8 ms·

"Jumpers," as described mostly just lacked a fear of consequences of being wrong and were presented with an incentive to guess. Not to be conspiratorial, but on

"Jumpers," as described mostly just lacked a fear of consequences of being wrong and were presented with an incentive to guess. Not to be conspiratorial, but one can't help but notice a recent preoccupation in mainstream outlets with pathologizing conspiracy theorists, dissenters, and now, "jumpers." Referencing Khaneman and Tversky's "system 1 and system 2" from their bestseller Thinking Fast and Slow without crediting it seems to be more about avoiding the scrutiny that would draw, and instead, appearing authoritative with statements about how ancient psychological researchers commonly distinguish between these types of thought. We should even be concerned someone who could be a "jumper," may also have schizophrenia, as our thinking may have applications to that. Maybe it's interesting, or maybe on closer inspection and thoughtful consideration it resembles propaganda to ignore your instincts, trust the narrative, and provides blunt tools for being suspicious of others who don't. If only most people were smart and comfortable enough to jump to conclusions and then course correct as needed, we could avoid the consequences of groupthink by those who fear criticism above all.

helen___keller 5y ago
> Not to be conspiratorial, but one can't help but notice a recent preoccupation in mainstream outlets with pathologizing conspiracy theorists, dissenters, and now, "jumpers." No conspiracies needed. QAnon type conspiracies are more visible than ever (as they get blown up on social media) and personally I've seemed to notice a pretty big uptick in 'uncle so and so went off the deep end so we had to cut off communication' type stories. This increase in attention feeds news stories about conspiracy adherents (and anybody that can be lumped in with them, even if it's not warranted). > maybe on closer inspection and thoughtful consideration it resembles propaganda to ignore your instincts, trust the narrative, and provides blunt tools for being suspicious of others who don't This is almost all "news" nowadays. Antifa is running the left, QAnon is running the right, somebody is out to get you and ruin the American way of life and we're going to tell you who the bad people are if you just tune in for our next segment.
- notreallyserio 5y ago
  > I've seemed to notice a pretty big uptick in 'uncle so and so went off the deep end so we had to cut off communication' type stories. I wonder how long that sort of cutting off has been happening in the past. I know there are members of my extended family I don’t associate with due to their crazy beliefs, but I haven’t talked about it.
  - helen___keller 5y ago
    My personal opinion is that the pandemic offered a unique opportunity for hidden 'crazy beliefs' to expose themselves. If Uncle Bob in 2017 believed that the federal reserve was run by a cabal hoarding 90% of our tax money to enrich themselves, nobody would really care unless he feels the need to bring it up in every conversation to the detriment of normal human interaction. If Uncle Bob in 2020 believes that, he probably also believes that the cabal is using masks to control the population, which causes an immediate conflict when he insists on going unmasked everywhere, including visits to elderly grandma. And then in 2021 that belief probably gets extended to vaccines. In other words, the pandemic offered a unique opportunity for conspiracy theories to conflict with day-to-day life in a way that wasn't true before the pandemic.
    - rglover 5y ago
      > he probably also believes The entire problem. You're not speaking to this person to figure out what they actually believe, you're forming a belief based on your own assumption.
      - helen___keller 5y ago
        This is a hypothetical person, so no, I am not speaking to the hypothetical person. My point is that IF uncle bob's belief system segued into beliefs about masks and vax, then it becomes more visible and causes conflict with family members who didn't give a shit about the previous belief system; not that all conspiracies will necessarily turn into beliefs about masks and vax.
version_five 5y ago
I've always felt like the belief in a large group of "conspiracy theorists" is probably one of the biggest "conspiracy theories". A friend of a relative is an apparent flat earther - my relative is always saying things like "oh you wouldn't believe what this guy thinks, he says the world is actually shaped like a UN map, what a goof". In this situation, which of the two is actually the more gullible? From the situations I hear described, it's pretty clear the guy just likes to tease, and enjoys the "intellectual exercise" - for some value of intellectual - of tearing down commonly held truths by providing alternatives, even if they are silly. I've seen the same thing with moon landing and 9/11. People like to use these as strawmen about look at all the nuts out there, we need to control what people can read, but this is just an excuse for shutting down opinions they don't like.
- crazy_horse 5y ago
  Read the conspiracy subreddit and get back with us.
  - HelixEndeavor 5y ago
