rigorousintuition.ca

Conspiracy Theories a Sign of Sane Thinking Study Shows
Added by Kristi Cereska on November 5, 2014.


Conspiracy theories cannot be countered as rhetoric or nonsense anymore, according to a new study which shows that looking at things from all sides is a sign of sanity. When it comes to the psychology of those that can accept or reject theories that may not be popular, it seems they are a step above those that will reject any theory except their own outright. Those who believe they are simply seeking the truth are sometimes labeled in today’s society as a tinfoil hat-wearing nutso.

The study, conducted on a news site, and a poll of those that commented was the basis for the study, which had as a topic, 9/11. There were over 2,000 comments and over 1,400 of them were labeled as being conspiracies, while just over 700 were labeled conventionalist. What this shows is that many more people are looking at issues critically and in-depth instead of just outright disputing them. It also showed that although the conspiracy theories group would argue against other’s views, they used less negative comments and strictly focused on the issue and what happened. The conventional people would argue, trying to push their own views on others in a far more hostile and argumentative manner.

People today will not accept that their views could be considered conspiracy theories because of the negative connotations associated with that term. Many believe that the phrase goes back to the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the document that ultimately came out, which directed media on how to cover the story and how to handle those that did not believe what the government’s official stance was. This document, the CIA Instructions to Media Assets, was supposed to be destroyed when it was no longer needed, but a copy resides in the Real History Archives. Among other things, the document stated how to handle critics and how to deflect questions from those critics.

This document goes on to use the term conspiracy, and that those disputing the governments truths were weak-minded, and that these people were using “irresponsible speculation” and that they focused on things that were impossible to dispute. This document even speaks directly of the assassination stating that conspiracy theories as large as some of the critics were talking about would be impossible to pull off.

The new study shows that the more one rejects ideas outright, the more aggressive they are in their views. They do not want to see beyond their own beliefs, or expand their thinking. Those that are labeled as conspiracy theorists are those that hope to open minds up to other possibilities, without forcing their beliefs on others. Pushing the barriers of long-held belief systems is not a bad thing; it is a way to open the mind, expand perceptions and seek the truth.

Many do not believe it wrong to look beyond the printed word and seek the truth. Many others do not want the pot stirred, and want to keep the long-held belief systems in their views of the government, media and the world. Independent studies will not change those that will argue with anyone that does not hold the same beliefs, but it may just take the stigma out of reading and discussing all those conspiracy theories.

By Kristi Cereska

Sources:
The Progressive Mind
Natural News
NCBI

82_28 » Fri Nov 07, 2014 5:05 pm wrote:Even people who made up their own minds have to use "air-quotes" when speaking amongst themselves. Because we "get it". We're not assholes. Everybody knows it was the "fabled" and yet fictional "inside-job". It's only the media that stays fast with the "official account". Why? I do not know.

I think I do know, but I really don't know why I know. Hence the name of this dump whose leader has forsaken his flock.

Twyla LaSarc » Fri Nov 07, 2014 7:14 pm wrote:I became aware of 'conspiracy thinking' pretty early, but I got a good dose of it in the 90's when a friend of mine started dragging home everything from Phikal to illuminati theory on her yearly vacation from dead tour. It was pre internet and she brought books and ideas home to share...I listened, because I do, but I still thought myself 'reasonable' (there is no escaping the air quote...).

The weird thing was, fool I, there was a hell of a lot of it was actually pretty dead on in 20 years retrospect. If that is conspiracy theory, then what is truth?

82_28 » Fri Nov 07, 2014 5:05 pm wrote:It's only the media that stays fast with the "official account".

norton ash » Fri Nov 07, 2014 3:57 pm wrote:Please, take this crazy shit somewhere else, OK? I'm so sick of these crackpot theories. You disrespect all those who died that day, not to mention the sacrifices of our armed services. Get out of your mom's basement and try reality for a change.

coffin_dodger » Sat Nov 08, 2014 10:16 am wrote:^^ a 'failed to spot the sarcasm' addition to the smilies would be good at this point.

Lord Balto » Sat Nov 08, 2014 1:28 am wrote:

norton ash » Fri Nov 07, 2014 3:57 pm wrote:Please, take this crazy shit somewhere else, OK? I'm so sick of these crackpot theories. You disrespect all those who died that day, not to mention the sacrifices of our armed services. Get out of your mom's basement and try reality for a change.

Sounds to me like you are the one who has a problem with reality. Do you also believe in the tooth fairy? As for "sacrifices," they wouldn't have had to make them if Cheney hadn't had a hard-on for Saddam's oil reserves, and faked an attack to justify an invasion. And I, for one, am deathly tired of folks whose cognitive dissonance prevents them from thinking clearly. But then, that's what the study is all about, isn't it?

And why don't you take your crazy shit somewhere else. This entire forum is about thinking outside the box. It's not about swallowing every lie, distortion, and deception propagated by a bunch of power hungry psychopaths in Washington and Ottawa.