Are Conspiracy Theorists Irrational?

Episteme 4 (2):193-204 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Abstract It is widely believed that to be a conspiracy theorist is to suffer from a form of irrationality. After considering the merits and defects of a variety of accounts of what it is to be a conspiracy theorist, I draw three conclusions. One, on the best definitions of what it is to be a conspiracy theorist, conspiracy theorists do not deserve their reputation for irrationality. Two, there may be occasions on which we should settle for an inferior definition which entails that conspiracy theorists are after all irrational. Three, if and when we do this, we should recognise that conspiracy theorists so understood are at one end of a spectrum, and the really worrying form of irrationality is at the other end

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,100

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
524 (#35,497)

6 months
36 (#100,460)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Coady
University of Tasmania

References found in this work

The Wealth of Nations.Adam Smith - 1976 - Hackett Publishing Company.
Of conspiracy theories.Brian Keeley - 1999 - Journal of Philosophy 96 (3):109-126.
Conspiracy Theories and Official Stories.David Coady - 2003 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2):197-209.
Complots of Mischief.Charles Pigden - 2006 - In David Coady (ed.), Conspiracy Theories: The Philosophical Debate. Ashgate. pp. 139-166.
The Lysenko Affair.David Joravsky - 1971 - Studies in Soviet Thought 11 (4):301-307.

View all 6 references / Add more references