Conspiracy theory
A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation,[3][4][5] when other explanations are more probable.[3][6][7] The term generally has a negative connotation, implying that the appeal of a conspiracy theory is based in prejudice, emotional conviction, or insufficient evidence.[8] A conspiracy theory is distinct from a conspiracy; it refers to a hypothesized conspiracy with specific characteristics, including but not limited to opposition to the mainstream consensus among those who are qualified to evaluate its accuracy, such as scientists or historians.[9][10][11]
For other uses, see Conspiracy theory (disambiguation).
Conspiracy theories are generally designed to resist falsification either by evidence against them or a lack of evidence for them. They are reinforced by circular reasoning: both evidence against the conspiracy and absence of evidence for it are misinterpreted as evidence of its truth.[8][12] Stephan Lewandowsky observes "This interpretation relies on the notion that, the stronger the evidence against a conspiracy, the more the conspirators must want people to believe their version of events."[13] As a consequence, the conspiracy becomes a matter of faith rather than something that can be proven or disproven.[1][14] Studies have linked belief in conspiracy theories to distrust of authority and political cynicism.[15][16][17] Some researchers suggest that conspiracist ideation—belief in conspiracy theories—may be psychologically harmful or pathological.[18][19] Such belief is correlated with lower analytical thinking, lower intelligence, psychological projection, paranoia, and Machiavellianism.[20] Psychologists usually attribute belief in conspiracy theories to a number of psychopathological conditions such as paranoia, schizotypy, narcissism, and insecure attachment,[9] or to a form of cognitive bias called "illusory pattern perception".[21][22] It has also been linked with the so-called Dark triad personality types, whose common feature is lack of empathy.[23] However, a 2020 review article found that most cognitive scientists view conspiracy theorizing as typically nonpathological, given that unfounded belief in conspiracy is common across both historical and contemporary cultures, and may arise from innate human tendencies towards gossip, group cohesion, and religion.[9] One historical review of conspiracy theories concluded that "Evidence suggests that the aversive feelings that people experience when in crisis—fear, uncertainty, and the feeling of being out of control—stimulate a motivation to make sense of the situation, increasing the likelihood of perceiving conspiracies in social situations."[24]
Historically, conspiracy theories have been closely linked to prejudice, propaganda, witch hunts, wars, and genocides.[25][26][27][28] They are often strongly believed by the perpetrators of terrorist attacks, and were used as justification by Timothy McVeigh and Anders Breivik, as well as by governments such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union,[25] and Turkey.[29] AIDS denialism by the government of South Africa, motivated by conspiracy theories, caused an estimated 330,000 deaths from AIDS.[30][31][32] QAnon and denialism about the 2020 United States presidential election results led to the January 6 United States Capitol attack,[33][34][35] and belief in conspiracy theories about genetically modified foods led the government of Zambia to reject food aid during a famine,[26] at a time when three million people in the country were suffering from hunger.[36] Conspiracy theories are a significant obstacle to improvements in public health,[26][37] encouraging opposition to such public health measures as vaccination and water fluoridation. They have been linked to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases.[26][30][37][38] Other effects of conspiracy theories include reduced trust in scientific evidence,[26][39] radicalization and ideological reinforcement of extremist groups,[25][40] and negative consequences for the economy.[25]
Conspiracy theories once limited to fringe audiences have become commonplace in mass media, the internet, and social media,[9] emerging as a cultural phenomenon of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.[41][42][43][44] They are widespread around the world and are often commonly believed, some even held by the majority of the population.[45][46][47] Interventions to reduce the occurrence of conspiracy beliefs include maintaining an open society, encouraging people to use analytical thinking, and reducing feelings of uncertainty, anxiety, or powerlessness.[39][45][46][48]
Lack of evidence
Belief in conspiracy theories is generally based not on evidence, but in the faith of the believer.[76] Noam Chomsky contrasts conspiracy theory to institutional analysis which focuses mostly on the public, long-term behavior of publicly known institutions, as recorded in, for example, scholarly documents or mainstream media reports.[77] Conspiracy theory conversely posits the existence of secretive coalitions of individuals and speculates on their alleged activities.[78][79] Belief in conspiracy theories is associated with biases in reasoning, such as the conjunction fallacy.[80]
Clare Birchall at King's College London describes conspiracy theory as a "form of popular knowledge or interpretation".[a] The use of the word 'knowledge' here suggests ways in which conspiracy theory may be considered in relation to legitimate modes of knowing.[b] The relationship between legitimate and illegitimate knowledge, Birchall claims, is closer than common dismissals of conspiracy theory contend.[82]
Theories involving multiple conspirators that are proven to be correct, such as the Watergate scandal, are usually referred to as investigative journalism or historical analysis rather than conspiracy theory.[83] By contrast, the term "Watergate conspiracy theory" is used to refer to a variety of hypotheses in which those convicted in the conspiracy were in fact the victims of a deeper conspiracy.[84] There are also attempts to analyze the theory of conspiracy theories (conspiracy theory theory) to ensure that the term "conspiracy theory" is used to refer to narratives that have been debunked by experts, rather than as a generalized dismissal.[85]
As evidence that undermines an alleged conspiracy grows, the number of alleged conspirators also grows in the minds of conspiracy theorists. This is because of an assumption that the alleged conspirators often have competing interests. For example, if Republican President George W. Bush is allegedly responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and the Democratic party did not pursue exposing this alleged plot, that must mean that both the Democratic and Republican parties are conspirators in the alleged plot. It also assumes that the alleged conspirators are so competent that they can fool the entire world, but so incompetent that even the unskilled conspiracy theorists can find mistakes they make that prove the fraud. At some point, the number of alleged conspirators, combined with the contradictions within the alleged conspirators' interests and competence, becomes so great that maintaining the theory becomes an obvious exercise in absurdity.[144]
The physicist David Robert Grimes estimated the time it would take for a conspiracy to be exposed based on the number of people involved.[145][146] His calculations used data from the PRISM surveillance program, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, and the FBI forensic scandal. Grimes estimated that:
Grimes's study did not consider exposure by sources outside of the alleged conspiracy. It only considered exposure from within the alleged conspiracy through whistleblowers or through incompetence.[147] Subsequent comments on the PubPeer website point out that these calculations must exclude successful conspiracies since, by definition, we don't know about them, and are wrong by an order of magnitude about Bletchley Park, which remained a secret far longer than Grimes' calculations predicted.