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 →

[–]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