Conspiracy Theories: Epistemological Mutants

What is a conspiracy theory? Political Psychologists define it as "attempts to explain the ultimate causes of significant social and political events and circumstances with claims of secret plots by two or more powerful actors". There are a few important elements that form part of this definition. Firstly, conspiracy theories seek to provide an explanation for political and social events. Secondly, they rest on the belief that shadowy powerful actors are executing secret plots to manipulate socio-political dynamics. Thirdly, they are generally based on a number of deductive errors in reasoning on the part of their proponents, whereby singular events or data points, that have no rational causal relationship, are linked together to form a narrative. In essence, conspiracy theories are based on connecting information nodes (which may or may not have an observable correlation, i.e. tendency to occur together) without any empirical evidence that proves a causal relationship between them, to create seemingly disjointed explanations for how the world works. This theorizing process is in sharp contrast with the rules of evidence followed by the scientific method, which asserts that "correlation is not causation" and also requires a multitude of statistically significant empirical observations to prove the validity of any theory. Finally, conspiracy theories are by nature a negative portrayal of reality - there are no conspiracy theories that claim that a secret group of powerful actors are working to end world hunger, despite the fact that this assertion may satisfy other definitional parameters of a conspiracy theory.

Conspiracy theories hold a very specific place within an individual's psyche and the social superstructure. Not all "absurd" claims are conspiracy theories, although there appears to be an identifiable mutation process whereby certain claims about the world can eventually devolve into a conspiracy theory. Take for example, the presence of extraterrestrial lifeforms in the universe. This particular epistemological artifact has manifested itself in various forms over the years. First, it appeared within the scientific community, which believes that there is a high probability of the existence of extraterrestrial life. This belief, however, cannot be claimed to be neither "absurd" nor a "conspiracy theory", because it uses the rules of scientific evidence, or rather, an extrapolation of a statistical expectation based on the sheer number of stars and planets in the universe. Over time, the extraterrestrial phenomenon manifested itself in the form of UFO sightings and abduction accounts. These sightings, however, have yet to provide any convincing evidence of their validity as "over half can be attributed to meteors, fireballs and the planet Venus" (Impey, 2020), while abduction accounts have only been limited to personal stories. Although these sightings and accounts could be termed as "absurd", they did not meet the specific definitional requirements of conspiracy theory, until they entered the final stages of this epistemological mutation process in recent years. Today, it has morphed into a full blown conspiracy theory that makes sweeping, unverifiable explanatory claims about the world, asserting that the world is ruled by a race of lizard-men that invaded Earth and has hijacked the bodies of world leaders. It is at this stage that this mutated form of this epistemological artifact becomes much more widespread and essentially takes on a life of its own. 

While most"normies" feel a strong urge to simply denounce these theories and stamp their proponents as "crazies", it is has become apparent that society at large cannot afford to do so. The fever of conspiracy theorizing is no longer a fringe issue and has already had very real impact on social and political dynamics (e.g. two newly elected members of the US congress are vocal proponents of QAnon). Furthermore, it is also evident that there is a significant overlap between the proponents of conspiracy theories and the popular support base for many fascist political leaders. In other words, it appears that the same type of psychological dynamics that drives one towards believing conspiracy theories, could also sway one to support the agenda of a fascist dictator. In many ways, Hitler's propaganda machine that worked to create a false narrative of the Jewish population, was functionally no different than the propagation of baseless conspiracy theories. Similarly, it is not surprising that most of Donald Trump's popular support comes from proponents of QAnon and other conspiracy theory groups as well. While we may dismiss their tendency as naive gullibility, such a dismissal does not resolve the issue at hand, which has potentially very dangerous consequences. It is therefore imperative to understand what causes the existence and persistence of such conspiracy theories, and the psychological function they serve in people who voluntarily become their proponents. 

At an individual level, the tendency to subscribe to conspiracy theories seems to emerge from three very powerful internal impulses. The first is the impulse to make sense of a world that is inherently flawed and imperfect. Both "normies" and "crazies" alike can relate to the premise of this impulse, as we all have looked around at some point and realized that we live in a world plagued by wars, hunger, disease, poverty, ecological crisis etc. This realization does not require any special leap of faith and is abundantly evident from the status quo. Conspiracy theories extrapolate from this fact, going on to fabricate explanations for this imperfect world, all based on the idea that sinister and powerful forces are the root of all global problems. As such, at the root of it, despite being vastly erroneous in its specifics, the core impulse working within conspiracy theory proponents is a benevolent one, seeking solutions to our problems.

