• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Shouldn't it Really Be a Conspiracy "Hypothesis"?

Reality Believer

Muse
Reality Believer
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
716
One thing has bugged me is the term "Conspiracy Theory". Yea, I know it is a permanent part of the conversational lexicon as we know it, but I can't help referring back to the scientific method that defines the the term "theory" as something that has been proven via the rigors of the scientific method.

You start with an observation, you form a hypothesis, and you experiment to either prove or disprove the hypothesis. If the hypothesis is proven with facts, evidence and experimentation, then it becomes a theory. Other well known theories that have survived the rigors of the scientific method: The theory of gravity; The theory of relativity.

Calling the 9/11 conspiracy theory (or any other CT subject) a "theory" is giving it way too much credulity in my humble opinion.

I am not campaigning for a change to our forum vocabulary. It is just something I need to vent about. Thanks! :boxedin:
 
Venting acknowledged and I think you have a point, thought the troofers probably wouldn't agree. Their "theories" carry the weight of physical laws (and frequently violate them) in those circles.
 
Reality Believer said:
One thing has bugged me is the term "Conspiracy Theory". Yea, I know it is a permanent part of the conversational lexicon as we know it, but I can't help referring back to the scientific method that defines the the term "theory" as something that has been proven via the rigors of the scientific method.

You start with an observation, you form a hypothesis, and you experiment to either prove or disprove the hypothesis. If the hypothesis is proven with facts, evidence and experimentation, then it becomes a theory. Other well known theories that have survived the rigors of the scientific method: The theory of gravity; The theory of relativity.

Calling the 9/11 conspiracy theory (or any other CT subject) a "theory" is giving it way too much credulity in my humble opinion.



I am not campaigning for a change to our forum vocabulary. It is just something I need to vent about. Thanks! :boxedin:
Click to expand...
I agree with you and raised it in one of my earliest posts (and used the same examples of relativity and gravity by the way). Some use the term Conspiracy Fantasists, but it hasn't stuck.
But by way of counter-argument, String Theory seems little more than conjecture (in my humble unqualified opinion) as do some of the economic and social science "theories".
 
Here is a good article called: Evolution is a fact and a Theory about how this word is used and what it means. One of the major problems in a debate such as that between scientists and creationists is that the word "theory" has completely different meanings to the parties involved, made obvious with the slogan "Evolution is just a theory". It's rather unfortunate that we are stuck with the term "conspiracy theory" when speaking of the ideas put forth by the truthers.
 
I think it's conspiracy "theory" in the vernacular sense meaning conjecture, speculation, guess etc. Has anyone seen anything resembling a hypothesis from a CTer?
 
The misuse of the word theory has long been one of my pet peeves, and not just in regards to the conspiracy nuts. People are always saying "Well my theory is..." when what they're referring to is their "opinion."

And when creationists say that evolution is "only a theory," I remind them that everything we know about the structure of the atom is also only theory.

Steve S.
 
Magenta said:
I think it's conspiracy "theory" in the vernacular sense meaning conjecture, speculation, guess etc. Has anyone seen anything resembling a hypothesis from a CTer?
Click to expand...

That is an informal vernacular. Formally, the scientific process demands: Observation > hypothesis > research + evidence + facts = Formal theory.

We piss about formal logical fallacies all the time, but never about the overreaching theme of the terms.

It is just a picayune point, but I wanted to make it.
 
Considering that a theory is made up of a compilation of facts, it does seem a bit of a misnomer to call what troothers preach a "theory"....
If they learn how to pronounce and spell hypothesis,(and learn what it means) though, we might have to rename this part of the sub-forum....:p
 
I think you are all off-base. According to my high-school science textbooks (I had to go to the basement to find them) an hypothesis is a educated guess. Nice try.
 
Last edited:
Minadin said:
I think you are all off-base. According to my high-school science textbooks (I had to go to the basement to find them) an hypothesis is a educated guess. Nice try.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is an educated guess.

I saw a bird fly by my window today. My guess (hypothesis), based on my level of education, is that birds are lighter than air. I shall perform some experiments that can either confirm or deny my hypothesis. When my experiments are complete, I will have a theory. It may, or may not support my original hypothesis. I am flexible. I could be wrong. Perhaps birds are not lighter than air? Perhaps I may learn something in the process?
 
You should weigh some cative birds, if you can. That should give you some real data. Why did you change my bolding?
 
While I agree that the difference between the technical and vernacular uses of the word theory can lead to all sorts of frustration, it is the vernacular meaning as a speculative guess that is the original meaning. The word comes down through Latin from the Greek thea (a view) and horan (to see). Combined, they give theoros (spectator, one who sees a view), which led to theoria (a speculation or contemplation).

In this sense, it is first attested in English in 1592, with the scientific sense not appearing until 1638. Since language is driven by the vernacular, not the technical, it is really no surprise that the looser sense of the word is the one most understood by the average speaker on the street. I find nothing objectionable about the phrase conspiracy theory, so long as nobody tries to claim that it is a theory in the technical sense.
 
I think we call it theory because "weird paranoid fantasy based on something I heard my Rice Crispies say to me" is a bit wordy.
 
I call it all "conspiracy fantasy" because they're not mere musings, or educated guesses based on observation of phenomena or events. Rather they're very deliberately constructed narratives that selectively include some information but quite intentionally excludes/ignores/distrusts/recasts nonconforming information, all to a singular end of demonstrating a preconceived notion of what the government did that day. If the fantasists merely constructed narratives that were selective in the information included, I'd be willing to grant it the non-perjorative term "hypothesis", but again, all the construction is towards a singular end. That puts it in the realm of "fantasy", as even heavily biased hypothesies are subject to modification based on the accual of observations and evidence. In the case of the fantasists, the narrative has a clearly defined goal in the end.

When you're selective about the information you admit, you're biased, but only that. Your conjectures are still hypotheses. When you pre-script the beginning, middle, and end, you're constructing a fantasy, not a hypothesis.
 
You might have a point,but the fact is that "Conspiracy Theory" has established itself so strongly in the language that it will never be gotten rid of.
 
dudalb said:
You might have a point,but the fact is that "Conspiracy Theory" has established itself so strongly in the language that it will never be gotten rid of.
Click to expand...
Well, I think "CT Nutjob" rolls off the tongue nicely. But we need to work harder to get it into accepted usage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom