> One needs to hit the sweet spot (which is not that narrow, your theories don't have to be perfect, just useful to predict what will happen and understand whos

> One needs to hit the sweet spot (which is not that narrow, your theories don't have to be perfect, just useful to predict what will happen and understand whose your friend or your enemy). I think this is about right. I think of it as: "conspiracy theorists" (those who actually match the silly strawman characterization) and "anti-conspiracy-theorists" both suffer from the very same problems: - loose epistemology...an undisciplined, over-eagerness to form illogical conclusions without sufficient evidence to substantiate them - not being mindful of the fact that there is a very real (and very important) distinction between one's perception of reality and reality itself