The Marginalization of “Conspiracy Theories” Due to a Lack of Empirical Proof

Many people will marginalize collusion and conspiracy as a “conspiracy theory” because there is not enough empirical proof to properly explain the crime. It should be noted that empiricism is just one tool in the bag of those who draw on the values of the enlightenment period, and that rationalism is also an important tool to draw on from enlightenment values. Rationalism does not require empirical proof, and since the primary tools of Machiavellian politics (read “The Prince” from Niccolo Machiavelli for more) are deception and criminal behavior, we need a system that can make inferences from the data points that are available to us, much like a detective would use causal inferences to work backwards from a crime scene to discover the root motive, weapon, and criminal(s) responsible for the crime. A well thought out crime can be quite difficult to both detect and infer the causes of, especially if all of the physical evidence was cleaned up properly, and misdirection techniques were effectively employed.

The State in its current form is a well oiled criminal machine adept at covering its tracks; to believe otherwise is both naive and simpleminded, and in many cases, intentionally ignoring the obvious. There is more than enough data points available for us to see the truth in the world around us, but this implies that we must actually start reasoning from what we see in order to conceptualize and realize it.

“I can see nothing,” said Watson. “On the contrary, Watson, you can see everything. You fail, however, to reason from what you see.” ~Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle

On the importance of reasoning skills (aka, rationalism) in relationship to empirical proof:

“When critical thinking is introduced into the classroom — and very often it is not — it is often approached monologically, for example, by having students divide a set of statements into “facts” and “opinions”. Unfortunately, a taxonomy that divides all beliefs into either facts or opinions leaves out the most important category: reasoned judgment. Most important issues are not simply matters of fact, nor are they essentially matters of faith, taste, or preference. They are matters that call for reasoned reflection. They are matters that can be understood from different points of view through different frames of reference. We can, and many different people do, approach them with different assumptions, ideas and concepts, priorities, and ends in view. The tools of critical thinking enable us to grasp genuine strengths and weaknesses in thought only when they are analytically applied to divergent perspectives in dialectical contexts. Dialogical and dialectical experience enables us to develop a sense of what is most reasonable. Monological rules do not.” ~Richard Paul, Dialogical and Dialectical Thinking

We must stop approaching our problems monologically, to instead engage them multilogically, otherwise our perception of reality will be too narrow, and we will be too easily manipulated by those who are orchestrating the big picture.  This implies that in order to make a proper diagnosis of our world’s problems, and to infer the motives, individuals, groups, and means of the crimes being committed against the people, we need to collect as many viewpoints as possible, while also crossing disciplines and domains, such as political, psychological, philosophical, technological, cultural, scientific, spiritual, and sociological, while also looking for patterns and trends over both narrow and wide periods of human history.

Egocentric Oversimplification – the natural tendency to ignore real and important complexities in the world in favor of simplistic notions when consideration of those complexities would require us to modify our beliefs or values. ~Richard Paul & Linda Elder

When we are overly reliant on the external appearance of things, (aka overly empirical) we will fail to discern the truth underlying them, and will therefore be easily deceived by the external. This is why truth has always been an inside job, and why we must look beyond appearances when drawing conclusions. ~Nathan & Aline

We live in a complex world, and we must resist the temptation to oversimplify it by reducing reality to the level of the material and empiric only, and we must instead rely on all of the Logocentric tools currently at our disposal, so that we can better grasp the complete scope of reality.  Only then can we properly identify and deal with the criminal behaviors, including the collusion and conspiracies, perpetrated against the people.

 

About Nathan & Aline

2 Responses to “The Marginalization of “Conspiracy Theories” Due to a Lack of Empirical Proof”

Read below or add a comment...

  1. Lisa A Williams says:

    Thank you, this is pure genius.

Leave A Comment...

*

CommentLuv badge

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.