SUMMARY CRITICAL
THINKING 2020
Problem 1: conspiracy theories
A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and
powerful actors, often political in motivation, but this is not a necessary condition, when other
explanations are more probable. New layers of conspiracy are added to rationalize every piece of
disconfirming evidence.
Beliefs in one conspiracy is related to beliefs in other conspiracies, even if those gravely contradicted each
other. There’s global coherence; once someone beliefs in a number of conspiracy theories, they naturally
begin to see authorities as deceptive which makes it easier to believe in other conspiracies.
Characteristics of a conspiracy theory
Based on prejudice and insufficient evidence
Resists falsification
Circular reasoning
Highly correlated w/ projection and paranoia
Often anti-governmental
Any existing proof is the result of ‘connecting the dots’ alleged causal connection
Agents who are responsible often need superpowers to be able to pull of the conspiracy
Conspiracy is complex and needs a large number of elements for successful completion
Involves a large number of people who would need to remain silent
Involves a grandiose ambition for control
Assigns sinister meaning to most likely random and insignificant events
Comingles facts and speculations
Refusal to accept or consider alternative explanations
Nothing is what it seems
Nothing happens coincidentally
Everything is connected to everything
Types of categorization
Walker’s 5 types: the who
1. Enemy outside
2. Enemy within
3. Enemy above
4. Enemy below
5. Benevolent/ angelic forces
,Barkun’s 3 types: the what
1. Event conspiracy
2. Systematic conspiracy
3. Super conspiracy (illuminati)
Rothbard’s how: shallow vs. deep
The development of a conspiracy
People connect random dots into a meaningful pattern (patternicity) and add to it an intentional agent
(agenticity), together w/ an already existing confirmation and hindsight bias this can lead to a conspiracy
theory.
The difference between transcendentalists and empiricists is that transcendentalists believe everything is
interconnected and happens for a reason. Empiricists think randomness and coincidence interact w/ the
causal net of the world, belief depends on evidence. The believe that a handful of anomalies can
undermine a well-established theory is at the heart of conspirational thinking.
Why do people adhere to conspiracy theories?
Psychological factors:
o Monological belief system= a self-sealing and expanding network of ideas that mutually
support each other. However, conspiracy theories are not always mutually supportive
and often directly contradict each other. Conspiracies are only related to each other to
the extent they cohere w/ a higher-order belief system
o People are drawn to conspiracy theories because they promise to satisfy important social
psychological motives that can be characterized as epistemic, existential and social
o Epistemic: the desire for understanding, accuracy and subjective certainty, belief is
stronger when;
Conditions are uncertain
People perceive patterns in randomness
People consistently seek out patterns and meaning in environment
Events are large-scale or significant and small-scale explanations seem
unsatisfactory
People overestimate their ability to understand complex causal phenomena
People have a high need for closure
Low levels of analytic thinking
Hypersensitive agency detection
Quasi-religious mentality
Lower levels of intelligence
Nonclinical delusional thinking and schizotypy
o Existential motives: conspiracy beliefs are linked to/ associated w/ feelings of
powerlessness, anxious attachment style, existential anxiety, low feelings of control on
the socio-political domain, alienation from political system
o Social motives:
, Need to maintain positive image of self narcissism
Need to feel unique
Defensive way of identifying w/ one’s social group collective narcissism
Member of low-status social groups more likely to endorse CT
Situational threats and crisis situations increase the likelihood of believing in CT
In general: the feeling of being undermined and threatened in the context of
international relations can facilitate the endorsement of CT
Demographic factors:
o Lower levels of education, possibly due to;
Higher likelihood of attributing agency and intentionality where it does not exist
Greater feelings of control and a general doubt that complex problems may have
simple solutions
Lack the cognitive and affective attributes that enable them to resist CT
o Lower levels of income; less likely to work in jobs w/ higher pay
o More likely to be male, unmarried, less educated, lower income, unemployed, member
of an ethnic minority group and weaker social networks
o Still, 1/5 Americans w/ a postgraduate educating believe in conspiracies.
