Conspiracy Theorist: The definition of a conspiracy theory

Thier appears to be a misunderstanding about the meaning of the term conspiracy theorist. The great thing about words, we don't get to make up our own definitions. So I thought it best to clear up what a Conspiracy Theorist is using the dictionary.

Conspiracy
1. The act of conspiring.

Conspire
1. to agree together, especially secretly, to do something wrong, evil, or illegal.

Theorist
1. a person who theorizes.

Theorize
1. to form a theory or theories.

Theory
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: exp. Einstein's theory of relativity.
dictionary.reference.com...

So a conspiracy theorists is one who uses provable facts to determine whether or not people have conspired to do something illegal.

This means that every investigator is a conspiracy theorists, if we look at the actual definition of the words.

In fact unless someone turned themselves in, every single crime that gets prosecuted starts out as a conspiracy theory, innocent until proven guilty.

What has happened is people who believe in conspiracy fantasy often times call themselves conspiracy theorists. If I call my self a vegetarian but eat beef everyday I'm certain I'm not really a vegetarian.

If my FANTASY has run wild with ideas that I have no proof or evidence to support and I call it a conspiracy theory, that does not make it a conspiracy THEORY.

The fact that people claim Conspiracy fantasy as theory does not diminish conspiracy theorists.

And if anyone in politics had a clue what the dictionary has to say about the meaning of words, they would stop using the term conspiracy theorists in the way they do.

You don't get to diminish the value of words because some people get caught up in fantasy without evidence.

Anyone who questions the official story of anything is by definition a conspiracy theorists whether you wish to be called one or not.

a reply to: sacgamer25

So a conspiracy theorists is one who uses provable facts to determine whether or not people have conspired to do something illegal.

Mmm, but if its factual its no longer a theory, right?. Since people who conspire together keep their activity secret they will always try to deny or cover up the truth about it. Thus the term they helped generate.

Like "gun violence" and "Muslim extremist" the word association is designed to make us believe that all conspiracies are only theories.

Conspiracy theorist.
Two words used by the media to shut down all seriouse debate on sensitive subjects.

How does it work?
Have tv presenters smirk or laugh everytime they use those two words. This conditions the viewer to fear being ridiculed if they associate with the theory.

Job done.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: sacgamer25

So a conspiracy theorists is one who uses provable facts to determine whether or not people have conspired to do something illegal.

Mmm, but if its factual its no longer a theory,

No that is not at all how theorists work. You start out with something that appears to be a conspiracy without anything other than a gut feeling that something doesn't sound right.

This is the beginning of an investigation, we have no theory yet.

Once we find the proverbial "smoking gun", then we have something acknowledged as a fact. At this time we call it a conspiracy theory. We have a piece of evidence that is contrary to the official story, but we can't call our theory fact until the evidence is sufficient to prosecute.

That is why many conspiracies remain only in theory. For a theory to stand the test of time thier has to be some kind of smoking gun, some fact that doesn't quite fit, but still not enough to prosecute.

a reply to: sacgamer25

originally posted by: sacgamer25

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: sacgamer25

So a conspiracy theorists is one who uses provable facts to determine whether or not people have conspired to do something illegal.

Mmm, but if its factual its no longer a theory,

No that is not at all how theorists work. You start out with something that appears to be a conspiracy without anything other than a gut feeling that something doesn't sound right.

This is the beginning of an investigation, we have no theory yet.

Once we find the proverbial "smoking gun", then we have something acknowledged as a fact. At this time we call it a conspiracy theory. We have a piece of evidence that is contrary to the official story, but we can't call our theory fact until the evidence is sufficient to prosecute.

That is why many conspiracies remain only in theory. For a theory to stand the test of time thier has to be some kind of smoking gun, some fact that doesn't quite fit, but still not enough to prosecute.

In scientific terms, a theory is a theorum and is backed by testable evidence.In other words it's a fact. Unfortunately, people confuse hypothesis with theory. A hypothesis is speculation that has not (yet) been proven via testable evidence. It would probably be more accurate to call conspiracy theorists conspiracy hypothesists--unless, of course, they have testable evidence.

a reply to: sacgamer25
Respectfully, I must disagree. If I take your premise, then ALL conspiracies are fantasy until proven to be correct. Even those with varying degrees of evidence to support them, of necessity, contain elements of speculation until they have enough evidence to be fact instead of fantasy(speculation).

Scientific theory...

Theory 1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: exp. Einstein's theory of relativity.

...is different from a general use of the word theory. The latter being closer to a hypothesis than a scientific theory. I see no problem with the "conspiracy theorist" terminology. At this point, it is used more as slang anyway.

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: sacgamer25

Ok you win. I like your definition better.

a reply to: Tangerine

Einstein's Theory of relatively is based on some scientific observations that others have agreed with.

But it is not science fact, and some scientists still dispute the THEORY outright. If it was a fact, no one would be disputing it.

Building 7 falling is a fact.
Building 7 is not mentioned in the official report.

Therefore any conclusion about building 7 is currently a theory since the proper facts to prove what happened were never gathered.

Now we can all stop believing in conspiracies or we could continue to try to understand what happened to building 7 and why it was left out of the report.

Simply put a theory is the best explanation for an observable phenomenon. When it comes to conspiracies their is often two sides of the story and only one is telling the truth.

When it comes to government and politics I think it's prudent of the people to question everything.

Everyone should be a conspiracy theorist.

originally posted by: sacgamer25
a reply to: Tangerine

Einstein's Theory of relatively is based on some scientific observations that others have agreed with.

But it is not science fact, and some scientists still dispute the THEORY outright. If it was a fact, no one would be disputing it.

Building 7 falling is a fact.
Building 7 is not mentioned in the official report.

Therefore any conclusion about building 7 is currently a theory since the proper facts to prove what happened were never gathered.

Now we can all stop believing in conspiracies or we could continue to try to understand what happened to building 7 and why it was left out of the report.

Simply put a theory is the best explanation for an observable phenomenon. When it comes to conspiracies their is often two sides of the story and only one is telling the truth.

When it comes to government and politics I think it's prudent of the people to question everything.

Everyone should be a conspiracy theorist.

I agree that everything should be questioned but I would say that, quite often,there are more than two sides to a story and no one may be telling the truth. Thinking that only A or B has to be the right answer prevents us from thinking outside the box. If we take the government as an example, there are so many agencies and groups within agencies that many may be involved in a single event and working at cross-purposes. They may not even be aware of each other.

a reply to: Tangerine

Your right, I oversimplified it a bit.