What Constitutes A "Conspiracy Theory"?

"A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
 
"A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true.
 
Specifically?

In my own words and I believe accurately described:
A conspiracy theory is a suspicion that different or additional issues/people/circumstances were involved in a way that would or could change the official story. It is not necessarily a derogatory term when it is reasonable not to accept the official version as the whole story. It is used as a derogatory term, sometimes correctly and sometimes unjustly, by those who support the official version and believe the conspiracy theory is simply grasping at straws or a diversion from what happened.
 
"A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true.
Did you not address this part on purpose? :dunno:
often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts.
 
"A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true.
You asked about "conspiracy theory" not "conspiracy" you idiot.
 
"A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true.
Did you not address this part on purpose? :dunno:
often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts.
Yes. As it is subjective. Much like the core term in question. Therefore, redundant.
 
"A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true.
Did you not address this part on purpose? :dunno:
often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts.
Yes. As it is subjective. Much like the core term in question. Therefore, redundant.
Only if you wish it to be subjective and redundant. Typically it's the conspiracy theories that are subjective therefore redundant.
 
"A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one."
That definition is insufficient. It suggests that two, or more “non governmental, or non “powerful actors” are incapable of conspiring... That simply isn’t true.
No it doesn't. Conspiracies exist, obviously. But to fit as a "conspiracy theory," as the term is generally used, it is "generally....carried out by government or other powerful actors." That doesn't mean "only." And note that not all conspiracies that are carried out by governments etc are conspiracy theories. The Tobacco Industry's efforts and conspiracy against anti-smoking claims, and the Reagan Administration Iran-Contra affair, are not conspiracy theories as they both were warranted accusations.
 
The OP can speak for himself as to what he himself believes to be conspiracy theory.

But some example of conspiracy theory as I see the phenomenon:

1. Those who believe the moon landing was faked or that the Holocaust never happened. Such conspiracy theorists rarely include anybody in government or in any kind of power role.

2. Those who believe 911 or a cover up of what actually happened was a government conspiracy intended to convince us that it was an Islamic terrorist action. Such people are rarely if ever involved with government or are in positions of power.

3. Those who believe there were multiple gunmen involved in the JFK assassination. Again such people are rarely if ever involved with government or are in positions of power.

4. Those who believe that climate scientists deliberately falsify or alter evidence so that they can push a doctrine of dangerous or deadly climate change that must be proactively addressed by government. Such people are often not in government or other positions of power.

etc.

None of these fit the definition as provided in Post #2.
 
The OP can speak for himself as to what he himself believes to be conspiracy theory.

But some example of conspiracy theory as I see the phenomenon:

1. Those who believe the moon landing was faked or that the Holocaust never happened. Such conspiracy theorists rarely include anybody in government or in any kind of power role.

2. Those who believe 911 or a cover up of what actually happened was a government conspiracy intended to convince us that it was an Islamic terrorist action. Such people are rarely if ever involved with government or are in positions of power.

3. Those who believe there were multiple gunmen involved in the JFK assassination. Again such people are rarely if ever involved with government or are in positions of power.

4. Those who believe that climate scientists deliberately falsify or alter evidence so that they can push a doctrine of dangerous or deadly climate change that must be proactively addressed by government. Such people are often not in government or other positions of power.

etc.

None of these fit the definition as provided in Post #2.
I dont think you read the description accurately. Its not the fruit cake that is in the government or position of power. Its the people involved in said suspected conspiracy.
 
Anything a given mod wants it to be based upon their personal bias.
Some people's DNA simply does not allow for them to distinguish between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts. Look at all the events in our world that were once painted as conspiracy theories, that today are known to be true.
 
Anything a given mod wants it to be based upon their personal bias.
Some people's DNA simply does not allow for them to distinguish between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts. Look at all the events in our world that were once painted as conspiracy theories, that today are known to be true.
Such as? Suspicion and accusation of a conspiracy is not the same thing as a "conspiracy theory."
 
Like what?
There is a really neat thing called google. Type something like "conspiracy theories proven true" and see what you get.

Or, try "Operation Northwoods." Especially if you believe that "our government" would never plan to harm Americans.
 
Like what?
There is a really neat thing called google. Type something like "conspiracy theories proven true" and see what you get.

Or, try "Operation Northwoods." Especially if you believe that "our government" would never plan to harm Americans.
I have no illusions about what the government is capable of doing. I looked up Operation Northwoods. It was something that was proposed but never carried out. I 'm asking what conspiracy theory has ever been proven to be true?
 
Countless criminal investigations begin as conspiracy theories.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top