3 ms·

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 believ

• 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.