Political factors: conspiracy theories arise frequently from political events when those events
stimulate the psychological states linked to conspiracy belief; low political trust, feelings of
powerlessness, uncertainty and unpredictability
o Ideology
Ingroup/ outgroup mentality
Certain political convictions are strongly associated w/ belief in conspiracies
political extremes
Link w/ right-wing authoritarianism
o Motivated reasoning; when people are presented w/ facts that contradict their
predispositions, often seen in conjunction w/ partisanship. People filter events and
circumstances through the lens of their underlying political sense
Situational factors: being on the losing end of a power asymmetry increases the belief in
conspiracy theories used by vulnerable groups to manage perceived dangers
Problem 2: critical reading and listening;
argument mapping
An argument is a group of statements, one or mor of which (the premises) are claimed to provide
support/ evidence/ reasons to believe it, and one of the others is the conclusion.
Premises supporting the conclusion are called good arguments; premises that do not support the
argument are called bad arguments.
Identifying which parts of an argument are the premises and which is the conclusion is done by identifying
the conclusion indicators, premise indicators or no indicators (text implicitly implies a conclusion).
An inference is the reasoning expressed by an argument, a proposition is the meaning or information
content of a statement.
, 2 conditions must be fulfilled for a passage to purport to prove something;
At least one of the statements must claim to present evidence or reasons
There must be a claim that the alleged evidence supports or implies something inferential
claim
o Explicit indicator words; because, therefore…
o Implicit inferential relationship
Non-arguments
Simple non-inferential passages
Expository passages; expanding or elaborating on a topic
Illustration
Explanations
Conditional statements
An argument map
contains a conclusion, premise pro and/or premise contra. A contention is an idea that somebody claims
is true. A reason is evidence for the claim, an objection is evidence against it.
There are 2 types of argument:
X
because y
1. Single argument
2. Complex or composite arguments: more than 1 reason or objection
X
because Y because B
because Z because A because C
a. Chain of reasoning: when a contention serves as the premise for a higher conclusion
X
because Y
because Z
THINKING 2020
Problem 1: conspiracy theories
A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and
powerful actors, often political in motivation, but this is not a necessary condition, when other
explanations are more probable. New layers of conspiracy are added to rationalize every piece of
disconfirming evidence.
Beliefs in one conspiracy is related to beliefs in other conspiracies, even if those gravely contradicted each
other. There’s global coherence; once someone beliefs in a number of conspiracy theories, they naturally
begin to see authorities as deceptive which makes it easier to believe in other conspiracies.
Characteristics of a conspiracy theory
Based on prejudice and insufficient evidence
Resists falsification
Circular reasoning
Highly correlated w/ projection and paranoia
Often anti-governmental
Any existing proof is the result of ‘connecting the dots’ alleged causal connection
Agents who are responsible often need superpowers to be able to pull of the conspiracy
Conspiracy is complex and needs a large number of elements for successful completion
Involves a large number of people who would need to remain silent
Involves a grandiose ambition for control
Assigns sinister meaning to most likely random and insignificant events
Comingles facts and speculations
Refusal to accept or consider alternative explanations
Nothing is what it seems
Nothing happens coincidentally
Everything is connected to everything
Types of categorization
Walker’s 5 types: the who
1. Enemy outside
2. Enemy within
3. Enemy above
4. Enemy below
5. Benevolent/ angelic forces
,Barkun’s 3 types: the what
1. Event conspiracy
2. Systematic conspiracy
3. Super conspiracy (illuminati)
Rothbard’s how: shallow vs. deep
The development of a conspiracy
People connect random dots into a meaningful pattern (patternicity) and add to it an intentional agent
(agenticity), together w/ an already existing confirmation and hindsight bias this can lead to a conspiracy
theory.
The difference between transcendentalists and empiricists is that transcendentalists believe everything is
interconnected and happens for a reason. Empiricists think randomness and coincidence interact w/ the
causal net of the world, belief depends on evidence. The believe that a handful of anomalies can
undermine a well-established theory is at the heart of conspirational thinking.