The second impulse pertains to complexity, and the propensity to either accept, integrate, ignore or reject it. In reality, the dynamics of the world and its social machinery are indeed immensely complex, impossible for any single individual to fully comprehend and articulate in any formative way. No single human being (or even a group for that matter) can have a complete grasp of the dynamics of the entire planet. Most people cope with this fact by reaching some form of compromise  - they either try to understand a small aspect of this vast realityscape (specializing in a specific field, for example), while others simply let go of any desire to do so at all, making peace with the fact that the ultimate truth is far too complex to comprehend. However, conspiracy theorists do neither. What sets the conspiracy theorists apart, in this regard, is their inability to accept the complexity of global socio-political reality, while simultaneously being unable forego the need for an explanation.  In essence, therefore, conspiracy theories fill in a cognitive gap in their understanding of how the world works. As such, they essentially provide simple solutions for inherently complex problems. It is in this sense, that conspiracy theories act as a psychological coping mechanism for some, while for others they can be seen as plain intellectual laziness.

 

The third impulse pertains to the ability to take on collective moral responsibility. In reality, we all face moral contradictions everyday, whether we choose to pay attention to them or not. For example, the world, as a whole, produces enough food for all individual human beings living in it. Yet, the question may naturally arise (maybe in the middle of your second helping of Crème brûlée), why are millions of children still going hungry every day? Or why do wars still continue, despite the very obvious fact that they bring lasting damage to people and communities? Or why are we not acting fast enough in the face of the climate crisis? The truth is, all social problems are inherently complex, involving numerous factors, stakeholders, systemic issues and variables that even the experts are not fully aware of. There may also be actors who perpetuate the problem, by systemic flaws in our social design and their roles within it (for example arms dealers or oil companies). Simultaneously many others may also be sincerely working hard to try and solve these issues (like public servants and NGOs). Considering all these factors, at a not-so-abstract level, the persistence of world hunger or constant war or ecological crisis, is indeed a moral failure on the part of the human race as a whole. In this sense, if we were to truly comprehend what this implies, we would find that the moral burden of our social ills is thinly distributed across all of us, by virtue of simply belonging to and partaking in the existing, flawed status quo. This moral responsibility, again, can either be accepted and acted upon, or ignored, as is done by most people. Alternatively, conspiracy theories allow their proponents an opportunity to simply divert this moral responsibility, upon a group of nameless, shadowy figures who only exist in theory.  

This trifecta of cognitive challenges - the lack of a clear solution, the defeat in the face of immense complexity and the reckoning with our collective moral failure - is a harder pill to swallow than one may think. Most of us, choose not to think about it at all, and have never truly come to terms with our individual moral burden by our association with the human race. Some are able to accept it and may go about dedicating their lives to some benevolent service or other, making a difference in whatever small way they can. Meanwhile, a group of individuals, when faced with these challenges, engage in a process of psychological self-defense by latching on to one conspiracy theory or another. They categorically reject the idea that inherent complexity exists, but instead propagate a simplistic explanation using their preferred conspiracy theory. They are also unable to accept that despite the best efforts of many, the world still remains imperfect and flawed. Neither can they accept that the moral burden for this failure is thinly spread across all individuals of the human race, themselves included. Instead, it is far easier to assume that the moral failing is the sole responsibility of a small handful of powerful elites, sinister forces of evil who have perfect understanding of planetary dynamics, who purposefully propagate the suffering of humanity, either driven by personal gains or simply a sadistic desire to watch other people suffer. As such, while subscribing to such conspiracy theories may feel like a brave stance to take against an unfair status quo, in effect it is the equivalent of a snail coming in contact with wind and receding into its protective shell for cover.

What is it that makes conspiracy theories so seductive, despite their flimsy foundation in any empirical evidence? As naive as they are, there is also something absurdly hopeful about believing in conspiracy theories. Hopeful, simply because it is based on the belief that complexity is not a real barrier on the road to finding solutions for global problems. In fact, when you reduce the problems of the world to only the sinister intentions of a small group of suits sitting in a boardroom, there is suddenly ample opportunity to romanticize the entire situation. It gives you a chance to imagine that a real-life hero may one day emerge, who will track down that cursed boardroom atop a towering skyscraper, kick down the giant doors with dramatic force and do the right thing by ridding the world of the tyranny of those within. For many, the glitz and glamour that the premise of a conspiracy theory provides, seems like a welcome alternative to the dullness of the world as it actually is, regardless of how far removed from reality it takes them. As such, the seductive promise of this romanticized pseudo-reality, can indeed be hard to resist.

In the words of Terence McKenna....