The psychology of Conspiracy Think

[Ken Davies]

Perhaps this freedom trumps all, and drugs discussion could shift to another area. Is this the JFKA debate?

[Micah Mileto]

16 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

You are wrong. This is a 100% factually correct and logical statement:

If there were no heroin dealers, there would be zero lives ruined by heroin. Zero.

I said nothing about cause and responsibility whatsoever, so I could not have conflated the two as you claim I did.

Take the attitude displayed in your comment and try applying it to the example I gave about skimpy clothing. It definitely sounds like you are giving an opinion about responsibility rather than cause. I think that the application responsibility is a subjective political opinion that implies a functional wide-reaching solution to a problem. Cause is just an observation of physics - again, remember my example about a car accident between two cars being "caused" by a third car making a legal pass on a road, or that third driver being on the road at that moment because the gas station clerk took two extra seconds to count change. Was the clerk responsible for the accident? See, conflating cause and responsibility is madness.

 

16 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

The proof is in the pudding Micah. Show me one thriving city in the entire world where all drugs are legal and available and have been for a long time, and that doesn't have a drug problem.... If you do that, I will agree that what you say is correct.

Better yet, show me such a city where all your libertarian fantasies have been actualized. Just one.

 

I basically do not believe that one should necessarily judge a political policy using real-world examples from the past or present, because there are always too many factors to consider, so many factors that it may indeed be impossible for the human mind to consider so many factors at the same time. I think debating in this way just becomes a pretentious game of exchanging trivia. I do not want to exaggerate my abilities to judge a real life situation, and you shouldn't, too.

For example, is it fair to say the United States is wealthy because of capitalism? The USA benefits from the exploitation of workers overseas who do not have the same rights as people within the geographical USA - wouldn't it be fair to factor-in the poverty of those workers when trying to assess the wealth of the USA? And is it not true that the rich enjoy socialism while only the poor must deal with capitalism?

 

Also, your idea of a "thriving city" seems to be one that participates in the holocaust of modern prison, and one that benefits from the slave labor of prisoners, and many of those prisoners are there because of the drug trade, which should not be considered a crime.

Do you believe in democracy? Imagine you went back in time and tried to convince an ancient king to institute democracy. The king would laugh and tell you the average population cannot be trusted with important decisions, and maybe he would even give you some examples of the average population destroying themselves thorough their own wishes. What would you say to that? "Oh, trust me, democracy is a good principal no matter what, it'll all work out in the future"?

Edited December 23, 2022 by Micah Mileto

[Micah Mileto]

On 12/21/2022 at 12:21 PM, Lance Payette said:

This is an excellent piece that pretty well sums up my perspective on the JFKA conspiracy community: “From Camelot to Conspiracy: Memory, Myth and the Death of JFK,” Skeptic » Reading Room » From Camelot to Conspiracy: Memory, Myth, and the Death of JFK. It’s by a Canadian historian who also teaches critical thinking.

This is a scholarly article that exemplifies the sort of serious attention conspiracy thinking has received in recent years: "Conspiracy theories as quasi-religious mentality: an integrated account from cognitive science, social representations theory, and frame theory,” https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00424/full. 

These aren’t “anti-conspiracy” pieces. They address why at least some people are prone to gravitate to “conspiracy” as an explanation for events.

I would challenge folks here to peep out of the conspiracy rabbit hole long enough to consider a few articles such as these. I believe it would be more productive than debating Prayer Man, the Magic Bullet or Oswald’s dental records ad nauseam.

As a religious believer, I’m as interested in the psychology and epistemology of belief – of my own beliefs – as in theology and apologetics. I continually examine myself as to whether I’m thinking rationally and critically, avoiding logical and emotional pitfalls, and relying on the best evidence and arguments.

It is possible through such self-examination to emerge from the conspiracy rabbit hole. Myself, Fred Litwin and many others are proof of this, not just in the JFKA community but in many others as well. This doesn’t mean abandoning an interest in the assassination. It means freeing oneself of the conspiracy mindset that clouds rational thinking. You might even remain a conspiracy theorist, but at least one who isn’t a prisoner to what I’ve called Conspiracy Logic and Conspiracy Think.

The conspiracy community isn’t about history, historical research or even the assassination per se. That’s the illusion or delusion – that it is about these things. As the above articles suggest, a whole set of underlying motivations distort the entire project.

