Philosophy Now Forum

I have the germ of an idea. Whatever enjoyment people, let's call them normal people, get from a book or a film, they know that when the closing credits roll, the story is over. Whatever larks may be had playing with the themes and logic, it's time to unsuspend disbelief and understand that what has been seen is a fiction. Perhaps for conspiracy nuts it is not enough to play with ideas and stories, they have to be real - a story isn't compelling to a conspiracy nut if they are not an actor in it. I have said before that, in my view, philosophy is basically story telling with a set of rules attached. In that sense, philosophers create coherent narratives based on a fairly limited palette of initial premises. The people who provide the material for conspiracy role play, ranging from the fairly respectable Dan Brown, who uses conspiracy theories to create ambiguous stories, to the flat out fruitloopery of the David Ickes of this world, are just doing the same thing, but with a more colourful set of premises.

"it's never been done by the correct people"

-Imp

uwot wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 9:55 am Perhaps for conspiracy nuts it is not enough to play with ideas and stories, they have to be real - a story isn't compelling to a conspiracy nut if they are not an actor in it.

It's as if they are so fully engulfed and intoxicated in the show -- even handing over their identity and allegiance to it -- that their very existence and validity seems to become dependent on a non-stop and ever-increasing supply of distortions.

Like the way theism might actually birth the evil that it claims to fight against, conspiracy platforms actually birth the disinformation that they claim to fight against.

Impenitent wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:18 am "it's never been done by the correct people"

-Imp

Ah well, some one's correct person is another's conspiracy nut.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:06 pm

uwot wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 9:55 am Perhaps for conspiracy nuts it is not enough to play with ideas and stories, they have to be real - a story isn't compelling to a conspiracy nut if they are not an actor in it.

It's as if they are so fully engulfed and intoxicated in the show -- even handing over their identity and allegiance to it -- that their very existence and validity seems to become dependent on a non-stop and ever-increasing supply of distortions.

Yeah, you're right. It looks very similar to contemporary addictions to video games and social media. Once hooked, perhaps a conspiracy nut needs a constant supply of hints, often posed as questions in the Tucker Carlson style, to maintain their exhilarating, or at least tittilating paranoia. Some people get off on risk, others on victimhood and martyrdom, the potential for which conspiracy theories provide.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:06 pmLike the way theism might actually birth the evil that it claims to fight against...

Yes. We all have our own smorgasbord of evil deeds, but the devil, I would suggest, doesn't really exist.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:06 pm...conspiracy platforms actually birth the disinformation that they claim to fight against.

The thing is there is clearly a market for this stuff. I'm no economist, but I understand that where there is a demand, there will be snake oil salesmen happy to supply. So any self respecting conspiracy nut should question whether their preferred narrative is one that raises serious questions, or is just an aesthetically pleasing confection. But we already know the conclusion they will reach.

Better, I think, to watch for wolves than to pretend wolves don't exist.

In the former, the watcher, if wrong, has simply been hyper-vigilant; in the later, the pretender, if wrong, is food.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 2:36 pm Better, I think, to watch for wolves than to pretend wolves don't exist.

In the former, the watcher, if wrong, has simply been hyper-vigilant; in the later, the pretender, if wrong, is food.

Right. Wolves you watch for, bearing in mind the wisdom we were taught as children in the fable of the boy who cried wolf. Werewolves you don't worry about, unless you have lost your grip on reality.

Conspiracy theorists are trapped in the fantasy of their own epistemic inadequacy.

They've never done anything sufficiently hard/complex in their life to recognise the limits of human knowledge/ability so they grossly over-estimate what others can do - they are deeply insecure about their knowledge/abilities.

Combine that with general misanthropy and distrust and what they effectively believe in is Descartes' demon.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 2:36 pm In the former, the watcher, if wrong, has simply been hyper-vigilant; in the later, the pretender, if wrong, is food.

If you need eaxamples of how hypervigilance kills - look no further than the current pandemic.

Hospital wards and cemeteries are full of YouTube researchers who trust their immune system more than "their vaccine".

In a world where lying, cheating, and stealing has not only become the norm, but an accepted means to a particular end, your society reaps what it sows.

"-isms" are the true opiate of the masses.

The entirely of the 20th century was spend studying the psychological make-up of the human animal to the degree where institutions have been able to manipulate individuals into just about any type of behavior. Imagine being able to convince highly educated people that their entire race is racist and there is nothing they can do about it.

This epic manipulation does not bode well for the future.

uwot wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:59 pm Perhaps for conspiracy nuts it is not enough to play with ideas and stories, they have to be real - a story isn't compelling to a conspiracy nut if they are not an actor in it.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 1:06 pm It's as if they are so fully engulfed and intoxicated in the show -- even handing over their identity and allegiance to it -- that their very existence and validity seems to become dependent on a non-stop and ever-increasing supply of distortions.

Yes.

And isn't it amusing how a thread about conspiracy nuts attracts the conspiracy nuts?

One of them says that it's better to watch for wolves than to become their food, yet he would never entertain the notion that the watch should include a mirror.

(Yikes, I suddenly feel like the guy in the "Jeepers Creepers" movie who foolishly attracted the attention of the murderous demon...



...who then chases him in this beast of a truck...



)
_______

Wolves you watch for, bearing in mind the wisdom we were taught as children in the fable of the boy who cried wolf.

sez the guy who accepts what he is told, over and over and...

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:28 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 2:36 pm In the former, the watcher, if wrong, has simply been hyper-vigilant; in the later, the pretender, if wrong, is food.

If you need eaxamples of how hypervigilance kills - look no further than the current pandemic.

*Hospital wards and cemeteries are full of YouTube researchers who trust their immune system more than "their vaccine".

You know this how?

Cuz you were told.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:55 pm You know this how?

Cuz you were told.

I was "told". By a few hundred independent hospitals across multiple countinents/countries. All observing the same thing.

I call it "Independent witness accounts".
You probably call it "Centrally-coordinated data manipulation.".

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:53 pmWolves you watch for, bearing in mind the wisdom we were taught as children in the fable of the boy who cried wolf.

sez the guy who accepts what he is told, over and over and...

You walked into it, you silly wanker. Go on then; what do I accept?