Any explanation of causation which is far from fact can or can not be called conspiracy theory. But does the facts make much difference? Does a plain hard fact changes the perception of a believer in conspiracy theory? Maybe not because that unfounded belief is the first thing that nurtures such theories.
Having these theories in all spheres of society is not a new thing. Humans believe in these theories since long when we started playing make believe games. It just got amplified with the help of social media which provides a fertile field to spread far and wide. A probable reason for people latching on to a theory is that it explains things in such a way that it potentially absolves the adopter from any real or imaginary guilt. It also provides a narrative which is more easier to follow with less mental acuity, and no efforts. Once sold it propagates on its own.
The good news is that these theories wither on their own in the face of time but not until sometimes causing some great damage. The bad news is that there is no way of fighting these apart from real cold facts which has less chance of success due to the mental blockage which favours such theory over a fact.
Most of the times there is some vested interest in propagation of such theories which can be financial or political but there are times when it just part of a thought without serving any purpose which may sound harmless until it moves into more violent domains.
It would be so easy to say that all such narratives should be judged by rationality but a fertile mind for such theory just doesn't have the interest or inclination for any rational judgement. Which is why once settled, it just needs to be waited out. It can be a long wait but it will go away just to be replaced by something new.
Peace
No comments:
Post a Comment