Using Logic to quit worrying

[sg1008]

I am going to attempt to address some conspiracy theories. I will be using logic, cost-benefit analysis, and examining the practical steps we should and can take.

A few theories to jog your memory:
WARNING: CONTENT OF THESE VIDS MAY BE DISTURBING
-
- (courtesy of rage)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-etc

Argument #1: Plausibility of Examination
First of all, anyone with a moment to examine the plausibility of investigating such theories will invariably conclude that further investigation would be tedious, require expensive resources, and involve access to inaccessible information and/or people.

For many this leaves the other option of clamouring for the "truth", or demanding greater "transparency". It is the cheaper alternative to finding out the truth for oneself.

The problem with this tactic is, if you distrust someone to reveal the truth, then why is it logical to assume that whatever "truth" they reveal with be the "truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"?  So, expecting to learn the truth from a source you gravely distrust is a bit oxymoronic, ain't it?

For others, this logic trap leaves another alternative; whistleblowers. These people seek to immortalize anyone who reveals anything about the distrusted parties, regardless of the relevance or utility of such information. They are the enjoyers of "sticking it to the man"....lol. Indeed, whistlelowers are useful, necessary and deserve protection, but it seems many people use the logic "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" to celebrate such deeds.

There is nothing wrong with this...but what irks me is the over-exuberant attitude that "without XYZ whistleblower we would all be lost to deception and cover up". It's a helplessness attitude that requires the average citizen to do nothing, but sit around hoping someone blows a whistle so they can then celebrate their heroism.

I don't like helplessness...so I dislike that attitude.

Anyways- for someone like you and me, the best address to this plausibility issue to realise that using our energy to clamor for truth, or over-celebrate whistleblowers, is a waste of good energy.  Otherwise you get these useless blogs about Michael Jackson and Illuminati, and videos of sky gods eating chemtrails, innocent witnesses of shootings suddenly become secret undercover agents- or children of agents, and professionals are either gods with access to truth, or evil illuminati minions with too much influence.

It's so fucked up and gets on my nerves.

Two things are for certain: (1) influential power structures (media, gov't agencies, politicians, CEOs, etc) have so little credibility when it comes to transparency, truth, and protection of justice, that people will believe anything about what they are probably up to; and (2) people are fed up with their current state of living and need some "truth" to liberate them from their uneasy feelings.


===============================
Argument #2: Ignorance can be fed, not created


In the first argument, I basically indicated that it is silly to waste time and energy examining and spreading information about things which are- from our POV- mere speculation....perhaps examination isn't in and of itself a waste, but the spreading of speculative information is. It creates more "noise" and confuses genuine attempts at discovering factual information.

For the second argument I offer a simple perspective about where ignorance comes from. Believing a lie is not something forced upon us. We take risks every time we trust; which is why a betrayal of trust is so personal and disturbing.

Ignorance comes into the picture when we overvalue "our sources" over "other sources" without any good explanation for doing so, albeit familiarity or some other psychological comfort. It's when we close our minds completely because we KNOW our information is superior, when in reality it is only partial, or perhaps not true at all.

The bottom line is, ignorance is a decision- we choose to believe in something based on our assumptions about who is telling the truth, and our lack of critical thinking. There is no way the government or any drug can manufacture that in order to control masses of people.

The most they could do is create a ripe environment for ignorance to exist, and then feed it. It would be a place where information is so scattered, and professionals so corrupt, that it takes exaggerated effort to break out of common/popular thought. A place where the alternative is so radical, most people settle for the comfortable explanation.

At any rate, it encourages inhibition of critical thought, and celebrates each persons position as "innocent bystander". So long as no individual can be blamed, then there is no need to address the issue. Thus oppression, corruption, and injustice are casually shrugged aside each day as each individual feels no connection to it at all.

At the same time, that stuff still exists...and instead of picking up a fucking history book to understand shit, people pick up all kinds of crap spewed at them by conspiracy theorists, politicians, and reputable journalists.

Just feeding ignorance, making it a nice big fat monster.


I dunno if I argued that well... my mom is talking very loudly with the neighbor making it hard to think....so I will just leave this and return later when they aren't talking so loudly. 

EDIT: Okay, now that my mom stopped talking loudly...


=======================
Argument #3: Practical steps

So, first I argued that it is implausible to delve too deep into speculation, second I argued that ignorance cannot be manufactured, only fed.

Third, I will present a few practical things we can do to combat ignorance and get away from the helplessness-rooted activities (such as clamouring for truth, praising whistleblowers).

An initial step to take would be to practice critical thinking often. Play devils advocate, and don't automatically dismiss arguments unless you have an empirical reason to do so. It is more likely you will find the truth via multiple sources, than via one.

A second step is to re-examine the ways in which you trust. Trust and respect go hand in hand....if X says so, then do you dismiss it, or give benefit of the doubt? With regards to other POVs, there is always something to learn. Learning requires some degree of trust and respect. So really, what people need is more trust in each other, and less trust of large entities.

Currently the pattern is to over trust a popular idea spewed out by a political party, religion, science foundation, or something...and to dismiss the real-life experience of a neighbor. Why should we put more trust into something removed and inaccessible, than we do in something close and available?

At any rate, it would bring thought from a large-scale conspirators place to a community  issues place. Where we really have power is in our own local situation- thats where energy should be put. If we can do that then we won't be as vulnerable to the "conspiracies" in the first place, and they wont even apply.

But of course, its easier to be an innocent bystander.

[RageBeoulve]

So do you deny that there is an elite taking advantage of a lazy public?

[TheoK]

But it is very seldom a conspiracy, merely the majority of people being ignorant about things that are either pretty open or "secret" but pretty obvious.

