Why is Leo so anti conspracy theories?

[Shermaningeorgia]

Governments can and do abuse power. That’s indisputable. 
Conspiracy theorists often are a mix of egoists who claim the truth or those legitimately highly sceptical of power. 
 

 

[Shermaningeorgia]

On 10/03/2026 at 11:04 AM, lennart said:

From an epistemic point of view I don't understand Leos categorical rejection of conspiracy theories. I do understand that a lot of conspiracy theorists are epistemically bankrupt but that doesn't mean that conspiracy theories as a whole are stupid or wrong. A few core conspiracy theories are actually correct and I think it is ignorant to just disregard all of them.

@Leo Gura btw note that I am coming from a place of respect for your work thats why I am surprised about your position on that one.

It is naive to think that power cannot be used 

[Ramasta9]

Watch this video, you may start to understand why Leo (and many others) do not wish or cannot see outside their own comfort box. 

Most people prefer a safe and comforting prison than a wild and unpredictable life.

One is for those who simply want to survive, the other is for those who are brave enough to live truly and thrive.

The spell is so strong that even the brightest minds are consumed and enslaved by it.

 

Edited March 25 by Ramasta9

[Infinity16]

The problem with conspiracy theories is how utterly implausible most of them are. You see, a secret is information kept inside by a chain. Chains are only as strong as the weakest link.

A decade plus a few months ago, Dr David Robert Grimes went into fine detail into the maximum plausible size for any conspiracy. Edward Snowden's revelations may be used to back the paranoia of conspiracy theorists but I, as well as Dr Grimes, would say that they actually disprove it. To explain why, consider that we know about the extent of NSA spying because of a whistleblower. This brings up the question of why we have yet to see whistleblowers for a Holocaust setup, moon landing hoax, climate change fraud, or the 9/11 inside job.

According to Dr. Grimes, up to 2,521 people can be involved in a five year conspiracy. A decade long conspiracy must have fewer than a thousand. One lasting a century may involve no more than 125.

He looked at four different conspiracies, how may people would have to be involved in the coverup, and how long they would last.

• A moon landing hoax would have involved 411,000 people and been exposed within 3.68 years
• Climate change fraud would have at least involved the 29,083 published climate scientists and would have been exposed after 26.77 years.
• Vaccination fraud would have involved 22,000 people (that number does not include any employees in the drug companies) and been exposed within 34.78 years.
• A secret cure for cancer would have taken no less than 714,000 people and been exposed after 3.17 years.

Paper by Grimes: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-01-26-too-many-minions-spoil-plot

Another lovely video: 

 

[Shermaningeorgia]

That is true. People can be incompetent and stuff can leak out.

[Shermaningeorgia]

On 10/03/2026 at 11:53 AM, Cred said:

You are both correct. A conspiracy theory is what happens when you have an autistic person who has not learned epistemic responsibility. That's it. There's no such thing as a Neurotypical that has the ability to come up with a conspiracy theory.

A conspiracy theory is basically what happens when you only have off the charts pattern recognition and other than that no real knowledge about reality.

So what a conspiracy theory is, is it is always a very real pattern in reality that is just interpreted the wrong way and therefore leads to the wrong conclusions.

So when examining a conspiracy theory, never make the mistake to ask what it says, ask instead what pattern it points to. when you don't see the pattern, this usually means that you have not looked hard enough or that your interpretation of reality is incomplete.

That's because for a conspiracy theory to be popular, a lot of people with superior pattern recognition have to agree with it in some way.

Here are a couple of examples.

• "birds are spies" of course this is wrong, but this doesn't change the fact that western people are being spied and Palantir exists.
• "the elites are Satanist" is wrong but what is right is that they worship Yaweh who is the Demiurg in the gnostic interpretation of the old testament, which is the devil. So in that sense this conspiracy theory is completely correct.
• "they eat babies" might be wrong, but they sure as hell like to fuck minors
• "Bill Gates wants to implant chips in my bloodstream" is wrong because it's Elon Musk who wants to implant chips
• "the system is rigged" well that's just the truth
• "the leftists want to replace Christianity and traditional values" yes that's exactly what I want to do

So all of them are autistic? So it takes an autistic person to be sceptical of power? 

Or all neurotypicals are naive and assume all people and institutions are benevolent and kind? 

 

 

[Rodrigo Costa]

@Infinity16 There is a MAJOR flaw in Grimes reasoning. Secrecy is not a necessary condition for a conspiracy to be true. 

What you need is a dominant narrative, which can be obtained through mass media propaganda and censorship. And if you control the narrative, a lie can be perpetuated indefinitely.   

In fact, even a blatant known political fact  can be turned into a "conspiracy theory" by the use of mass media propaganda and censorship for narrative control.

And, because the corporate mass media lost its importance in the last years, now they're trying to control the internet. It's not hard to understand.

 

Edited Sunday at 04:57 PM by Rodrigo Costa