Why do people adhere to conspiracy theories?
Psychological factors:
o Monological belief system= a self-sealing and expanding network of ideas that mutually
support each other. However, conspiracy theories are not always mutually supportive
and often directly contradict each other. Conspiracies are only related to each other to
the extent they cohere w/ a higher-order belief system
o People are drawn to conspiracy theories because they promise to satisfy important social
psychological motives that can be characterized as epistemic, existential and social
o Epistemic: the desire for understanding, accuracy and subjective certainty, belief is
stronger when;
Conditions are uncertain
People perceive patterns in randomness
People consistently seek out patterns and meaning in environment
Events are large-scale or significant and small-scale explanations seem
unsatisfactory
People overestimate their ability to understand complex causal phenomena
People have a high need for closure
Low levels of analytic thinking
Hypersensitive agency detection
Quasi-religious mentality
Lower levels of intelligence
Nonclinical delusional thinking and schizotypy
o Existential motives: conspiracy beliefs are linked to/ associated w/ feelings of
powerlessness, anxious attachment style, existential anxiety, low feelings of control on
the socio-political domain, alienation from political system
o Social motives:
, Need to maintain positive image of self narcissism
Need to feel unique
Defensive way of identifying w/ one’s social group collective narcissism
Member of low-status social groups more likely to endorse CT
Situational threats and crisis situations increase the likelihood of believing in CT
In general: the feeling of being undermined and threatened in the context of
international relations can facilitate the endorsement of CT
Demographic factors:
o Lower levels of education, possibly due to;
Higher likelihood of attributing agency and intentionality where it does not exist
Greater feelings of control and a general doubt that complex problems may have
simple solutions
Lack the cognitive and affective attributes that enable them to resist CT
o Lower levels of income; less likely to work in jobs w/ higher pay
o More likely to be male, unmarried, less educated, lower income, unemployed, member
of an ethnic minority group and weaker social networks
o Still, 1/5 Americans w/ a postgraduate educating believe in conspiracies.
Political factors: conspiracy theories arise frequently from political events when those events
stimulate the psychological states linked to conspiracy belief; low political trust, feelings of
powerlessness, uncertainty and unpredictability
o Ideology
Ingroup/ outgroup mentality
Certain political convictions are strongly associated w/ belief in conspiracies
political extremes
Link w/ right-wing authoritarianism
o Motivated reasoning; when people are presented w/ facts that contradict their
predispositions, often seen in conjunction w/ partisanship. People filter events and
circumstances through the lens of their underlying political sense
Situational factors: being on the losing end of a power asymmetry increases the belief in
conspiracy theories used by vulnerable groups to manage perceived dangers
Problem 2: critical reading and listening;
argument mapping
An argument is a group of statements, one or mor of which (the premises) are claimed to provide
support/ evidence/ reasons to believe it, and one of the others is the conclusion.
Premises supporting the conclusion are called good arguments; premises that do not support the
argument are called bad arguments.
Identifying which parts of an argument are the premises and which is the conclusion is done by identifying
the conclusion indicators, premise indicators or no indicators (text implicitly implies a conclusion).
An inference is the reasoning expressed by an argument, a proposition is the meaning or information
content of a statement.
, 2 conditions must be fulfilled for a passage to purport to prove something;
At least one of the statements must claim to present evidence or reasons
There must be a claim that the alleged evidence supports or implies something inferential
claim
o Explicit indicator words; because, therefore…
o Implicit inferential relationship
Non-arguments
Simple non-inferential passages
Expository passages; expanding or elaborating on a topic
Illustration
Explanations
Conditional statements
An argument map
contains a conclusion, premise pro and/or premise contra. A contention is an idea that somebody claims
is true. A reason is evidence for the claim, an objection is evidence against it.
There are 2 types of argument:
X
because y
1. Single argument
2. Complex or composite arguments: more than 1 reason or objection
X
because Y because B
because Z because A because C
a. Chain of reasoning: when a contention serves as the premise for a higher conclusion
X
because Y
because Z