Yes, I know – the self-important and self-serving leaders of the cult will insist this is all bunk, they are serious researchers interested only in the truth, real conspiracies do exist, the JFK conspiracy community is inherently different from all those other goofy conspiracy communities and cults, Lance is just a Lone Nutter whose only interest is in provoking us, yada yada yada.

Just peep out of the rabbit hole long enough to look in the mirror. That's my challenge. You’ll be doing yourself a favor.

My week is up.  The New Atheist community needs my attention. See you down the road.

If you believe in psychology pseudoscience, what is your opinion on the idea that psychology is just a scam designed to make people feel ashamed of themselves?

[Andrej Stancak]

My reading of M.J. Gagne's article tells me it is a superficial insight into minds on people who question the official narrative of JFK assassination. The Author's point: "What conspiracists seek, ultimately, is not truth in the form of a set of objective facts, but validation of their feelings of alienation, a validation that rests on a set of presumed facts."  has been disproven by the work and lives of many JFK researchers. JFK researchers do seek data, facts, pieces of evidence. We are not psychologically affected by mythical thinking - we just want to know the truth. If the truth is that Lee Oswald alone killed the President, so be it. But what shall we do with a large number of pieces of evidence which suggest otherwise?

The JFK researchers seek the truth in form of evidence: written documents, audio recordings, photographs and films. Somehow, almost 60 years after the fact, the Governement still conceals the most relevant documents. Shall I feel ashamed for questioning the official narrative and avoid being considered a myth-follower, or shall I demand all the documents pertaining the case be made available to the public? Most of us have made their choice.   

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Andrej Stancak said:

My reading of M.J. Gagne's article tells me it is a superficial insight into minds on people who question the official narrative of JFK assassination. The Author's point: "What conspiracists seek, ultimately, is not truth in the form of a set of objective facts, but validation of their feelings of alienation, a validation that rests on a set of presumed facts."  has been disproven by the work and lives of many JFK researchers. JFK researchers do seek data, facts, pieces of evidence. We are not psychologically affected by mythical thinking - we just want to know the truth. If the truth is that Lee Oswald alone killed the President, so be it. But what shall we do with a large number of pieces of evidence which suggest otherwise?

The JFK researchers seek the truth in form of evidence: written documents, audio recordings, photographs and films. Somehow, almost 60 years after the fact, the Governement still conceals the most relevant documents. Shall I feel ashamed for questioning the official narrative and avoid being considered a myth-follower, or shall I demand all the documents pertaining the case be made available to the public? Most of us have made their choice.   

Also the same logic in that caption of the article can be made the other way and perhaps it makes a stronger case. Humans, like animals have “fear” as one of the most powerful emotions. When people challenge the official narrative in things like the JFKA, it directly challenges peoples faith in government and its institutions. People would rather hang onto their trust in government than they would face the awful reality that government isn’t serving the people and is carrying out despicable acts like this using tax payers money. People like stability, safety, and comfort. The state killing its president causes anguish, anxiety, fear and uncertainty. 
 

To give you an example, have any of you been sat next to a female partner and they have refused to watch something on TV on the grounds it upsets them. Or, refuses to talk about a topic that presents a threat to mankind or their safety? The reason is that women are even more safety conscious and sensitive to fear. They’d rather not face it. The trend in society is an obsession with safety, its been encouraged. People would rather look the other way than face an unpleasant truth. 
 

 

[Guest]

On 12/21/2022 at 6:21 PM, Lance Payette said:

....cut  "The conspiracy community isn’t about history, historical research or even the assassination per se. That’s the illusion or delusion – that it is about these things. As the above articles suggest, a whole set of underlying motivations distort the entire project" cut...

Well... I'm only here because of my interest in history and historical research.

On "The conspiracy community", if I have ever seen a divers bunch of people,  it is on this forum.  This is all very far from being a "cult" as you call it.  Yes, there is some working together, information is being shared, etc... but that doesn't make it a community.   All the rest almost feels like stigmatising. 

PS : and I have learned a lot from the guys (and girls) here, sometimes it's a bumpy ride, sometimes it's fun,  but that's life, we are all different people, just here because of a mutual interest in something that happens to be the JFKA. Generalizing is one of the most harmful things on this planet.

Edited December 24, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans