Someone I know, a family member it turns out, recently and in a rather sophomoric manner asserted that 9/11 was an inside government job. I proclaim sophomoric because this particular person is not a big reader of politics, political theory and history. Not surprisingly a wild conspiracy can be quite intoxicating if not self-evident. Yet feels perfectly justified in mentioning this with an honest tone. Such people stumble about and discover various conspiracy theories and take them to be functions of critical thinking and "open mindedness." Question the sources and credibility of the conspiracy theorists? No. They are patriots. At least, this is what they would have you believe.
As I stumbled to discuss the matter, someone else chimed in with a "all government are corrupt" statement. Implicit here was that corruption can easily convert into murderous - as in 9/11. The monster had tentacles. I was not prepared to fight on two fronts! When an effort was made by someone to question the offenders she was dismissed as "closed minded."
How to fight insulting and insipid allegations at the hands of ignorance?
I like conspiracy theories just as much as the next guy. I do actually spend time reading them. They cause me to explore things on my own. My personal belief is that when push comes to shove CT's come up short. I will always listen but accepting takes more work.
There is no way to debate this. Much like terrorists refute accepted norms and rules of engagement - thus dismissing traditional forms of diplomacy - conspiracy theorists simply refute standard and logical responses to their allegations. It's easy to say, "you are close minded" and that "you're a willing an unknowing participant in the cover up" and "that anything the government says is propaganda."
Something tells me that even if an independent inquiry was to be opened and subsequently concluded, for the sake of argument, that the Warren Commission was adequate, hard conspiracy theorists would scoff at this and somehow pin it on the Illuminati or some other darker force for arriving at such a summary. The only truth they need to hear is the one that fits their perceptions and versions of the facts.
And what would they do with the "truth" in any event? Did it ever occur to them that "truth" remains elusive possibly because their logic is flawed?
The sad truth is that it is possible and feasible not everything will be able to be answered to satisfy everyone. History has taught us that much. There are many questions that have been left unanswered. It's how we treat these "gaps" or absence of evidence that defines our intellectual health.
It is healthy to be skeptical and ask questions. However, something seems disturbingly adrift. People are accepting conspiracy theories at face value with little thought. The concept of 'thinking things to their logical end' is completely weeded out of the equation. The notion of critical thinking has been redefined. Specifically, the manufacturing of dissent and subsequent financial success of conspiracy theories have become the process to which we define critical thinking.
It's a serious malaise.
I hold little regard for those who willingly remain ignorant of history on one side but gleefully accept a political conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theorizing is a form of inferiour and parasitical intellectualism.
Why are people so vulnerable to conspiracy theories?
It is a 21st century scourge polluting our minds. A war must be waged to defeat it.
It seems that the basis of your own allegations against conspiracy theories is based on the character of the "offenders" alone.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't know the family member in question here, the so called "Conspiracy theorist" anyway, is NOT a closed minded person who lacks critical thinking and merely refutes logic. While in fact, the "Coincidence theorist" however, DOES often seem to abandon open mindedness and critical thinking in the process of "stumbling to discuss the matter". That both parties show bias is quite evident.
There are only truths and lies, and the uncertainty of either.
Both Parties must consider the credibility of the source.
Consider that employing true open mindedness means accepting that new truths may require restructuring former belief systems. Not a simple task for many.
The topic of conspiracy in regards to what is implied is a serious one. Nobody does this topic any justice by quoting ignorantly from those who may have found truth and attempting to debate with those like yourself who are intelligent, yet unaware.
I submit that if you were to take on the great work of researching conspiracy related issues yourself, you would become aware of what motivates those who speak from a sophomoric manner to do so.
I'll end with the following revisions of your ending statements:
Why are (Intelligent) people so (quick to dismiss) conspiracy theories?
It is a 21st century epidemic that prohibits the true freedom of our minds and the future of humanity. A war MUST be waged to defeat it.
(And needs minds like yours on the front lines!)
Dear Libertine 69,
ReplyDeleteAh yes, the "conspiracy theorists are open minded" argument. Did it ever occur that my position is precisely because I am too aware and informed?
You attempt to be "open" but wind up sticking up for what exactly? That CT's play a functional role in searching for "truth" however defined?
Conspiracy theorists seem to be sophisticated sophists.
I would submit that a CT HAS to refute logic to match his theories. He or she must reconstruct events according to their "logic" while interpreting and mishandling the facts as is clearly the case with 9/11.
They are taking the "gaps" in the event as well as the shortcomings of the Warren Commission and charging all sorts of short sighted and myopic views. If that's your idea of open mindedness be my guest. It's not mine.
I have seen the havoc CT's have created on route to either ruining or destroying the careers of good people. They blatantly misquote and select what they want to hear by choice to fit their world view.
Indeed on the contrary, I'm a conspiracy enthusiast. I have read more than I care to admit. Conspiracy theories have always made me go out and research. THAT RESEARCH HAS ALWAYS LED ME TO SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.
So the basis of my refuting it is rooted not in ignorance but actual awareness. You have presumed that I was not informed.
However, I do not let it guard and direct me. On the matter of 9/11, there are way too many holes in the conspiracy angles that has little merit.
Never heard of the coincidence theorist. Good one.
If CT's present to "minds like mine" facts that stand on their own merit I will listen. Implicit in your argument is that the answers and truth end with the CTer and if we dare refute them we are close minded? Is this correct?
Until then spare me. The war is to return the healthy skeptic who is far more capable than a lousy second-rate CTer.
I'll gladly take the fight.
Thanks for the comment.
Really.
Should have mentioned one other thing: I used to be a conspiracy theorist enthusiast to the point I used to proclaim "everything is a conspiracy."
ReplyDeleteI've since adjusted somewhat.
It's annoying to walk away and recognize another thought. People don't reject CTers for coming out with ideas or questions. In fact, I think people listen lest they be fooled.
ReplyDeleteWhat they do have a problem with is how a theory tends to crumble when scrutinized.
So rather than charge people are being hoodwinked perhaps the CTers should rethink their models.
After all, for years CTers have been telling us that Elvis is alive, Big Foot exists and that aliens are at Area 51.
The latter reminds me that aliens have to exist right? How insipid of us to think otherwise? I mean, it's our self-absorption that led us to believe the sun revolved around is right?
Now where the debate gets sticky is who gets to write and interpret history? What are the criteria to arrive at a truth and who gets to determine when something is proven free of spinning and doctoring?
The X-Files rule.