What do you guys think causes this phenomenon? Study: "Fact-based counterarguments to conspiracy beliefs DO NOT WORK"

submitted by Site_rly_sux from thejournal.ie

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (40 children)

No, not lots. A handful.

Conspiracy theorists put forth hundreds and hundreds of conspiracies, constantly churning them out on blogs and podcasts and wherever. And yet in only three or four cases were they accidentally correct.

The fact that you dismiss a fact-based scientific study out-of-hand BECAUSE YOU DIDNT LIKE THE CONCLUSION is evidence that the study is true

[–]GuyWhite 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

It’s a bullshit study because the folks writing it assume the know all the facts and that those facts are correct.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

No, they did not make any such assumption. They studied over 7,000 participants. So they didn't base anything on an assumption: they did some actual fact-finding science in order to come to their conclusion

[–]GuyWhite 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

I think the “study” is a conspiracy theory. I’m a participant and I did some fact checking.🤣

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Dude please take a second to think about what you're saying.

The university found that conspiracy theorists reject facts OUT OF HAND because of their faulty thinking patterns

Instead of spending just a few minutes thinking about how this applies to you, your instant reaction instead is to IMMEDIATELY reject this study, because it goes against your biases.

Do you not see how your exact behaviour is what this study is about?

You feel so sure about your fake conspiracy worldview, that you even reject facts which prove you wrong

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Anybody who uses the phrase “conspiracy theory“ is automatically discredited as a bootlicker of oligarchy. There really are bad people in positions of power who want to hurt you and will stop at nothing to do so.

[–]monkeymagic 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

i don’t think you understand sir. the university said. did you not see the word university in the comment you are taking issue with?

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nice appeal to authority fallacy you got there.

[–]AliceTheGorgon 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Their literal premise is an assumption. That "conspiracy theories" are different from any other belief, and that the establishment is either always correct or that believing the establishment for poor reasons is fine.

Of course people who believe things for unreasonable reasons aren't going to be persuaded by reason. It doesn't matter whether they believe a "conspiracy theory" or the official story. A healthy society would recognize that both are bad, and would encourage people to have reasonable discussions about anything they want to.

But groups tend towards promoting the survival of the group, rather than an actual cause, because any group actually dedicated to a cause has no reason to stick around once it's accomplished. So the only groups that stick around are those that either switch to, or started as, pursuing the group's survival rather than the cause. And governments are no different. So a government that pushes the survival and expansion of itself will tend to do better than one that prioritizes the actual needs of the people, unless the population is vigilant.

As such, any group, governments included, will tend towards promoting themselves and trying to silence critics. This is what the term "conspiracy theory" has become nowadays. A term meant to silence dissent rather than being actually descriptive.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This is what the term "conspiracy theory" has become nowadays

I disagree

A "conspiracy theory" is easily identifiable.

It's not just "the same as any other idea except it goes against the official story"

You can list ten random thoughts and I'll be able to point out which are the product of conspiracy thinking. That's repeatable, deterministic science.

And if someone believes in a thought/idea which is identifiably a product of conspiracy thinking, then, they are a suitable candidate for this study

[–]AliceTheGorgon 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You can list ten random thoughts and I'll be able to point out which are the product of conspiracy thinking. That's repeatable, deterministic science.

And which criteria are you going to use for this repeatable deterministic process? Because you certainly have absolutely no way of knowing if some general idea might have reasonable reasons to believe it that you simply haven't heard of.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'll be able to tell which are the result of the paranoia+paradoila+dunning kruger mixture which powers conspiracy thinking.

Failing that, there's always the good old backup method of just checking facts. Conspiracy theories aren't reliant on facts, just confirmation bias, as the study showed.

Go ahead.

List ten random thoughts and I'll be able to point to which are the result of conspiracy thinking.

For example.

  1. Tomorrow is trash day

  2. I mustn't forget to buy lightbulbs next time I'm out

  3. The same vehicle keeps driving past my house which means I am under observation

Obviously that was an easy test. We could even just do thoughts about The System or whatever to make it more difficult.

  1. Some predatory hedge funds buy credit default swaps and then drive struggling companies into the ground to raise the value of the swaps

  2. There are pharmaceutical companies which produce killer vaccines for eugenics purposes

  3. Polluting megacorporations have too much control over environmental legislation

One of the three is easily demonstratable as the product of conspiracy thinking.

Actually I think if you took those three statements to 100 people on the street, only the 1% conspiracist will be unable to answer: which of the three is a conspiracy theory which only conspiracy theorists believe?

That's repeatable deterministic science, my friend

[–]AliceTheGorgon 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

the result of the paranoia+paradoila+dunning kruger mixture which powers conspiracy thinking.

Subjective. Or so limited in application as to be irrelevant to the majority of beliefs that get labeled as "conspiracy theories" nowadays.

checking facts. Conspiracy theories aren't reliant on facts, just confirmation bias

Except for everything where the facts are not known to the populace. Such as any modern controversy, where the large majority of the "facts" are statements from people or organizations, and are thus not actually facts at all, but claims.

Additionally, just because some small number of people believe things for flagrantly silly reasons, doesn't mean that there are no reasonable reasons for believing the same general idea. Which is literally what I said at the beginning.

For example, I will rephrase your "definitely a conspiracy" belief into something that a reasonable person could believe, but which always gets ignored because those ignoring it don't want to admit that reasonable doubt exists.

There are massive, profit-driven, pharmaceutical companies which are pushing a very new type of treatment on the populace, being further pushed by many people who have stake in those companies, or who frequently rub elbows with the company, or have other such suspicious connections. These groups also all loudly proclaim that it is completely safe and has no long term side-effects, despite there being no possible way to know that in such an early stage of the new treatment, and the fact that literally everything has at least some risk. Further, this new "vaccine" doesn't prevent those who get it from getting the illness, and doesn't prevent them from spreading it.

It's almost like when you deliberately ignore the reasonable beliefs, you can claim that anyone is a "conspiracy theorist" just because you were able to find one loon somewhere.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Bruh you take that deranged paragraph to 100 random people on the street and 100 will agree it's a fucking deranged paranoid nightmare.

That's what I mean by deterministic repeatability. You can in 100% of cases label someone a paranoid conspiracy theorist, if they come out with that deranged lunatic screed

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

Exactly. That is a lot of how these studies work.
They mix up facts for fakes.
Being oblivious for facts is why psychologists and psychiatrists exist.
(And you can read that in two ways too.. lol)

What we need is a general understanding of how we get to a common truth.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

So let's see. The people conducting the various studies, approached someone who was a conspiracy theorist and gave them the objectively true history of an incident which the subject believes a fake conspiracy theory about.

The scientists found that, in cases where they had the 100% objectively true history, the subjects were not persuaded by the facts.

Your response to hearing this. Is to leap to the defence the subjects of the studies. You not read any of the papers, you have no idea about the methology, you're just immediately certain that the 100% OBJECTIVELY TRUE story of this study must be incorrect, without checking anything....you are literally proving the study.

You haven't bothered to read the methology. BECAUSE YOU ARENT INTERESTED IN THE FACTS.

It's literally what the study found. You just proved that the study is correct. Amazing

[–]zyxzevn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The facts are determined by physical evidence
and .theories (not facts) fill in what we have no evidence for.

The sad thing is that the people in this research omit physical evidence, nor discuss it.
So the researchers are not interested in facts.

And neither are you.
Just look at the evidence for demolition of WTC-7.
Or the failure of psychiatry in recognizing that medicine dont work. They are just sedatives.
Or the damage that you can see from injected mRNA that encode spike-proteins. Or the link between climate and the sun.
Or what is a woman.

Almost every "fact" of the mainstream is a big lie.
Because it is driven by money, propaganda and beliefs.
The "fact-checkers" are all money an propaganda driven.

Instead we need open science for this based on physical evidence.
Not idiots that think they know everything, because mainstream says so.
And if we disagree we exchange and discuss the physical evidence.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah these are all your fake conspiracy theories. They don't get any more true just because you listed them.

By the way - you still haven't checked - did the conspiracy theorists in the study self-identity? Wouldn't that destroy your whole argument? If the label was applied by the participant themself?

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You are spewing theories.
Please inform me of physical evidence that any of us missed.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're the only one making extraordinary claims buddy.

It's up to you to supply extraordinary proof

  1. Demolition of WTC 7

  2. failure of psychiatry

  3. "fact-checkers" are all money an propaganda driven.

  4. damage that you can see from injected mRNA

  5. The greenhouse warming effect is caused only by the sun and not the greenhouse gases

These are all fake unproven conspiracies which you believe in because you're stupid

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why, so you can systematically dismiss it all with the bootlicker buzz phrase “conspiracy theory,“ which is just a type of bullying oligarchs use to dismiss everybody and everything challenging their hegemony?

