Should we have a presumption against conspiracy theorizing (that is, should the fact that something is a conspiracy theory give us an extra reason to disbelieve it)?
Conspiracy theories are explanations of events or situations that have a sinister mood to them. They are usually motivated by bias or insufficient evidence that is blown out of proportion which leads to a political debate about them. Both evidence against the conspiracy theory and an absence of evidence for the conspiracy theory is interpreted as evidence of its truth making them complex. Conspiracy theories’ main premise is oftentimes not based on extensive research and with the sinister and political attitude of them, there will always be doubt of whether they are true because of the lack of concrete evidence used.
Daniel Pipes has researched conspiracy theories and has found common themes that will help people understand them better. These themes give support to the fact that we should have presumptions on conspiracy theorizing. In the article “The genesis of a conspiracy theory” by Katrin Weigmann, she contrasts scientific theories and conspiracies to put them into better retrospect with each other as scientific theories – individuals associate with being reliable and true. It is important to understand the nature of conspiracy theories to help navigate them. They can be a part of spreading fake news and create unrest in people’s minds regarding sensitive matters. Daniel Pipes, who spent some time studying conspiracies defines them as “the fear of a non-existent conspiracy” (material for Video 13) this is true because most conspiracies are fearful of how something happened. Pipes identifies three tools that are available for identifying conspiracy theories. The first one is common sense which helps decipher whether a conspiracy is true and helps determine if the evidence is consistent with the conspiratorial theory. Most times there are many different parties involved in creating the conspiracy theory, this can lead to leaks of information which in turn fails the conspiracy theory. And lastly, Pipes outlines that there are distinct patterns found in each conspiracy theory. These distinct patterns are called “patterns of standards of evidence” and are specific themes to look for while reading a conspiracy to judge its reliability.
It is important to note that not all patterns need to be present in order for something to be a confirmed conspiracy, however, the more patterns present, the easier it may be to decipher if it is true or not. (Video 13) The first pattern of evidence that Pipes identifies in conspiracy theories is that the conspirators rely on evidence only an obsessive would see. Weigmann outlines a study that describes individuals making relationships between things that may not necessarily have a relationship present:
“This requires seeing patterns—for instance, meaningful relationships between events—even if they are only random occurrences.” (Weigmann, 2018)
Not only is this an example of the conspirators point of view but also the lure of the theory itself that influences a reader. The types of evidence and arguments made would be something a reasonable person would not focus on. This pattern is supported by another one of Pipe’s patterns which is the fact that each theory is so complex because of the details and this distracts the reader and might not allow them to pick up on the inconsistencies within the text. Creators of conspiracy theories are reluctant to share exactly where they got their evidence from because they do not want the reader to look into those sources and potentially realize that the evidence is either made up (i.e. facts are sometimes invented to add credibility to the story) or from an unreliable source that would deem the conspiracy to be fake i.e. forged publications being used as support.
Further, conspiracies have layers of other conspiracy theories which are all used as evidence to support each other. (Video 14) Conspirators tend to lose track of time and this is shown through the example of a scientist who spent 20 years campaigning against the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine and justified it by it being in the best interest of patients. (Weigmann, 2018) Pipes goes on to identify another stage of conspiracies which is the reoccurring assumptions that are present. Power is the first motive and it is the main goal of the conspiracy theory because it is a fundamental human drive. This is illustrated through Weigmann’s observation of how people feel by knowing information:
“People feel they are in possession of this very scarce information that other people don’t have. Sharing this information will make them feel more in control and more powerful”. (Weigmann, 2018)
People betraying secrets is a more contemporary example of the inner workings of the human mind and the inability to keep information to oneself especially when it holds value over someone else. Then, the main focus of the theory (the one who benefitted most from the event or situation) gains control. The conspiracy of the assassination of Princess Diana and the Royal Family’s involvement in staging a potentially intentional murder because she chose to live differently than normal royals conveys the message that how far is the Royal Family willing to go to maintain their influence. Conspiracies drive history and though natural disasters can happen, human planning is far more significant. Conspirators rely on the fact that people want to continue to find information that aligns with their personal beliefs but does not want to do any research on the controversial topics to make the most informed decision and this is shown through Weigmann’s example of common examples that are not fully understood by people.
“The science behind vaccination, GMOs, or viral infections is difficult to understand for the lay public. Alleging that the pharma or food industry deceives the public is much easier.” (Weigmann, 2018)
And lastly, nothing is accidental or foolish and this is indicated in the John F. Kennedy assassination through the very streamlined shots that were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald. (Video 15) In the article “The genesis of a conspiracy theory” by Katrin Weigmann, her primary focus is on why people believe in conspiracy theories and how they spread. She mentions that once a conspiracy theory starts garnering attention, “it is difficult to argue with reason.” (Weigmann, 2018) this goes back to the fact that any evidence presented is never against the theory and if it is, it drives the theory to be more true.
“Conspiracy theories can do considerable harm when they are embraced by political leaders. Former South African president Thabo Mbeki, under the influence of Duesberg, instituted policies denying anti‐retroviral treatments for AIDS patients, which, according to estimates, led to the premature deaths of more than 300,000 people between 2000 and 2005.” (Weigmann, 2018)
This is interesting to note as this seems like something that was caused by the ideas of higher-order evidence rather than first-order evidence. Higher-order evidence is shown here through the president endorsing no need for AIDS treatments. Most people believe people in positions of power like that of a president because they are known to be experts. Rather than listening to the facts (which are first-order evidence), the fate of an estimated quarter of a million people was rested in the hands of a misinformed and easily influenced president that let other innocent people believe the same thing.
It is a habit of thought for humans to be trusting of simpler explanations and generally side with non- conspiratorial theories. When it comes to conspiracies, the stance of guilty until proven innocent is taken. Though not all conspiracies end as failures, it does not change the fact that with the evidence involved they aren’t always true either. Daniel Pipe’s breakdown of conspiracies is significant to the study of them and being able to properly distinguish between fact and hoax. Katrin Weigmann shares Pipe’s stance and puts into context all the ways in which people fall for the influence of conspiracies. Due to the nature of conspiracies, it is better to keep a presumption of conspiracies to have the most accurate information.
2020-4-24-1587710523