How do we define a "conspiracy theory"?

[Nightwise]

First off, this in and of itself is not a conspiracy theory but a discussion about the very concept and ideas of it. Because of this, there is no logical reason for this post or my account to be subjugated to repercussion. I'm neither here nor there. I'm just arguing for the sake of going into the etymology and a meta-understanding about the entire subject.

I have seen Leo going hard on these so-called conspiracy theories. Although I do like many of the views and perspectives Leo has, I do criticize him here though, as there is a certain irony here.

See, conspiracy theorists are by default seen as people who have outlandish, absurd and crazy notions about reality. Just utter the word "conspiracy theorist" and you will not even take a second to consider the points that a conspiracy theorist makes, but you will already have automatically dismissed him because dismissing a conspiracy theorist as a madman is the default conditioned response. This is why painting someone as a conspiracy theorist is in and of itself a very powerful tool for letting someone lose his/her credibility, sometimes almost irregardless of the points and theories that were actually being made.

But what do you think that the mainstream thinks about all the content and videos that Leo has posted over the years? Do you think that is seen as commonsensical and perfectly acceptable to the mainstream? Especially now that he's delved deeper into mysticism and oneness, many people think he's totally ludicrous.

If someone in the medieval times would've claimed that the authorities were using christianity as a tool for repressing the masses, such a person would've certainly been painted as just a mad "conspiracy theorist" if they had the term in those times. Now we know better. But what happened to be the conspiracy theory back then happens to be the common understanding now. Then we can of course ask the question what the commonsensical understanding in the future will be that seems like a conspiracy theory now.

Outlandish and extraordinary ideas should not automatically be dismissed, yet at the same time they should also not instantly be believed just because you would like to believe in farfetched and eccentric ideas about reality.

They should neither be dismissed or believed; they should be discussed, investigated, be taken interest in, but with a healthy dose of skepticism. Don't believe them, just look into them. See if you can correlate what's being said with something of your own insight and experience, and then still don't necessarily believe, but just for the sake of interest you can take a look further into it. This is just about exploring different facets of reality, and it is my feeling that on this forum we should be allowed to do so.

After all, you do realize that a lot that we talk about on this forum is already seen as very absurd, if not conspiratorial, by the mainstream population, right?

Don't dismiss alternative ideas just because they have the label "conspiracy theory" to them. That's all I'm saying. But don't be naive either.

Edited April 16, 2020 by Nightwise

[Forestluv]

There have been many threads on this topic the past few weeks