Woo and Occam's Razor - the explanation for most conspiracy theories and nonsense

Although there are legitimate conspiracies I'd like to note that most are actually baseless supposition without supporting evidence (which ends up doing more harm than good.)

Conspiracy theory vs Occam's Razor

What is Occam's Razor?

Occam's razor, also written as Ockham's razor, and lex parsimoniae, Latin for law of parsimony, is a problem-solving principle attributed to William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), who was an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher and theologian. The principle can be interpreted as stating Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. - wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org...'s_razor

So in short, the less assumptions made when evaluating a scenario, the less problems you create. In fact, don't even assume anything unless you have undeniable evidence to your claims.

Conspiracy theorists ASSUME information that is not backed up with physical evidence. Occam's Razor teaches won't shouldn't make too many assumptions without supporting evidence. Occam's Razor is essentially a tool towards simplicity (i.e. "keep it simple silly," "it is what is" etc).

Next I'd look to post the Woo phenomena. Woo covers most of the stereotypical nonsense you see on the internet and in the real world (New Age claptrap, free energy, hero fantasy role-playing delusions etc.)

Woo is a term for pseudoscientific explanations that share certain common characteristics, often being too good to be true (aside from being unscientific). The term is common among skeptical writers. Woo is understood specifically as dressing itself in the trappings of science (but not the substance) while involving unscientific concepts, such as anecdotal evidence and sciencey-sounding words.

Woo is usually not the description of an effect but of the explanation as to why the effect occurs.

Woo is used to blind or distract an audience from a real explanation or to discourage people from delving deeper into the subject to find a more realistic explanation. You can't make money if nobody buys your BS...Despite the terrible name, it has become quite a popular term within the skeptical movement—....

Origins of the term

The term comes from "woo-woo", an epithet used in the 1990s by science and skeptical writers to ridicule people who believe or promote such things.[1][2][3][4][5]This is in turn believed to have come from the onomatopoeia "woooooo!" as a reaction to dimmed lights or magic tricks. The term implies a lack of either intelligence or sincerity on the part of the person or concepts so described.

As a coincidence, the Chinese word 巫 (pronounced in the Mandarin dialect as Wū) means a shaman, usually with magic powers.[6] Also coincidentally, the Chinese word 無/无 (pronounced Wú in Mandarin) means "nothing" or "negation".

Characteristics of woo

Woo generally contains most of the following characteristics:

Anecdotal evidence: Prefers to use testimonials over actual studies. (Much less likely to go wrong.)

Panacea: Is a simple idea that purports to be the one answer to many problems (often including many diseases).

Pseudoscience: Has a "scientific-sounding" reason for how it works, but little to no actual science behind it; especially: Science woo: Uses words that sound scientific but make no sense in their context, such as "quantum".

Quote-mined studies that, if bent properly, appear to support the woo.

Here is the link to the Woo page from rational wiki: rationalwiki.org...

I believe at times woo actually proves the information it's arguing against is true but to be truly objective one should see both sides to an argument. To avoid confirmation bias, one has to keep an open mind to other possibilities and even be skeptical. Further more, one doesn't fully understand their own views until they understand their opponent's views as well.

I'm not a complete skeptic as I've had my own "exotic" experiences but I think for a conspiracy website that has an obvious bias (i.e. conspiracy theories) they should see the other side of the coin.

a reply to: supermilkman
Might as well shut down ATS.

Network theory is also somewhat anti-conspiracy theory.

In computer and network science, network theory is the study of graphs as a representation of either symmetric relations or, more generally, of asymmetric relations between discrete objects. Network theory is a part of graph theory: a network can be defined as a graph in which nodes and/or edges have attributes (e.g. names).

Network theory has applications in many disciplines including statistical physics, particle physics, computer science, electrical engineering, biology, economics, operations research, climatology and sociology. Applications of network theory include logistical networks, the World Wide Web, Internet, gene regulatory networks, metabolic networks, social networks, epistemological networks, etc.; see List of network theory topics for more examples.

Euler's solution of the Seven Bridges of Königsberg problem is considered to be the first true proof in the theory of networks.[1]

en.m.wikipedia.org...

It shows how complex network systems really are and that the world is actually RUDDERLESS rather than there being some evil puppet master hiding behind the scenes. The world is definitely not as black and white people make it out to be.

Thus endth all things Freemason...

WOO

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: supermilkman
Might as well shut down ATS.

some conspiracies are true but many are not.

i've read enough of them to find out at that most are just peoples' imagination. like they're story telling.

once again, they're making assumptions and often tie things/events together that have no relation to begin with.

originally posted by: LetsGoViking
Thus endth all things Freemason...

freemasons exist. they're just a fraternity. mind you there are countless other groups that exist in the world besides freemasons.

is there corruption? honestly every institution and organization has it's scrutiny.

many work environments have fraternization even though businesses officially forbid it.

businesses and schools often forbid drug use but many students/workers are under the influence.

there's good and bad apples everywhere you go.

a reply to: supermilkman

Great post and I think for the most part, especially for some of the more fantastical theories, what you wrote makes a lot of sense.

I think, at times, the issue becomes what really is the simplest solution/answer.

Take Bill Clinton and military actions back in the day....

1) Iraq has essentially been a thorn in the side of the West for decades now (for some legitimate reasons and for some reasons that I don't completely comprehend).

2) Bill Clinton was acting pervy with an intern a couple of decades ago.

3) Bill Clinton (by his own admission) initially lied about the affair with the intern.

4) Questions were raised about the timing of bombings of Iraq when compared to the timing of the developments of the Lewinsky affair.

1 + 2 + 3 = 4

As described in this Wiki Page, some (possibly legitimate) questions were raised.

Some critics of the Clinton administration, including Republican members of Congress, expressed concern over the timing of Operation Desert Fox. The four-day bombing campaign occurred at the same time the U.S. House of Representatives was conducting the impeachment hearing of President Clinton. Clinton was impeached by the House on 19 December, the last day of the bombing campaign.

A few months earlier, similar criticism was levelled during Operation Infinite Reach, wherein missile strikes were ordered against suspected terrorist bases in Sudan and Afghanistan, on 20 August. The missile strikes began three days after Clinton was called to testify before a grand jury during the Lewinsky scandal and his subsequent nationally televised address later that evening in which Clinton admitted having an inappropriate relationship.

The Operation Infinite Reach attacks became known as "Monica's War" among TV news people, due to the timing. ABC-TV announced to all stations that there would be a special report following Lewinsky's testimony before Congress, then the special report was pre-empted by the report of the missile attacks.

So we have a pervy President, desperate to keep his position and stature and a somewhat rogue nation in Iraq that consistently provides "reasons" for harsh dealings.

Where does this fall on the razor?

Were the two sets of bombings ordered by a man that had the sole purpose of defending the free world? It is most definitely possible.

Were the two sets of bombings ordered by a man that found himself backed into a corner and was desperately trying to find a way out? It is most definitely possible.

I think one of the biggest issues we all face in current times is that there really aren't "reporters" anymore. That is to say all of the people on television have become commentators at best and propagandists at worst. There really aren't many people/outlets anymore that simply "report" what was actually said and done without diluting it with their own "version" or "vision" of the truth. In that sense we are all left to our own devices to try to piece things together the best we can.

The Hindu caste system has also helped me better understand how the system really is.


Everyone has a job/moral duty one should perform.

To quote Steve Jobs


Does the current system need reformation? Sure some new ideas should be implemented but we don't need violent anarchism like many conspiracy theorists think. The system is just a process. Try to make it better.

a reply to: supermilkman

I think there are most definitely conspiracies brewing within the governments of the world, but I am no longer a believer in the "NWO Conspiracy". Yes, there are Globalists everywhere, but I don't think they are organized enough to really get a unified conspiracy to work.

