On May 23, 2008, at 9:29 AM, Jim Devine wrote:
ravi wrote:
More on conspiracy theories (another topic in the same podcast) in
a future
post...
I notice that "they" kept you from talking...
;-)
I was going to type something up about arrogance, contingency,
plurality, etc... my rehash of the points that the philosopher Paul
Feyerabend laid out a few decades ago. But then I came across this one
by Floyd Rudmin that about covers it:
http://www.newdemocracyworld.org/conspiracy.htm
CONSPIRACY THEORY AS
NAIVE DECONSTRUCTIVE HISTORY
by Floyd Rudmin
April, 2003
newdemocracyworld.org
Floyd Rudmin is a member of the Psychology Department, University of
Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway.
"Conspiracy theory" is usually used as a pejorative label, meaning
paranoid, nutty, marginal, and certainly untrue. The power of this
pejorative is that it discounts a theory by attacking the motivations
and mental competence of those who advocate the theory. By labeling an
explanation of events "conspiracy theory," evidence and argument are
dismissed because they come from a mentally or morally deficient
personality, not because they have been shown to be incorrect. Calling
an explanation of events "conspiracy theory" means, in effect, "We
don't like you, and no one should listen to your explanation."
In earlier eras other pejorative labels, such as "heresy," "witchery,"
and "communism" also worked like this. The charge of "conspiracy
theory" is not so severe as these other labels, but in its way is many
times worse. Heresy, witchcraft, and communism at least retain some
sense of potency. They designate ideas to be feared. "Conspiracy
theory" implies that the ideas and their advocates are simple-minded
or insane.
All such labels implicitly define a community of orthodox believers
and try to banish or shun people who challenge orthodox beliefs.
Members of the community who are sympathetic to new thoughts might shy
away from the new thoughts and join in the shunning due to fear of
being tainted by the pejorative label.
There is currently a boom in books on conspiracy theory, most of them
derogatory, as is evident in some recent titles: Architects of Fear:
Conspiracy Theories and Paranoia in American Politics; Conspiracy
Culture: From the Kennedy Assassination to the X-Files; Conspiracy:
How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From.
Within popular US culture, there is also now a boom in movies, novels,
and web sites that feature conspiracy theories. The apparent
popularity of conspiracy theories is often cited as a cause of
concern, that our society is breaking down. For example, Canadian
journalist Robert Sibley has said that conspiracy theory is "a
nihilistic vortex of delusion and superstition that negates reality
itself."
I think that just the reverse is true. There is nothing insane or
sinister about conspiracy theory research. It is rather matter of
fact. A wide range of ordinary people from many walks of life take an
interest in the political and economic events of our era. They think
things through on their own, use the library, seek for evidence,
articulate a theory, communicate with other people with similar
interests. It is heartening that some citizens invest time and effort
to unearth and expose some of the conspiracies that damage our
society, our economy and our government.
But it certainly does seem that some historians and journalists are
quite frightened of conspiracy theory and its wide popularity. Those
are the two professions whose job it is to interpret our world for us.
When ordinary people take on the task of doing this themselves, it
must mean that they don't believe what the authorities say we should.
Maybe the professionals feel threatened when amateurs think about
political events for themselves.
Perhaps we are in the middle of a new Reformation. The high priests
are again losing their monopoly, and they see us sliding into cults
and chaos. Something similar happened in 1517, when Martin Luther
challenged the Church and translated the Bible into German so that
ordinary people could think about theology for themselves. When put on
trial, Luther said, "I cannot submit my faith either to the Pope or to
the Councils, because it is clear as day they have frequently erred
and contradicted each other." That is exactly what a JFK conspiracy
theorist would say about the Warren Commission.
People take on the task of explaining things for themselves when the
orthodox experts insist on saying nonsense—for example, that Lee
Harvey Oswald acting alone killed JFK. A Reformation is a rebellion
against arrogance. If historians and journalists want to understand
why they are being displaced by conspiracy theory, it would be most
reasonable to examine their own failings first.
The correct big-word label for conspiracy theory would be "naive
deconstructive history." It is "history" because it explains events,
but only after they have happened. Past-tense. Conspiracy theory, as a
political act, is an after-the-fact complaint. To see conspiracies
while they are happening would require the resources and powers of
police forces and espionage agencies.
<...>
Conspiracy theory has a special focus on contradictions,
discrepancies, and missing facts. The natural sciences similarly seek
to find faulty explanations by focusing on facts that don't fit the
orthodox explanations. If we want more truthful explanations of
events, whether of scientific events or of political and historical
events, then we must compare competing explanations.
<...>
However, we should remember that conspiracy theorists are ordinary
people and will show ordinary failings of rationality, for example,
what is referred to as "confirmation bias." This means that we are all
biased to look for evidence that our ideas are right rather than for
evidence that our ideas are wrong. This bias has been demonstrated and
replicated in many different contexts and countries. Confirmation bias
is a common mistake made by conspiracy theorists, as well as by
historians, journalists, and everyone else. David Fischer has
catalogued and exemplified over 100 different kinds of faulty
reasoning in the research of competent, published historians. These
would all apply to conspiracy theorists as well.
<...>
--ravi
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
