10-23-2024, 10:41 PM
What makes it fun is that it is essentially impossible to "prove" models. Each significant layer of correlation brings in corresponding predicates, which may then be questioned anew. This is often called "shifting the goalposts", but it is a fundamental attribute of rational epistemology: no finite belief-system or scientific model can be complete and consistent. It is however, possible to "disprove" models by showing contradiction, however (and this can be logically proven) the model may then always be revised to account for seeming contradiction.
And the wheels just keep going 'round and 'round...
Eventually, it comes down to practical utility. So what about any wild conspiracy theories: how do they affect "real life"? How are they useful? What do they show us, and are they persistently worthwhile? And those are "open-ended" questions.
This is why I feel it is better to "entertain" beliefs and conspiratorial models, rather than "holding" them.
And the wheels just keep going 'round and 'round...
Eventually, it comes down to practical utility. So what about any wild conspiracy theories: how do they affect "real life"? How are they useful? What do they show us, and are they persistently worthwhile? And those are "open-ended" questions.
This is why I feel it is better to "entertain" beliefs and conspiratorial models, rather than "holding" them.
