Moderator: Community Team
nietzsche wrote:b.k. barunt wrote:I have to agree. Anyone who accepts the pap that is dished out to the masses is a fool of the most common stripe. Even the most bizarre conspiracy theories make more sense than the traditional tripe that most citizen types embrace as gospel.
Honibaz
Sadly, the idea that believers in conspiracy theories are nuts is the best ally of the perpetrators.
Haggis_McMutton wrote:
Sure, it's valuable not to blindly accept the government's story.
However blindly rejecting it cause "government's are evil" is just as bad and stinks of those goth kids who are all so "special" that they have to dress and act all the same to establish how much of a freethinker they are.
You have to judge them independently and most conspiracy theories are fuckin insane. Vaccines causing autism? Chemtrails ? C'mon.
Btw. Welcome back bk
_sabotage_ wrote:No, I'm not interested in propaganda literature, thanks though.
_sabotage_ wrote:As I am sure you have as well.
Have you read the laws of physics? They might help you to understand that an object cannot fall at free fall speed through the path of greatest resistance, and yet they were broken three times in New York that day.
nietzsche wrote:b.k. barunt wrote:I have to agree. Anyone who accepts the pap that is dished out to the masses is a fool of the most common stripe. Even the most bizarre conspiracy theories make more sense than the traditional tripe that most citizen types embrace as gospel.
Honibaz
Sadly, the idea that believers in conspiracy theories are nuts is the best ally of the perpetrators.
_sabotage_ wrote:Yes, I feel that the laws of physics can't be broken by propaganda. That WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 could not have fallen they way they did based on what we have been told. It is physically impossible. That a plane measuring double the size of the hole it creates is impossible. These are called facts, and you can write as much as you like, but facts are hard to spin.
warmonger1981 wrote:How about the illuminati card game made in 1982 and revised in 1991. It shows the twin towers exploding by a terrorist attack. Did the makers of the game know what the future holds as most of the cards are strategies being used? How about that for conspiracy. I'm not saying I believe in that crap but it is kind of creepy.
LBJ took the IRT down to 4th street USA/ when he got there what did he see? The youth of America on LSD. -- James Rado and Jerome Ragini_sabotage_ wrote:LBJ killed JFK.
_sabotage_ wrote:1. I don't believe that the government is incompetent, I just believe that their competence revolves around their own interests, and that their interests aren't tied to the peoples.
2. Didn't need tens of thousands, needed a few. All they had to do was let a threat take form and add a few touches.
3. The NYTimes released info on the 6 warnings Bush received, and yet this thread states that anyone who thinks Bush had advanced knowledge is a conspiracist.
4. It's not a select few, it's millions of people and many major media has reported great doubts on the official story internationally, though seldom in the US.
5. CIA provided Bush with six warnings, FBI reports that they were impeded from doing their job, DoD were the folks saying it was a hoax to deflect attention from Saddam.
And yes, my position remains that until the laws of physics are changed to fit the scenario, then reality will just have to do.
BigBallinStalin wrote:nietzsche wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:nietzsche wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:nietzsche wrote:You are all missing the point.
The key here is why people like conspiracy theories, what do they remind them.
Have you read the Hero with a thousand faces?
I recall seeing that book in the movie Big Fish. That's the extent of my knowledge about it.
Are you saying that conspiracy theorists (CTs) view themselves as the hero who will bring back the booty to others?
What role do CTs play in Campbell's monomyth?
I'm saying that all of us have a innate tendency to believe in a myth. It's a story in the back of our minds all the time. I believe (I have no proof or scholar article) that it's somehow the origin of the tendecy we all have to believe in conspiracy theories.
There's not much mythic with conspiracy theories. It begins with, "No, X didn't happen; Y did."
(to be clear, there's a difference between Campbell's use of "myth"--as in, "epic quest," and your use of "myth"--i.e. "urban legend").
Nope, I meant it in the epic quest way.
I'm going to leave it there though, you are not ready
You really think that CTs view themselves as heroes?
Big Ballin Stalin wrote:There's not much mythic with conspiracy theories. It begins with, "No, X didn't happen; Y did."
(to be clear, there's a difference between Campbell's use of "myth"--as in, "epic quest," and your use of "myth"--i.e. "urban legend").
nietzsche wrote:Nope, I meant it in the epic quest way.