Instead, I have come to believe that stupidity, arrogance, ignorance, greed, and power lust have become so widespread in our societies, that fallen angels/demons/evil trans-dimensional beings have use it against us. The wolves herd us like sheep to our own death, and all the while, we wonder what the hell is going on.

A NWO Conspiracy? Probably not. A Kosmokrator Conspiracy? Much more likely.

Two things are curious.

1. The OP defined woo, but for some reason decide to ignore the origins of "conspiracy theory."

2. This is a conspiracy site.

Plans are everywhere, plans by men, and women, to accomplish the tasks designed by others, often without any knowledge about the original intent.

To a soldier, standing on the front line, the "plans" concerning the war's actions that he is not privy to is a conspiracy, or a plan, depending on how he feels about his role from the little he knows. The fact that he knows little, by design, is proof that things are not what they appear to be a many levels.

a reply to: supermilkman

There is no solid evidence to support Occam's Razor. It was just a half-baked conspiracy theory from a guy who was too lazy to think things through, and it was adopted and parroted by other people who lacked the will or intelligence to see the world around them for what it is.

If Occam's Razor were a valid theory, things like Moon landings and understanding the opposite sex would be easy.

Welp, there's another crazy conspiracy theory thoroughly debunked.

originally posted by: crankyoldman
To a soldier, standing on the front line, the "plans" concerning the war's actions that he is not privy to is a conspiracy, or a plan, depending on how he feels about his role from the little he knows. The fact that he knows little, by design, is proof that things are not what they appear to be a many levels.

VERY good point. D-Day was a "conspiracy" because the generals didn't tell the grunts the whole plan.

originally posted by: eluryh22
a reply to: supermilkman

Great post and I think for the most part, especially for some of the more fantastical theories, what you wrote makes a lot of sense.

I think, at times, the issue becomes what really is the simplest solution/answer.

Take Bill Clinton and military actions back in the day....

1) Iraq has essentially been a thorn in the side of the West for decades now (for some legitimate reasons and for some reasons that I don't completely comprehend).

2) Bill Clinton was acting pervy with an intern a couple of decades ago.

3) Bill Clinton (by his own admission) initially lied about the affair with the intern.

4) Questions were raised about the timing of bombings of Iraq when compared to the timing of the developments of the Lewinsky affair.

1 + 2 + 3 = 4

As described in this Wiki Page, some (possibly legitimate) questions were raised.

Some critics of the Clinton administration, including Republican members of Congress, expressed concern over the timing of Operation Desert Fox. The four-day bombing campaign occurred at the same time the U.S. House of Representatives was conducting the impeachment hearing of President Clinton. Clinton was impeached by the House on 19 December, the last day of the bombing campaign.

A few months earlier, similar criticism was levelled during Operation Infinite Reach, wherein missile strikes were ordered against suspected terrorist bases in Sudan and Afghanistan, on 20 August. The missile strikes began three days after Clinton was called to testify before a grand jury during the Lewinsky scandal and his subsequent nationally televised address later that evening in which Clinton admitted having an inappropriate relationship.

The Operation Infinite Reach attacks became known as "Monica's War" among TV news people, due to the timing. ABC-TV announced to all stations that there would be a special report following Lewinsky's testimony before Congress, then the special report was pre-empted by the report of the missile attacks.

So we have a pervy President, desperate to keep his position and stature and a somewhat rogue nation in Iraq that consistently provides "reasons" for harsh dealings.

Where does this fall on the razor?

Were the two sets of bombings ordered by a man that had the sole purpose of defending the free world? It is most definitely possible.

Were the two sets of bombings ordered by a man that found himself backed into a corner and was desperately trying to find a way out? It is most definitely possible.

I think one of the biggest issues we all face in current times is that there really aren't "reporters" anymore. That is to say all of the people on television have become commentators at best and propagandists at worst. There really aren't many people/outlets anymore that simply "report" what was actually said and done without diluting it with their own "version" or "vision" of the truth. In that sense we are all left to our own devices to try to piece things together the best we can.

I think the government is a multi-purpose industry.

For one, the military has the largest discretionary budget so they have a lot of power. That power, combined with careless, greedy politicians leads to over-extending their authority at times. Military guys are pretty bully-ish to be honest.

They think they can do whatever they want basically.

The military/police is actually a safety net however (which honestly is the only thing keeping the country from falling apart) but our foreign/domestic policy needs to change.

We're involved in other countries mainly because of oil and resources. Other reasons is intelligence gathering, data mining, resource scouting, research and development projects, there is some nation building and even building foreign internal defense.

SOME countries actually became developed cities because of intervention. We have also provided some humanitarian relief as well as hostage rescues (which is good.) Other arreas have been totally destroyed and destabilized though (which is causing the outcry and even requests for peace treaties/troop withdrawals.)

The problem at this point is that we know that the politicians are deliberately lying to us about many of these campaigns.

Democratic institutions are known to have more coverage on incidents due to there not being censorship. For example many active duty people and journalists are reporting the current conflicts in Syria and other places in real time with footage (which is creating an immediate response with other civilians.)

The 9/11 event, for one, is being exposed more than ever and should be investigated. Many, I think are aware the tv's are, at times, spoon-feeding us unreliable information. I'm sure more disclosure projects will be the norm. There's only so long that you can keep your head in the sand before enough is enough. Eventually our officials are going to have address many of the conspiracies that maybe legitimate.

This doesn't mean we should get rid of our safety net however. It just means the guys that were responsible for these events should be exposed (i.e. Larry Silverstein and others).

As for Bill Clinton he's just another countless example of sex scandals which honestly I think rich, VIP type get to get away with because of their title and influence. Bill Clinton had workplace fraternization.

This is why the internet is good. It's giving an alternative news source to the regular tv media. The tv news stations ultimately have biases but the internet is deregulated which is actually spreading much needed awareness.

We shouldn't destroy the system, we just to need update it and improve it. One of the best ways to do that is address the serious issues concering our current system.

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: crankyoldman
To a soldier, standing on the front line, the "plans" concerning the war's actions that he is not privy to is a conspiracy, or a plan, depending on how he feels about his role from the little he knows. The fact that he knows little, by design, is proof that things are not what they appear to be a many levels.

VERY good point. D-Day was a "conspiracy" because the generals didn't tell the grunts the whole plan.

Yes, if one is left in the dark then they would feel like some grand conspiracy is happening. People tend to be scared of the unknown.

Historically speaking enlisted guys usually never liked officers or the higher-ups (especially if they never walked a mile.) Generals and politicians have been quoted naming referring infantry as "disposable" and "cannon fodder," which is morbid.

D-day was a scary event overall.

I've read from some alternative sources that there may have been US planes disguised as Japanese jets during Pearl Harbor but I'm not sure if this is true. If it's true then it would mean these generals/politicians are actually creating war games and their justifications for war is all a lie.

I think what it boils down too is finding out who is financing everything. There is credible evidence that there was some US entities financing Nazi Germany.

That's actually another good point: many theorists say that our world economy is controlled by 12 or so families and they finance everyone including governments and militaries. According to these types of theorists, the military has been used as a depopulation program (which might be true.) People have argued for years that world leaders finance both sides to warring factions (which if true is totally evil.)

I also think in conflicts anything can happen: mistakes, ineffeciencies, incompetence, fragging, etc.

Personally I think world militaries should be replaced with a civil police force monitoring their own respective regions (like Interprol.)

If we ever do have a world wide government it would eliminate national schisms and address the legitimate crimes happening in their territories. You should research Raelism and the ideas they have.

They recommend a world government, a new universal currency, replacing militaries with a civil police force, annexing the countries into 12 sectors/regions etc. They actually have some good ideas that could solve many of our current problems.

a reply to: supermilkman

Rule #1 - Know your audience!

This OP content is 101 to any seasoned conspiracy theorist. The problem is simply that some people get so deep they can no longer see the forest through the trees.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: supermilkman

I think there are most definitely conspiracies brewing within the governments of the world, but I am no longer a believer in the "NWO Conspiracy". Yes, there are Globalists everywhere, but I don't think they are organized enough to really get a unified conspiracy to work.

Instead, I have come to believe that stupidity, arrogance, ignorance, greed, and power lust have become so widespread in our societies, that fallen angels/demons/evil trans-dimensional beings have use it against us. The wolves herd us like sheep to our own death, and all the while, we wonder what the hell is going on.

A NWO Conspiracy? Probably not. A Kosmokrator Conspiracy? Much more likely.

]

I agree. I think the idea for an NWO to actually be implemented is too far fetched to pull off. The scale and implementation is too much.

Life will more than likely carry on as usual. However this is something to think about:

Civilization starts out in packs, packs turn into tribes, tribes into villages, villages into towns, towns into cities, cities into states, states into countries, then eventually all of the countries are unified.

If you really think about it we're already in a global environment with nation-wide trade and commerce.

We're already globalized. College universities has flags of all the countries. Most of the US merchandise is actually outsourced and made overseas (which is helping bring under-developed countries into developed nation status, win-win.)

With the advances in computer science, technology, and telecommunications, quality of life has vastly improved. Your low class of the 21st century live better than medieval kings (as they didn't have things like electricity, heating and air conditioning, automobiles.)

Society, aside from it's bad moments, is actually far better than it has ever been.

originally posted by: crankyoldman
Two things are curious.

1. The OP defined woo, but for some reason decide to ignore the origins of "conspiracy theory."

2. This is a conspiracy site.

Plans are everywhere, plans by men, and women, to accomplish the tasks designed by others, often without any knowledge about the original intent.

To a soldier, standing on the front line, the "plans" concerning the war's actions that he is not privy to is a conspiracy, or a plan, depending on how he feels about his role from the little he knows. The fact that he knows little, by design, is proof that things are not what they appear to be a many levels.

It takes two or more people to conspire. If one were to have a moral compass there wouldn't be as many issues.

Today's military is all volunteer (aside from other countries that still have drafts and mandatory enlistments.) Today's soldier chooses to go to war. Draftees were forced to go to war and had to do what their leaders demanded.

By the way, paramilitary woo somewhat addresses this topic.

Also not all plans are bad.

What about city planners? What about people who work in the medical field and have to follow operating procedures? Air traffic controllers? Logistics? Management and inventory in businesses? A gameplan in sports? Blueprints written by architects or computer programmers?

I understand you're talking about malicious plans but not everyone is doing that.

Most live in their own world and think about themselves and close ones.

Most people don't care about you.

If someone is out to get you well that's why the police is there to prevent that from happening.

If the government is after you it's probably because you did something wrong or you're a unicorn (refer to persecution complex in the woo article).

a reply to: supermilkman

You are very right. People in the First World have become too accustom to prosperity. Every glass of spilt milk becomes an apocalypse. Nevertheless, proxy wars, currency wars, international sanctions....its all a huge game of Monopoly, so the conspiracies are decentralized conspiracies. Conspirators vs conspirators.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
a reply to: supermilkman

There is no solid evidence to support Occam's Razor. It was just a half-baked conspiracy theory from a guy who was too lazy to think things through, and it was adopted and parroted by other people who lacked the will or intelligence to see the world around them for what it is.

If Occam's Razor were a valid theory, things like Moon landings and understanding the opposite sex would be easy.

Welp, there's another crazy conspiracy theory thoroughly debunked.

Occam's razor is a problem-solving tool. It's not another conspiracy.