[RageBeoulve]

But it is very seldom a conspiracy, merely the majority of people being ignorant about things that are either pretty open or "secret" but pretty obvious.

So secret organizations in all government around the world doesn't qualify as "conspiracy"?

Tell me, what do you know about this?

[TheoK]

I don't trust such "documentaries".

I don't doubt that the rich and powerful are often ruthless psychopaths and have secret agendas etc, but that with masonic rites and such - no.

[RageBeoulve]

Well I don't believe in magical powers either, man. But they apparently do. And there they all are. World leaders from all over like to go and have secret meetings and perform their stupid religious shit around a giant owl made out of rock, pretending they are burning children to death in that place.

If nothing else, it tells you what kind of people we are allowing the important decisions to be made by. Do you really want someone who believes in Satanism (or whatever the hell that is) telling you what you should and shouldn't be doing on your own property?

I don't. These people are out of their minds.

[RageBeoulve]

Guy in this vid speaks the truth. The people in charge have all the resources and money to get what they want. If the education system and economy was not going the way the higher ups desired, they could change it, LICKETY SPLIT, lemme tell ya. Logically, the rise in obesity, the drop in education quality, all these race wars, are a product of the people in charge getting what they are paying for.

[TheoK]

Still depending to a great deal on ignorance of the average citizen. Orwell wrote his book in 1948. Huxley wrote his in 1932, even before WWII. Thus thinking and enlightened people have known or at least anticipated this for generations.

[sg1008]

I'm not in the business of arguing whether or not those theories are true.

My argument was- it is implausible to investigate what is inaccessible, that we do have a level of control because we control our own ignorance, and its more beneficial to focus our energies on the local scene rather than on the big conspiracy/political scene.

I'd compare it to slaves and their masters. Is it beneficial for slaves to try and keep tabs on what their masters are up to, debating amongst themselves about what master is doing what, while doing nothing to affect their continual status as a slave?

Or would it be more empowering for them to focus on their own community, their own people, then whatever devious plans their masters have won't be relevant because they can simply revolt?

If there is an grain of truth in any of the theories, the latter to me seems a more logical, and practical approach.

[RageBeoulve]

I'm not in the business of arguing whether or not those theories are true.

My argument was- it is implausible to investigate what is inaccessible, that we do have a level of control because we control our own ignorance, and its more beneficial to focus our energies on the local scene rather than on the big conspiracy/political scene.

I'd compare it to slaves and their masters. Is it beneficial for slaves to try and keep tabs on what their masters are up to, debating amongst themselves about what master is doing what, while doing nothing to affect their continual status as a slave?

Or would it be more empowering for them to focus on their own community, their own people, then whatever devious plans their masters have won't be relevant because they can simply revolt?

If there is an grain of truth in any of the theories, the latter to me seems a more logical, and practical approach.

Fancy talk aside, we're being bamboozled. YES, man. I've been saying this since I was old enough to watch the news and realize how stupid it was. Nobody will fucking listen to me though.

[TheoK]

I listen, but what shall we do? There will be no successful revolution, as long as 99.99% are ignorant fools.

[sg1008]

I listen, but what shall we do? There will be no successful revolution, as long as 99.99% are ignorant fools.

An initial step to take would be to practice critical thinking often. Play devils advocate, and don't automatically dismiss arguments unless you have an empirical reason to do so. It is more likely you will find the truth via multiple sources, than via one.

A second step is to re-examine the ways in which you trust. Trust and respect go hand in hand....if X says so, then do you dismiss it, or give benefit of the doubt? With regards to other POVs, there is always something to learn. Learning requires some degree of trust and respect. So really, what people need is more trust in each other, and less trust of large entities.

Currently the pattern is to over trust a popular idea spewed out by a political party, religion, science foundation, or something...and to dismiss the real-life experience of a neighbor. Why should we put more trust into something removed and inaccessible, than we do in something close and available?

At any rate, it would bring thought from a large-scale conspirators place to a community  issues place. Where we really have power is in our own local situation- thats where energy should be put. If we can do that then we won't be as vulnerable to the "conspiracies" in the first place, and they wont even apply.

I mean...I could elaborate if you'd like.

[sg1008]

I'm not in the business of arguing whether or not those theories are true.

My argument was- it is implausible to investigate what is inaccessible, that we do have a level of control because we control our own ignorance, and its more beneficial to focus our energies on the local scene rather than on the big conspiracy/political scene.

I'd compare it to slaves and their masters. Is it beneficial for slaves to try and keep tabs on what their masters are up to, debating amongst themselves about what master is doing what, while doing nothing to affect their continual status as a slave?

Or would it be more empowering for them to focus on their own community, their own people, then whatever devious plans their masters have won't be relevant because they can simply revolt?

If there is an grain of truth in any of the theories, the latter to me seems a more logical, and practical approach.

Fancy talk aside, we're being bamboozled. YES, man. I've been saying this since I was old enough to watch the news and realize how stupid it was. Nobody will fucking listen to me though.

You're saying this to a black person man. The people less likely to listen are the most privileged. Keep that in mind, because you wil find many allies amongst the less privileged.

[RageBeoulve]

I agree with Lit. What the fuck are we supposed to do? People like this descent into madness. Its like shooting up with herion to them at the moment, and they don't realize they're gonna pay for it tenfold later on. They like this pretty fantasy painted for them by the media at the behest of the elite. They like living in.. this.



WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO?  We can't give the masses what they think they are getting from Obama and his asshole predecessors, and the same thing is happening all over the world.

[sg1008]

May I refer you to Argument #3: Practical steps?

I would be happy to elaborate.