I'm going to leave it there though, you are not ready
Crazyirishman wrote:I'm about halfway through the Hero of 1000 Faces right now, and I'm struggling to draw the connections between Campbell's ideas of myth and conspiracies. Myth is used to explore and explain ideas of the human conditions in hopes that others will learn lessons from them and apply them to life. It doesn't feel as if conspiracy theories have the same intent.
nietzsche wrote:I'm saying that all of us have a innate tendency to believe in a myth. It's a story in the back of our minds all the time. I believe (I have no proof or scholar article) that it's somehow the origin of the tendecy we all have to believe in conspiracy theories.
nietzsche wrote:
It's as if you guys never read a poem, as if you never venture a little farther of what matter-of-fact, logic, left-brain says.
There's a connection between Campbell's Hero and Jung's archetypes. They are talking of the same universal human psyche. Not all humans must believe in conspiracy theories but the great majority do. Is Campbell's "myth" perfectly delineated? Could there be a little more deep down there? Could some of the myth imagery be both used to like hero stories and believe in conspiracy theories?
If I had faked a source, faked a wikipedia entry and made you believe it came from a scholar, you guys wouldn't doubt it for a second, even without knowing the scholar, you would've just needed he was in some prestigious western university. You would just learn it and qoute it.
Crazyirishman wrote:nietzsche wrote:
It's as if you guys never read a poem, as if you never venture a little farther of what matter-of-fact, logic, left-brain says.
There's a connection between Campbell's Hero and Jung's archetypes. They are talking of the same universal human psyche. Not all humans must believe in conspiracy theories but the great majority do. Is Campbell's "myth" perfectly delineated? Could there be a little more deep down there? Could some of the myth imagery be both used to like hero stories and believe in conspiracy theories?
If I had faked a source, faked a wikipedia entry and made you believe it came from a scholar, you guys wouldn't doubt it for a second, even without knowing the scholar, you would've just needed he was in some prestigious western university. You would just learn it and qoute it.
Whoa, that's a little harsh. I completely agree with you that there's a connection between Campbell's and Jung's work, I mean Campbell says it himself in the book. And of course there's some 'deep down there' stuff in his ideas just like any other critical thought oriented writing. Just because you find a source for something doesn't mean I'm going to think and blindly accept that: *derp! a guy with a PhD from *insert name of western university" said it so it must be true."
What I said was that for me myth and conspiracy seem to have different purposes, so I was struggling to find the connection between the two. Its easier for me to learn a lesson about the human condition from Oedipus or the Iliad and Odyssey than it is for me to learn a lesson from 'Obama was born in Kenya", "The government was behind 9/11" and the Illuminati.
BigBallinStalin wrote:_sabotage_ wrote:1. I don't believe that the government is incompetent, I just believe that their competence revolves around their own interests, and that their interests aren't tied to the peoples.
2. Didn't need tens of thousands, needed a few. All they had to do was let a threat take form and add a few touches.
3. The NYTimes released info on the 6 warnings Bush received, and yet this thread states that anyone who thinks Bush had advanced knowledge is a conspiracist.
4. It's not a select few, it's millions of people and many major media has reported great doubts on the official story internationally, though seldom in the US.
5. CIA provided Bush with six warnings, FBI reports that they were impeded from doing their job, DoD were the folks saying it was a hoax to deflect attention from Saddam.
And yes, my position remains that until the laws of physics are changed to fit the scenario, then reality will just have to do.
If I only led creationist books and refused to read science books--cuz they're propaganda, then the "evidence" of creationism would seem strong, wouldn't it?
_sabotage_ wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:_sabotage_ wrote:1. I don't believe that the government is incompetent, I just believe that their competence revolves around their own interests, and that their interests aren't tied to the peoples.
2. Didn't need tens of thousands, needed a few. All they had to do was let a threat take form and add a few touches.
3. The NYTimes released info on the 6 warnings Bush received, and yet this thread states that anyone who thinks Bush had advanced knowledge is a conspiracist.
4. It's not a select few, it's millions of people and many major media has reported great doubts on the official story internationally, though seldom in the US.
5. CIA provided Bush with six warnings, FBI reports that they were impeded from doing their job, DoD were the folks saying it was a hoax to deflect attention from Saddam.
And yes, my position remains that until the laws of physics are changed to fit the scenario, then reality will just have to do.
If I only led creationist books and refused to read science books--cuz they're propaganda, then the "evidence" of creationism would seem strong, wouldn't it?
Have you read The New Pearl Harbour? How about Shock Doctrine? I never said I haven't read any books about the official account, I just choose not to read any more. Have you read any of the literature pointing to an inside job?
Again, this thread holds the simple premise that Bush having advanced knowledge is a conspiracy theory, and yet him receiving six warnings has been verified. So what's your take, you seem to enjoy taking a dig at mine.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: denominator, mookiemcgee