Not sure where this will go, but I have been thinking about this for a few days and it would seem sensible to try and map out some preliminary ideas.\u00a0 Also it is rather a long time since I was active on this blog.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
We have, particularly over the last few months, but more generally over a longer time, been subjected to a rise in the “popularity” of conspiracy theories.\u00a0 These are, of course, nothing new – they have been around for a long time (I’m sure that if I were to quickly google it there are examples from long, long ago) but the specifics of the events ‘over the pond’ leading up to and following the election have not only brought them into sharp focus – but seemingly have brought them into mainstream “politics”.<\/p>\n
My intention here is not to delve into specific examples – other than to perhaps illustrate some points – but rather to explore the phenomenon and articulate a few thoughts.<\/p>\n
I have, I think, always had a reasonable grasp on what is “real” and what is “imaginary”.\u00a0 However, experience has taught me that there is often a blurring – for one reason or another – of the distinction here.\u00a0 The most obvious is that we – as a species – are progressing.\u00a0 You may argue that some of the progress is in a negative direction\u00a0\ud83d\ude00\u00a0but that does not change the fact that the lines continue to be redrawn.<\/p>\n
At any given moment though I would like to think that my own personal lines are – if not perfect – at least rational.\u00a0 Although that term in itself is not necessarily a helpful one.<\/p>\n
I have spoken\/written before about the fact that Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen use the label “Liars to Children” to describe teachers.\u00a0 Not in a derogatory (or any other negative sense) way but as an actualisation of what is the necessary process of learning.\u00a0 Of course, not everyone learns at the same rate, but – regardless of that – if you give someone data\/information\/knowledge that they are not ‘prepared’ for then that is not going to result in a satisfactory learning experience – for teacher or pupil.<\/p>\n
Thus we were all taught “the basics” first – and, whilst the basics were, perhaps not actually lies, they still hid a lot of the truth.\u00a0 The definition (according to what is written in The Science of Discworld) is :<\/p>\n
Now – it is important to realise that this is not confined to young children – we, throughout life, continue to relay on these things to make sense of the world.\u00a0 We each have a different level of understanding – and that level itself varies from subject to subject – I will willingly plead ignorance about some things and much more knowledge about others.\u00a0 This is because:<\/p>\n
So – in this respect we all inhabit “imaginary worlds” that are – hopefully – simplified versions of the ‘real’ world.\u00a0 These worlds are created by our minds based on our upbringing, our knowledge sources, our ability to grasp the more complex ideas and much, much more.\u00a0 For this reason it is extremely unlikely (in my view – and I hope you appreciate the irony of that) that any two people will have exactly the same worldview.<\/p>\n
We interpret “facts” based on how they interact with this worldview.\u00a0 There are many things inbuilt in each of us that regulate the way in which that interpretation is done – some in a positive way and others in a negative.\u00a0 This particular post is not going to delve into any in detail.\u00a0 One of the most helpful\/damaging of them is the fact that we tend to put too much faith in anything that reinforces what we already know.<\/p>\n
So much so that we will often go out of our way to confirm what we know at the expense of testing where our knowledge is deficient.\u00a0 This\u00a0confirmation bias<\/strong>\u00a0is often a big factor in the rise of conspiracy theories.\u00a0 Those who espouse them reject anything that contradicts the theory whilst pointing gleefully to anything that remotely supports it.<\/p>\n Here we get to the core of what I want to write about.\u00a0 Any conspiracy theory requires that those who believe it inhabit an imaginary world – however, that in itself does not make them any different to everyone else as I have pointed out that – to some extent – we all do.\u00a0 There is a famous aphorism “all models are wrong, but some are useful”.\u00a0 This is as true of our worldview as it is of an excel spreadsheet.\u00a0 I would suggest that it is the way that they are wrong – and the willingness of the person to accept “learning” that are the most important factors.<\/p>\n It is easy to point to some particular factors of the recent events in America.\u00a0 The biggest difficulty is that there is not just one conspiracy theory to deal with, but several that are interacting – which, of course, is how everything works anyway, but that means that the conspiracy theory in some ways gains more of a hold because it is more difficult to break down.<\/p>\n One of the key things people point to is “what are the facts”.\u00a0 Problem is – what is a fact to one person is a myth to another – and it is often difficult to change that view because the frame of reference is so totally different.\u00a0 Crucially it is difficult to provide evidence that something did not happen if sufficient people say that it did.\u00a0 Election fraud was everywhere – but there is no evidence for it – but equally it is difficult to prove that it didn’t happen – because every time you produce a reason why it didn’t that can be easily refuted by those who think it did simply by suggesting that you are “hiding the evidence”.\u00a0 How do you prove that you are not hiding evidence?<\/p>\n For most people, most of the time, the line between real and imaginary is reasonably defined.\u00a0 We read books – get drawn into the story – but we don’t “believe” it is real – always assuming its a fiction book, I guess for non-fiction the working assumption is that it IS real\u00a0\ud83d\ude00 equally we watch TV programmes – what happens there isn’t ‘real’ although some “reality shows” might want you to think it is.\u00a0 Here is a thought –\u00a0 are there any TC shows that are 100% ‘real’?<\/p>\n The fact that many (if not all) reality shows manipulate the action shown – even if just by being selective in what is broadcast and what is not – sort of does a first pass blurring of the real\/imaginary boundary.<\/p>\n This leads to the question – is “reality” simply what most people agree on?\u00a0 Surely there is more to it than that – and yet…. There are plenty of ways in which we can be – and are – manipulated.\u00a0 This is not something that is new with so called “social media” – but that has necessarily amplified it to an extent not seen before – but then – so did the invention of radio – and TV – and even newspapers.\u00a0 It is (I would argue) impossible for ANY media outlet to be entirely unbiased on all subjects.\u00a0 So – we will be, to some extent, manipulated by our media of choice – whether that is the BBC, the Time, or facebook.<\/p>\n I am no expert, but from what I have seen and heard the choices of many in the USA are very polarised – and suffer from extreme “confirmation bias” – only listening to outlets that support their views.\u00a0 There have been plenty of folks who can (very easily) point to the deficiencies within the crowds of MAGA supporters.\u00a0 I am sure that there are equally ‘strange’ opinions and views within any other group that is choosing to separate itself from the “center” – where I am counting the center as being “reality”!!<\/p>\n Thing is – to someone from (for example) an Asian country I suspect that many parts of my worldview would sound equally ludicrous to them as the MAGA view sounds to me.\u00a0 So the “center” is not necessarily something that we can point to anyway.\u00a0 That, however, is not the point.\u00a0 The point is that there must be some consensus view on what is a “reasonable” worldview to have.\u00a0 Who gets to decide what that is?\u00a0 Is there anything that counts as “undisputed” fact?<\/p>\n As we have grown and learned, we have discovered that things that we once thought “unreal” turn out to be very real.\u00a0 If – when I was in school – someone had told me that I’d be able to take out a “phone” from my pocket and have a “facetime” call with someone on the other side of the world – what do you think my reaction would have been.\u00a0 (and it wouldn’t cost me to do so\u00a0\ud83d\ude2e)<\/p>\n So – is it possible that some things that are thought of as conspiracy theories (or perhaps better termed imaginary worlds) might just turn out to be true?<\/p>\n There are – of course – some of these imaginary worlds that can be disputed with “realities” – but even there we must be careful as our realities might just be “lies to children”.<\/p>\n Probably more to write on this subject later……<\/p>\n