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Define “woman.”

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Psychology and psychiatry are quackery with a long history of homophobia for which they have not been held fully accountable.

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They're also apologists for US imperialism, so even if the theories were true, it's OK, because it's all done for your own good.

[–]BISH 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

And yet in only three or four cases were they accidentally correct.

Sometimes, I like reading your comments, because it lends insight on how stupid people think.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I said "three or four" to be safe but I honestly couldn't (and still can't) think of any which turned out to be correct

Edit - this list might be helpful if you're trying to think of one

https://saidit.net/s/AskSaidIt/comments/achw/for_the_left_doomsday_is_always_just_around_the/112om?context=3

[–]BISH 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I said "three or four" to be safe but I honestly couldn't (and still can't) think of any which turned out to be correct

This is the stupid stuff that I am taking about.

You're the king of the dunces.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It's going to be really easy for you to list them then

Any minute now in fact

[–]BISH 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's going to be really easy for you to list them then

The low hanging fruit:

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah and none of those are things which conspiritards were correct about

  1. The pandemic wasn't a hoax and you remain incorrect about it today

  2. Vaccine passports don't exist, you hoaxer

  3. Mandatory vaccines don't exist you hoaxer

  4. COVID Vax does increase immunity levels you hoaxer

  5. CBDC need to actually become the mark of the beast for conspiritards to be right about predicting it

  6. What about it ?

So why do you think conspiracy theorists were so hopelessly incorrect about the things I listed in the link?

[–]BISH 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You've gone full retard.

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The fact that you have to use name-calling is proof that you are a bully on behalf of oligarchs. Everything that you have denied the existence of is 100% true, and there is no link that I could post that will convince you of it because you are willfully refusing to accept the facts. There are no such thing as “conspiracy theories.” There really are bad people in power who want to hurt you, and you are helping them commit crimes by attacking their critics. That makes you an accessory before, during, and after the fact to crimes against humanity. How do you sleep at night? Oh, wait, I already know the answer to that: with underage girls like every degenerate who projects his or her degeneracy onto President Trump and the GOP and who dismisses legitimate criticism of the oligarchy’s crimes with the bootlicker buzz phrase “conspiracy theory.”

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Many many theories that are bullshit are made up just to muddy the waters and drag down the theories that are true. The moon landing was fake, so they conflate that with flat earthers, which is preposterous. 9/11 was an inside job and controlled demolition, so they conflate that with space lasers and nuclear nonsense, or assert that even the airplanes were fake.
A conspiracy theorist who is not discerning in what theories they latch onto will be susceptible to propaganda.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

No, the conspiracy theorists who believe in the things you listed believe them just as sincerely as you believe in your fake theories too.

How you look at a flat earther. Is how normal people look at you.

You believe in fake theories about 9/11 and the moon landing. Other people are pointing at you and saying "ignore jagworms, he doesn't really think that crazy shit about the moon landing and 9/11 - his lies are made up just to muddy the waters and drag down the theories that are true"

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

It's not belief that makes any of these things true, it's facts.

I don't mind 'normal' people thinking I'm weird. Most people believe the lies about 9/11 and think we went to Iraq for revenge for something they did to US. All lies.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Bruh omg every word could be said by the flat earther you look down on. How did you not see that

"It's not belief that makes space lasers true, it's facts. Most people want to believe the lies about the world being round. All lies"

Actually the EXACT same method of analysis and logical positivism is how we prove the world is round and how we prove you're wrong about your fake 9/11 conspiracies

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I agree, the world is round.
Unfortunately, you believe lies about 9/11. 3 controlled demolitions happened that day. The planes were real, but the buildings were rigged to drop.

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

3 controlled demolitions happened that day. The planes were real, but the buildings were rigged to drop.

No, thats a fake to muddy the water

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

OK. What's real then?

[–]Site_rly_sux[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thats what the conspiritards ask. Asking that question is how you ended up in this mess, because someone answered it with some paranoid bullshit.

The correct thing to do is to clear your mind of pre-conceptions about a conspiracy and research the topic from scratch

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Or maybe you could just accept the fact that everything you violently label as a “conspiracy theory“ to justify bullying people on behalf of the oligarchy is actually true.