    Go outside and get back to us.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    The conspiracy subreddit gets discredited for the random stuff that gets posted on there, which ought to be expected since they do little moderation. On several key points, the conspiracy subreddit has been correct. For example, in March 2020, they accurately predicted the course of covid, namely that vaccines would be developed, that there would be large-scale hesitancy, and that this would be used to justify the keeping of covid lockdowns / masking requirements / eviction moratoria far beyond the stated 15 days. Regardless of your belief in whether this was justified or not, this happened. Similarly, the subreddit was correct about things later revealed by edward snowden. Of course the next post will be about lizard people, but frankly, that doesn't mean we ought to discount the well thought out, presented, and reasonable 'conspiracies' that get trotted out there. Some of them actually happen. It's just a bad place to trust, because they do no moderation. On the other hand, the places that do moderate are always behind on the things that end up being true.
macksd 5y ago
> lacked a fear of consequences of being wrong This is interesting. It used to be that some of the people we're discussing, let's use flat-earthers as an example, were just really, really committed to their idea. It was their whole identity and persona, and they would just never be able to accept anything different. This seems to me to be the opposite of what you describe. It's like they were terrified of being wrong, so they embraced not admitting it no matter what. They would never accept that they had been wrong. (With a few exceptions - I've engaged with A LOT of flat-earthers and some of them do give me the impression they just like playing devil's advocate, etc.) Lately though, QAnon seems to have embraced this idea. They've made statements that will be very quickly falsifiable, and will actually say "Who cares if it's not true - we just support patriotism / freedom, etc. and what part of that do you disagree with?" They'll make statements that will be very quickly falsifiable (for instance, I saw a post claiming Nancy Pelosi had been arrested for high crimes, and Trump was now making his move - but a few days later obviously that wasn't true). That's what I call a lack of fear of consequences of being wrong. But to me it seems a new phenomenon.
- iammisc 5y ago
  I'm a right winger. I don't know any Q people. It seems to me that mostly left wingers know Q people and know all the details. My leftist father in law will explain in detail to me everything Q said, and I just nod along going like... why would you even bother reading this stuff?
  - macksd 5y ago
    I know several in person. I'm probably right of center and definitely live in a predominantly right area. They put it on their IG stories and they bring it up in person. Without cutting them off socially, not really sure how I can avoid hearing it from time to time.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
I don't understand why "conspiracy theorists" are so discredited. Conspiracy is a crime and people are charged with it often if not every day. It's essentially a coordinated effort by any group to do something others disapprove of. Pretty much any human organization with is capable of it. It doesn't take long to find evidence of truly outlandish conspiracies perpetrated by the US government itself. Dosing citizens with drugs in an attempt to control their minds. Exposing citizens to radiation on purpose without their knowledge or consent in order to study the effects, measurably causing increased rates of cancer in that population. Anyone can find stuff like this just randomly browsing wikipedia. Yet somehow we're supposed to disbelieve when "theorists" speak? I've also concluded there's people out there who want to discredit these "theorists" in any way possible. Abusing science and medicine to do it? Why not? They must be mentally ill, right? All those insane ideas must be evidence that something is literally wrong with their cognition. Their brains must be scrambled or something. Schizophrenia? Throw in words like paranoia and suddenly people will agree that maybe we should involuntarily institutionalize these people. Put them on medication to calm them down. Yeah. Paranoia is not a symptom when they really are after you. I don't understand how anyone can accuse people of paranoia in the 21st century when we know there are a hundreds of government agencies out there spying on literally everyone on the planet at all times. We know they conspire to do all sorts of completely unacceptable actions. We know they always deny the truth afterwards for as long as they can get away with. Some people have silly beliefs like flat earth. That's just wrong and it's safe to ignore them. The problem is when people raising perfectly legitimate concerns about COVID-19 vaccines are dismissed as anti-vaxxers. The truth is their risk-benefit profiles are not fully known at this time, scientists are still studying their effects. It's absolutely possible that some vaccine has higher risks than benefits. Yet people saying anything that isn't glowing support for vaccination get moderated on social media for spreading disinformation.
- _y5hn 5y ago
  Because most of it is absence of critical thinking and facts. There are many real conspiracies, but they become real when backed by facts for the allegations.
  - 5y ago

