3 ms·

A conspiracy is an understanding between people to facilitate action toward a purpose. A theory about a conspiracy is when outsiders to the conspiracy try to re

A conspiracy is an understanding between people to facilitate action toward a purpose. A theory about a conspiracy is when outsiders to the conspiracy try to reason about motives without being privy to the actual motives (if any) of the conspiracy. By their nature, conspiracy theories can be far more wide ranging than the actual motives of any conspiracy will be. This is one of the things that makes conspiracy theories problematic.

hnfong 3y ago
Given that we already know that there was a conspiracy (by the now-ousted OpenAI board to remove Sam Altman), and that people here on HN have been theorizing about this for almost a week now, your definition makes everyone who commented about it a "conspiracy theorist". In actual "language game" usage, it's just a derogatory term meaning "I don't like these unproven claims, even though I can't disprove them".
- ethanbond 3y ago
  No it’s actually a derogatory term meaning “excessively complicated theory to support my priors.” Such as casting clear evidence toward the “safety/commercialization of next gen tech was a point of contention among the board” thesis instead as: > The leak about Q* feels like an olive branch to let the former OpenAI board and Ilya save a bit of face, probably part of the terms for Sam coming back plus it distracts from all the drama and puts a positive spin on things.
  - keepamovin 3y ago
    What if there's multiple overlapping but distinct meanings of the term conspiracy theory? Wouldn't that be a conspiracy in itself to diffract the meaning? Or would would the mere suggestion that it were itself be a conspiracy theory hiding a far less sinister reality? Or what if, like a fractal, it's everything everywhere all at once? :) hahaha
thaumasiotes 3y ago
> A theory about a conspiracy is when outsiders to the conspiracy try to reason about motives without being privy to the actual motives (if any) of the conspiracy. By their nature, conspiracy theories can be far more wide ranging than the actual motives of any conspiracy will be. This is one of the things that makes conspiracy theories problematic. This seems like it would apply equally well to all theories.
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  Motives are a lot more difficult to reality check than are physical properties. Especially if, as ethanbond indicates, the person with the theory doesn't believe what the other people say about their motives.
  - thaumasiotes 3y ago
    You're trying to use a definition of "conspiracy theory" that, even if you exclude natural phenomena -- which you're only managing to do by special pleading -- says that a conspiracy consists of one or more people cooperating with "each other" in public. And the conclusion you draw is fully general. There are more possibilities for why something happened than there are reasons for it. What are we supposed to have learned? > Especially if, as ethanbond indicates, the person with the theory doesn't believe what the other people say about their motives. The modal case is that, when someone makes a claim about their own motives, they are lying. The second most common case after that is that they don't know their own motives and their reported motive is not accurate.
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      I'm "special pleading" because I way overgeneralized in my initial attempt at a definition. > conspiracy consists of one or more people cooperating with "each other" in public. Public doesn't have to have anything to do with it. > What are we supposed to have learned? Yes, I overgeneralized. In general the thing to learn is to try to reality check as much as possible. > The modal case is that, when someone makes a claim about their own motives, they are lying. Granting this point, a razor would attribute base motivations over complex motivations.

hnfong 3y ago

Given that we already know that there was a conspiracy (by the now-ousted OpenAI board to remove Sam Altman), and that people here on HN have been theorizing about this for almost a week now, your definition makes everyone who commented about it a "conspiracy theorist". In actual "language game" usage, it's just a derogatory term meaning "I don't like these unproven claims, even though I can't disprove them".

ethanbond 3y ago
No it’s actually a derogatory term meaning “excessively complicated theory to support my priors.” Such as casting clear evidence toward the “safety/commercialization of next gen tech was a point of contention among the board” thesis instead as: > The leak about Q* feels like an olive branch to let the former OpenAI board and Ilya save a bit of face, probably part of the terms for Sam coming back plus it distracts from all the drama and puts a positive spin on things.
- keepamovin 3y ago
  What if there's multiple overlapping but distinct meanings of the term conspiracy theory? Wouldn't that be a conspiracy in itself to diffract the meaning? Or would would the mere suggestion that it were itself be a conspiracy theory hiding a far less sinister reality? Or what if, like a fractal, it's everything everywhere all at once? :) hahaha

thaumasiotes 3y ago

> A theory about a conspiracy is when outsiders to the conspiracy try to reason about motives without being privy to the actual motives (if any) of the conspiracy. By their nature, conspiracy theories can be far more wide ranging than the actual motives of any conspiracy will be. This is one of the things that makes conspiracy theories problematic. This seems like it would apply equally well to all theories.

anonymouskimmer 3y ago
Motives are a lot more difficult to reality check than are physical properties. Especially if, as ethanbond indicates, the person with the theory doesn't believe what the other people say about their motives.
- thaumasiotes 3y ago
  You're trying to use a definition of "conspiracy theory" that, even if you exclude natural phenomena -- which you're only managing to do by special pleading -- says that a conspiracy consists of one or more people cooperating with "each other" in public. And the conclusion you draw is fully general. There are more possibilities for why something happened than there are reasons for it. What are we supposed to have learned? > Especially if, as ethanbond indicates, the person with the theory doesn't believe what the other people say about their motives. The modal case is that, when someone makes a claim about their own motives, they are lying. The second most common case after that is that they don't know their own motives and their reported motive is not accurate.
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    I'm "special pleading" because I way overgeneralized in my initial attempt at a definition. > conspiracy consists of one or more people cooperating with "each other" in public. Public doesn't have to have anything to do with it. > What are we supposed to have learned? Yes, I overgeneralized. In general the thing to learn is to try to reality check as much as possible. > The modal case is that, when someone makes a claim about their own motives, they are lying. Granting this point, a razor would attribute base motivations over complex motivations.