Re:Adam Curtis Explains It All
by mistermann on Sunday January 31, 2021 @11:12AM
(#25979801)
> One needs to hit the sweet spot (which is not that narrow, your theories don't have to be perfect, just useful to predict what will happen and understand whose your friend or your enemy).
I think this is about right.
I think of it as: "conspiracy theorists" (those who actually match the silly strawman characterization) and "anti-conspiracy-theorists" both suffer from the very same problems:
- loose epistemology...an undisciplined, over-eagerness to form illogical conclusions without sufficient evidence to substantiate them
- not being mindful of the fact that there is a very real (and very important) distinction between one's perception of reality and reality itself
Thinking for yourself requires being able to make claims without having mapped an exact cause and effect - even without having evidence at hand.
It's about understanding connections and patterns and who benefits.
As for the "actual proof" sometimes those who you depend to provide it (and only hold it) are either your open enemies or are supposedly friendly (e.g. your government or Big Tech) but profit from hiding it.
People who can't connect the dots for themselves are taken advantage of (by governments, "experts" with conflicts of interests, media pundits, etc.) and are gullible.
People who over-connect the dots are conspiracy theorists (and might be gullible to different things).
One needs to hit the sweet spot (which is not that narrow, your theories don't have to be perfect, just useful to predict what will happen and understand whose your friend or your enemy).