Skip to main content

Conspiracy belief is a conspiracy

By Philip J. Wilson.

Source: It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia.

My article takes a critical look at the scholarship of conspiracy belief and concludes that it is unfair to associate it too closely with those on the political right.

The British physicist Sir John Pendry is reputed to have said:

"Science is like a group of children chasing a ball on a playground. Everyone runs after the ball, and where the ball goes the crowd follows."

Scientists (or their funding agencies) chase innovation. The article notes something similar among social scholars, except that the impetus for them is more like conformity: 

"All too often, many of the fallacies that liberal commentators see as constitutive of the conspiracy theories they oppose can in fact be ascribed to their own analyses of current affairs."

This quotation, from Harper & Sykes, suggests that a left-leaning political outlook finds its way into some scholars’ writing about conspiracy belief. Bearing in mind the need for reflexivity in social scholarship, it is something of a curiosity that such personal inclinations are never declared. A consequence of the bias, as my article says, is that those on the political right are easily misrepresented.

What the article does not go on to say is that this tendency may well get worse. Scholarship ultimately depends on public support, and in nations dominated by a two-party political system, that requires bipartisan support. Recent events in the USA reveal what can happen when such support is lost. The woke left was bound to meet a reaction from what has been called the woke right, but the assault on science, particularly environmental and public health science, is fundamental.

Scholars must understand the language and values of conservatives, who may be sensitive about feeling lectured to, or tired of what they see as a moral stance without moral authority. Or, as the article notes, are fed up with being accused of motivated reasoning when their accusers are just as culpable.

This counsel applies to science as much as to social scholarship. To give a common example, climate scientists often end their articles with something like exhortation: the sooner society cuts carbon emissions the better (and so on). Consider this article, which presents the latest climate science to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It says:

"… these annual updates could track decreases or increases in the rate of human influence and climatic changes … reflecting the outcomes of societal choices during the critical 2020s decade."

The previous year’s annual update was more optimistic:

"Depending on the societal choices made in this critical decade … these annual updates could track an improving trend for some of the indicators herein discussed."

The authors might say that these statements are sober as befits the articles’ high formal standing, and are merely intended as gentle reminders to the policymakers they address. But they could also be interpreted by the oversensitive as unscientific, owing to the hint of wishfulness, enervating, since something similar is often repeated without effect, and annoyingly effortless–how exactly are the virtuous choices to be arrived at and enacted?

Those with a more neutral outlook are likely to be sympathetic to the fact that, for fifty years, climate scientists have been providing information to policymakers to little apparent effect. But they would also accept that the statements are not strictly relevant to climate science and have no information content. They might also worry that, even if the economy used no fossil fuels, it would still do nothing to reverse several other sources of environmental degradation, such as deforestation and mass extinction, that accompany economic growth.

I hope that Conspiracy belief is a conspiracy encourages scholars in all disciplines to be more mindful of public sensitivities. I also hope that it will improve science communication and reduce the risk of an increase in anti-scholarship sentiment.

Read the full article: Conspiracy belief is a conspiracy.

---

Philip Wilson is an arboricultural consultant with an interest in climate change. Recent publications include:

Labels: