PROPOSED MEEP: "CONSPIRACY THEORIES" as a NEW FORUM CATEGORY

Author: oromagi
Conspiracy Theory
oromagi
MEEP
Forums
Roadrunner say what

Posts

Total: 50
Topic's author
#1
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Is there popular support for a new forum category CONSPIRACY THEORIES?

If this idea seems popular I propose we have a vote on it from Aug 1st to Aug 15th

I will also be separately proposing a new forum category HISTORY to be voted on during the same period if such an idea seems popular.

#2
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@oromagi
Everything that happened a second ago is history.

So maybe we only need two categories.....Past Events and the Future .

The present is so brief, there's no time to write anything before it's too late.


Will religion be included under conspiracy theories?
#3
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
i vote "NO"
#4
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,239
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@oromagi
i vote "NO"
I second that. Conspiracy theories in the colloquial sense are inherently illogical as they are characterized by the most basic of logical fallacies (argument from ignorance, argument from incredulity, shifting the burden of proof, etc.). I don’t think promoting that in a debate website is a good idea.
#5
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
Since conspiracy theories attempts(and fails) in challenging science, I suggest putting all of them in the SCIENCE and NATURE class of forum threads here so they could be debunked in proper category fashion.
#6
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Anything that encourages any sort of discussion outside of Trump, abortion, and gender is badly wanted. The site is dead. Forum categories are a suggestion and something to have fun with. I'd read oro's conspiracy theories before I'd read brutal's clunky if/thens or Double's futile battles with GP.  
#7
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,114
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
I vote YES on both
#8
rbelivb
rbelivb's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 210
1
2
5
rbelivb's avatar
rbelivb
1
2
5
-->
@oromagi
VOTE +1 Yes
#9
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
#10
Alfresco
Alfresco's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 18
0
0
5
Alfresco's avatar
Alfresco
0
0
5
Absolutely needed!

conspiracy -
a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

And there are so many instances that nobody is even looking into.
The people that are suppose to, are often part of it.

So it's our duty as citizens to analyze these.
I can't think of a better place than DebateArt as most of social media that
discusses the subject, are not even trying to uphold any fairness of the discourse.
That's why the meaning of the term in everyday use differs so greatly from the above definition.
That makes it easy to label the discussion that of lunatics.
While in fact, it should be more to akin of a rigorous criminal investigation.

Debate=fair dialogue=truth

#11
Alfresco
Alfresco's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 18
0
0
5
Alfresco's avatar
Alfresco
0
0
5
-->
@Double_R
Good point. Debate website should definitely promote fair discussion.
So it's possible to discuss conspiracy theory formally using some method best suited
to reveal, say, inconsistencies in a given theory.
#12
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,239
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Alfresco
There's nothing wrong with pointing out inconsistencies in a given theory, but inconsistencies = inconsistencies, not conspiracy.

If you want answers, then by all means advocate for them. But when not having answers is your argument for having answers (it's a conspiracy) you are committing really basic logical fallacies.
#13
Kritikal
Kritikal's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 76
0
1
7
Kritikal's avatar
Kritikal
0
1
7
There is no such thing as a conspiracy in a vaccum. I feel like any conspiracy you could think of would already be covered by another topic. Also, if there were to be an explicit conspiracy theory section, I doubt this would attract debate about legitimate or plausible conspiricies, and is more likely to attract the tin foil hat nut-bars that are unlikely to add any value to the site. 
Topic's author
#14
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@zedvictor4
Will religion be included under conspiracy theories?
No.  That would defeat the purpose. My purpose is to separate our two of the most popular types of forum topics so that those interests can be more easily located and contributed to.  Including the most popular forum topic category under a different, more inclusive heading would be the opposite of my rational objective.



Topic's author
#15
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Double_R
Conspiracy theories in the colloquial sense are inherently illogical.... I don’t think promoting that in a debate website is a good idea.
Religions are also inherently illogical but the RELIGION forum is the most popular topic (excluding mafia which isn't really a topic of discussion).  Nor do topics like SPORTS, SHOW BUSINESS,  POLITITCS, and ARTISTIC EXPRESSION have much call for the practice of logic.  Are you suggesting that this site should only feature forum topics that promote reasoned arguments?    If we forbade unreasoned thinking on this site our traffic would drop to somewhere close to nil.

Topic's author
#16
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Intelligence_06
Since conspiracy theories attempts(and fails) in challenging science, I suggest putting all of them in the SCIENCE and NATURE class of forum threads here so they could be debunked in proper category fashion.
Not all conspiracy theories challenge science or nature but I think I agree most do.  The problem with your plan is 1) we already have a SCIENCE and NATURE category to which only Wylted and I ever add discussions of conspiracy theories and 2) putting conspiracy theories under SCIENCE and NATURE invokes Double_R's concern that we not give irrational thinking the imprimatur of reason.     Many people on this site like to propose and discuss various conspiracy theories but few think to post those discussions under SCIENCE and NATURE.  A CONSPIRACY THEORY category might consolidate such discussion in one easy-to-find category without implying such discussions are consistence with natural law.
Topic's author
#17
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@badger
Anything that encourages any sort of discussion outside of Trump, abortion, and gender is badly wanted
Agreed.  Abortion and gender, in particular, are such private decisions that even the fact of public forums on those topics seems scopophilic. 
Topic's author
#18
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Hi Disc!  LTNS!