helen___keller 5y ago

> Not to be conspiratorial, but one can't help but notice a recent preoccupation in mainstream outlets with pathologizing conspiracy theorists, dissenters, and now, "jumpers." No conspiracies needed. QAnon type conspiracies are more visible than ever (as they get blown up on social media) and personally I've seemed to notice a pretty big uptick in 'uncle so and so went off the deep end so we had to cut off communication' type stories. This increase in attention feeds news stories about conspiracy adherents (and anybody that can be lumped in with them, even if it's not warranted). > maybe on closer inspection and thoughtful consideration it resembles propaganda to ignore your instincts, trust the narrative, and provides blunt tools for being suspicious of others who don't This is almost all "news" nowadays. Antifa is running the left, QAnon is running the right, somebody is out to get you and ruin the American way of life and we're going to tell you who the bad people are if you just tune in for our next segment.

notreallyserio 5y ago
> I've seemed to notice a pretty big uptick in 'uncle so and so went off the deep end so we had to cut off communication' type stories. I wonder how long that sort of cutting off has been happening in the past. I know there are members of my extended family I don’t associate with due to their crazy beliefs, but I haven’t talked about it.
- helen___keller 5y ago
  My personal opinion is that the pandemic offered a unique opportunity for hidden 'crazy beliefs' to expose themselves. If Uncle Bob in 2017 believed that the federal reserve was run by a cabal hoarding 90% of our tax money to enrich themselves, nobody would really care unless he feels the need to bring it up in every conversation to the detriment of normal human interaction. If Uncle Bob in 2020 believes that, he probably also believes that the cabal is using masks to control the population, which causes an immediate conflict when he insists on going unmasked everywhere, including visits to elderly grandma. And then in 2021 that belief probably gets extended to vaccines. In other words, the pandemic offered a unique opportunity for conspiracy theories to conflict with day-to-day life in a way that wasn't true before the pandemic.
  - rglover 5y ago
    > he probably also believes The entire problem. You're not speaking to this person to figure out what they actually believe, you're forming a belief based on your own assumption.
    - helen___keller 5y ago
      This is a hypothetical person, so no, I am not speaking to the hypothetical person. My point is that IF uncle bob's belief system segued into beliefs about masks and vax, then it becomes more visible and causes conflict with family members who didn't give a shit about the previous belief system; not that all conspiracies will necessarily turn into beliefs about masks and vax.

version_five 5y ago

I've always felt like the belief in a large group of "conspiracy theorists" is probably one of the biggest "conspiracy theories". A friend of a relative is an apparent flat earther - my relative is always saying things like "oh you wouldn't believe what this guy thinks, he says the world is actually shaped like a UN map, what a goof". In this situation, which of the two is actually the more gullible? From the situations I hear described, it's pretty clear the guy just likes to tease, and enjoys the "intellectual exercise" - for some value of intellectual - of tearing down commonly held truths by providing alternatives, even if they are silly. I've seen the same thing with moon landing and 9/11. People like to use these as strawmen about look at all the nuts out there, we need to control what people can read, but this is just an excuse for shutting down opinions they don't like.

