4 ms·
I agree about conspiratorial thinking, I think you wrote a good exposition on that subject, and I think the way you incorporated Bayesianism is interesting. I
by maxbond 3y ago
I agree about conspiratorial thinking, I think you wrote a good exposition on that subject, and I think the way you incorporated Bayesianism is interesting.
I disagree with the part where you say "merely," a conspiracy theory plays a particular role within political discourse.
Conspiracy theories are intimately connected with power relations and ideology. They are also syncretic (or at least, the ones that fail to be perish) - they can incorporate any idea and even contradictory ideas and accommodate them, and the contradictions only serve to reinforce the theory rather than weaken it. That's very different than other kinds of "theory".
- chriswarbo 3y agoTrue, the dynamics I stated are pretty broad (scarily so!): they don't describe why any particular set of ideas will take hold or not. The ones which appear will certainly depend on politics, as various goals/agendas are pushed (some good, some bad; subjectively speaking). There's also an aspect of cultural darwinism, that certain theories/agendas/politics are good at "reproducing" and others go "extinct". I suppose the best we can hope for is to try and remain grounded in empiricism; call out incorrect arguments when we notice them (even for causes we agree with; we should prefer alternative, better arguments); and always allow for the possibility that we're wrong ;)
- maxbond 3y agoI agree. If you're interested I discussed the evolutionary bit here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34186172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34186172 (I'd propose "memetic evolution" or "memetic Darwinism" to avoid the association with like social darwinism and race "science" though.)