A conspiracy theory category might help separate some conspiratorial thinking from other public policy discussion.
Topic's author
#19
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Kritikal
I feel like any conspiracy you could think of would already be covered by another topic.
Probably so but the same could be said of existing topics- just about everything under discussion here could be correctly crowded under MISCELLANEOUS, ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, SCIENCE and NATURE.  But I think the purpose of categories is to help separate popular topics so the headings encourage discussion under that topic, the topics inspire new posts and traffic is spread out to improve front page visibility.

more likely to attract the tin foil hat nut-bars
I'm guessing you're new here
#20
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@oromagi
Religion is in fact very quiet at the moment.

Gender, guns and politics are currently the hot topics.

And history and conspiracy theories are way off the boil.
#21
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,239
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@oromagi
Religions are also inherently illogical but the RELIGION forum is the most popular topic
While I believe all religions are fallacious, I wouldn’t claim all religion is inherently illogical.

Religion is the result of believing in a deity, there is nothing about that which necessitates any kind of logical framework in which the belief must be based upon.

Conspiracy theories are essentially identified by the characteristics of its illogical framework. The immediate dismissal of any evidence contradicting the theory as part of the conspiracy, the absence of evidence serving as evidence, or my favorite; “I’m just asking questions” which negates the notion that a conspiracy is even being alleged.

Conspiracy theorists would point out that the definition of a conspiracy is simply two or more people conspiring to commit a crime, which happens all the time. But that’s just a distraction, no one would call that a conspiracy theory, that’s just not the way we speak. And more importantly that’s not what the section would actually be promoting. It’s just a way for conspiracy theorists to try and gain credibility by invoking something totally different from what they are proposing.
#22
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@oromagi
Gender is a private decision, you say?

Then why is it them forcing the others to publicly acknowledge their chosen gender?

It is trans people who made it a public issue, nice try though.
#23
Kritikal
Kritikal's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 76
0
1
7
Kritikal's avatar
Kritikal
0
1
7
-->
@oromagi
Probably so but the same could be said of existing topics
This is true, but I was just pointing out that it is already possible to discuss conspiracy theories so the status quo solves.  

I'm guessing you're new here
Your point? I think you are trying to challenge the inherency of it because there are already some here, but it could still get much worse. 
#24
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
Conspiracy theorists would point out that the definition of a conspiracy is simply two or more people conspiring to commit a crime,
people who tried to blow the whistle on watergate were dismissed as "conspiracy theorists"
#25
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,239
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@3RU7AL
Used as a pejorative, because that’s the connotation the term “conspiracy theorist” conjures. The fact that people called them this is irrelevant to whether they fit the term as it is generally understood and more importantly, whether their discoveries were the result of the same logical fallacies we see from these groups.
#26
Alfresco
Alfresco's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 18
0
0
5
Alfresco's avatar
Alfresco
0
0
5
-->
@Double_R
Let me put it this way then:

A debate site is already an environment that by definition is designed to minimize errors of reasoning.
It should treat the term 'conspiracy' in a formal sense (as opposed to colloquial) to begin with.

conspiracy - a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. - is a standard definition.
And has been since time immemorial. It is also a legal term.

Which is why it should be entirely distinct from theories that are often lumped together but rather should
be filed under the category 'unsolved mysteries' or similar -
bigfoot, UFOs and whatnot.

Topic's author
#27
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Kritikal
Your point?
A separate CONSPIRACY THEORIES topic encourages discussion under that topic, inspires new posts, and spreads out traffic out to improve front page visibility.
Topic's author
#28
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@3RU7AL
people who tried to blow the whistle on watergate were dismissed as "conspiracy theorists"
Sounds like a good topic for a CONSPIRACY THEORIES forum.

Topic's author
#29
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Alfresco
Which is why it should be entirely distinct from theories that are often lumped together but rather should
be filed under the category 'unsolved mysteries' or similar -
bigfoot, UFOs and whatnot.

The  claim that a large primate remains secretly undiscovered in the Americas is not itself a conspiracy theory but since there is no evidence to back that claim, almost all conversation about Bigfoot ends up being about the conspiracy that keeps the evidence from coming to light.

The claim that extraterrestrial vehicles have visited the Earth is not itself a conspiracy but since there is no evidence to back that claim, almost all conversation about UFOs ends up being about the conspiracy that keeps evidence for UFOs from being revealed.




#30
Kritikal
Kritikal's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 76
0
1
7
Kritikal's avatar
Kritikal
0
1
7
-->
@oromagi
A separate CONSPIRACY THEORIES topic encourages discussion under that topic, inspires new posts, and spreads out traffic out to improve front page visibility.
That is not a good thing. Advertising is good, but you want to advertise to the correct crowd.