crazy_horse 5y ago
Read the conspiracy subreddit and get back with us.
- HelixEndeavor 5y ago
  Go outside and get back to us.
- iammisc 5y ago
  The conspiracy subreddit gets discredited for the random stuff that gets posted on there, which ought to be expected since they do little moderation. On several key points, the conspiracy subreddit has been correct. For example, in March 2020, they accurately predicted the course of covid, namely that vaccines would be developed, that there would be large-scale hesitancy, and that this would be used to justify the keeping of covid lockdowns / masking requirements / eviction moratoria far beyond the stated 15 days. Regardless of your belief in whether this was justified or not, this happened. Similarly, the subreddit was correct about things later revealed by edward snowden. Of course the next post will be about lizard people, but frankly, that doesn't mean we ought to discount the well thought out, presented, and reasonable 'conspiracies' that get trotted out there. Some of them actually happen. It's just a bad place to trust, because they do no moderation. On the other hand, the places that do moderate are always behind on the things that end up being true.

macksd 5y ago

> lacked a fear of consequences of being wrong This is interesting. It used to be that some of the people we're discussing, let's use flat-earthers as an example, were just really, really committed to their idea. It was their whole identity and persona, and they would just never be able to accept anything different. This seems to me to be the opposite of what you describe. It's like they were terrified of being wrong, so they embraced not admitting it no matter what. They would never accept that they had been wrong. (With a few exceptions - I've engaged with A LOT of flat-earthers and some of them do give me the impression they just like playing devil's advocate, etc.) Lately though, QAnon seems to have embraced this idea. They've made statements that will be very quickly falsifiable, and will actually say "Who cares if it's not true - we just support patriotism / freedom, etc. and what part of that do you disagree with?" They'll make statements that will be very quickly falsifiable (for instance, I saw a post claiming Nancy Pelosi had been arrested for high crimes, and Trump was now making his move - but a few days later obviously that wasn't true). That's what I call a lack of fear of consequences of being wrong. But to me it seems a new phenomenon.

iammisc 5y ago
I'm a right winger. I don't know any Q people. It seems to me that mostly left wingers know Q people and know all the details. My leftist father in law will explain in detail to me everything Q said, and I just nod along going like... why would you even bother reading this stuff?
- macksd 5y ago
  I know several in person. I'm probably right of center and definitely live in a predominantly right area. They put it on their IG stories and they bring it up in person. Without cutting them off socially, not really sure how I can avoid hearing it from time to time.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

I don't understand why "conspiracy theorists" are so discredited. Conspiracy is a crime and people are charged with it often if not every day. It's essentially a coordinated effort by any group to do something others disapprove of. Pretty much any human organization with is capable of it. It doesn't take long to find evidence of truly outlandish conspiracies perpetrated by the US government itself. Dosing citizens with drugs in an attempt to control their minds. Exposing citizens to radiation on purpose without their knowledge or consent in order to study the effects, measurably causing increased rates of cancer in that population. Anyone can find stuff like this just randomly browsing wikipedia. Yet somehow we're supposed to disbelieve when "theorists" speak? I've also concluded there's people out there who want to discredit these "theorists" in any way possible. Abusing science and medicine to do it? Why not? They must be mentally ill, right? All those insane ideas must be evidence that something is literally wrong with their cognition. Their brains must be scrambled or something. Schizophrenia? Throw in words like paranoia and suddenly people will agree that maybe we should involuntarily institutionalize these people. Put them on medication to calm them down. Yeah. Paranoia is not a symptom when they really are after you. I don't understand how anyone can accuse people of paranoia in the 21st century when we know there are a hundreds of government agencies out there spying on literally everyone on the planet at all times. We know they conspire to do all sorts of completely unacceptable actions. We know they always deny the truth afterwards for as long as they can get away with. Some people have silly beliefs like flat earth. That's just wrong and it's safe to ignore them. The problem is when people raising perfectly legitimate concerns about COVID-19 vaccines are dismissed as anti-vaxxers. The truth is their risk-benefit profiles are not fully known at this time, scientists are still studying their effects. It's absolutely possible that some vaccine has higher risks than benefits. Yet people saying anything that isn't glowing support for vaccination get moderated on social media for spreading disinformation.

_y5hn 5y ago
Because most of it is absence of critical thinking and facts. There are many real conspiracies, but they become real when backed by facts for the allegations.
- 5y ago