Exposure to conspiracy theories correlates with unethical behavior

[Justatruthseeker]

Quite. Geocentrism wasn't a conspiracy, so is not directly relevant to a discussion about conspiracies and conspiracy theories. Modern Flat Earthers, on the other hand, are (inevitably) conspiracy theorists.

How so, are you suggesting they don’t sincerely believe they are correct, but are in it to simply deceive?????

Or that Globe believers don’t truly believe, but are in it to deceive????

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Let me remind you what your question was:
"How many wars did the average citizen in the street start?"

2 simple questions for you:
1. Do you understand that the trigger for a process leading to an outcome is generally recognised as the start of the process?
2. What triggered the process that lead to the outcome of war being declared?

ETA Your source even says that "avenging Franz Ferdinand's death....was necessary"

Apparently you are unaware who Franz Ferdinand actually was...

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria - Wikipedia

“was a member of the imperial Habsburg dynasty, and from 1896 until his death the heir presumptive (Thronfolger) to the Austro-Hungarian throne.”

So what were you saying about citizens being the start of the war????

 

[timothyu]

Elitists take no responsibility for the troubles they create for the masses, yet if someone lashes out or a spirit of rebellion exists (as is growing today), they take revenge upon the masses by sending them and not themselves into wars and the like. All sorts of ways to maintain power and place blame on the masses.. Oddly some people blame the poor shmucks who take the law into their own hands and lash out against the elite instead of putting responsibility where it belongs.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

How so, are you suggesting they don’t sincerely believe they are correct, but are in it to simply deceive?????

There are both believers and deceivers, but so what?

Or that Globe believers don’t truly believe, but are in it to deceive????

No; let me explain: the FE's claim that there is a conspiracy to maintain that the Earth is a globe, in order to conceal the fact that the Earth is flat.

This makes the FE's conspiracy theorists; it says nothing about their motives, and it says nothing about whether globe Earthers really believe the Earth is a globe or are pretending that they believe that.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Apparently you are unaware who Franz Ferdinand actually was...

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria - Wikipedia

“was a member of the imperial Habsburg dynasty, and from 1896 until his death the heir presumptive (Thronfolger) to the Austro-Hungarian throne.”

So what were you saying about citizens being the start of the war????

I think the idea is that it was the assassin who started that train of events and therefore was the citizen responsible.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Regarding my question on music ...I am aware of the science and math of music ..the frequencies ..harmonics and those frequencies that do not resonate . Of course some human ears are acclimated that way and others are tone deaf ...my point is ...music does not have to exist for life to exist . In other words group bonding happened because of music ? That would imply a serendipitous relationship between something organic and something no organic .

I don't think anyone is claiming group bonding happened because of music; it is a very effective way of maintaining and enhancing it. There are plenty of other developments that don't have to exist for life to exist but can have a significant influence on success, e.g. language.

... the components of music exist apart from man, are non organic and therefore not part of the evolutionary process unless waves evolve and in a serendipitous way . I would think it safe to say that they ( the musical components) always existed as indeed they must have since we did not invent them ...but not enjoyed until harnessed by man .

I don't follow - what do you mean by 'musical components'?

Sound and the means to make sound are common in the environment, as are the materials to make art, tools, and other cultural artefacts; early humans made use of what was available.

 

[Ophiolite]

I think the idea is that it was the assassin who started that train of events and therefore was the citizen responsible.

I agree that is the argument that is presented, but I think it is oversimplistic. The assassin was not acting in a vacuum, but his motives and his opportunity were a construct of his environment, culture, personal history and the like. Any competent historian could point to a variety of events, without which WWI would not have started when it did (and possibly not at all).

The start of a war is of much less significance (to the point, except for those directly engaged, of being irrelevant) than the cause. So, even if it is the case that no citizens ever started a war, so what? Ultimately, wars are not conducted without the broad agreement of its citizens. Thus in WWI, combatants on both sides, happily joined up to head into battle. And it was the paucity of domestic support that led to the US defeat in Vietnam.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I agree that is the argument that is presented, but I think it is oversimplistic. The assassin was not acting in a vacuum, but his motives and his opportunity were a construct of his environment, culture, personal history and the like. Any competent historian could point to a variety of events, without which WWI would not have started when it did (and possibly not at all).

Yes; and the soundbite and story-based history taught in schools can be seriously misleading.

Coincidentally, I've been watching a couple of documentary series about the history of the USA and of Britain that roots out the most egregious historical fictions: American History's Biggest Fibs and British History's Biggest Fibs. Very interesting, and occasionally quite surprising...

The start of a war is of much less significance (to the point, except for those directly engaged, of being irrelevant) than the cause. So, even if it is the case that no citizens ever started a war, so what?

Quite.

Ultimately, wars are not conducted without the broad agreement of its citizens. Thus in WWI, combatants on both sides, happily joined up to head into battle. And it was the paucity of domestic support that led to the US defeat in Vietnam.

I think those are arguable points - in the UK the majority of the population (by poll) were strongly against being involved in the Iraq war; in WWI, many combatants weren't happy or willing, and propaganda played its part in enthusing others; the pull-out from Vietnam was more complicated than just lack of popular support.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I agree that is the argument that is presented, but I think it is oversimplistic. The assassin was not acting in a vacuum, but his motives and his opportunity were a construct of his environment, culture, personal history and the like. Any competent historian could point to a variety of events, without which WWI would not have started when it did (and possibly not at all).

Indeed. But the fact remains that he was just a "man on the street" and his action set in motion the process that lead to war.

The start of a war is of much less significance (to the point, except for those directly engaged, of being irrelevant) than the cause. So, even if it is the case that no citizens ever started a war, so what? Ultimately, wars are not conducted without the broad agreement of its citizens. Thus in WWI, combatants on both sides, happily joined up to head into battle. And it was the paucity of domestic support that led to the US defeat in Vietnam.

We can take the argument to an absurd extreme: if a soldier, who is typically just a normal citizen, didn't fire the first shot/deliver first sword strike etc there would be no war. So it is pretty much every war that has been started by Joe Average.

 

[Ophiolite]

I think those are arguable points - in the UK the majority of the population (by poll) were strongly against being involved in the Iraq war; in WWI, many combatants weren't happy or willing, and propaganda played its part in enthusing others; the pull-out from Vietnam was more complicated than just lack of popular support.

I completely agree re the Iraq war. My point was that some wars can be supported by the population. Remember that Brexit was decided by a couple of percent one way rather than the other, so to with wars - there will likely never be 90% - 100% approval. As for Vietnam, public disapproval was certainly not the only factor, but had very broad support remained the US might have just got round to putting some competent generals in charge.

We can take the argument to an absurd extreme: if a soldier, who is typically just a normal citizen, didn't fire the first shot/deliver first sword strike etc there would be no war. So it is pretty much every war that has been started by Joe Average.

Hence my contention that the start of the was is insignifcant, the cause of the war is not.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

No; let me explain: the FE's claim that there is a conspiracy to maintain that the Earth is a globe, in order to conceal the fact that the Earth is flat.

This makes the FE's conspiracy theorists; it says nothing about their motives, and it says nothing about whether globe Earthers really believe the Earth is a globe or are pretending that they believe that.

Agreed, as long as the earth is a globe.... but that can't be proven in the FE ideology... So in their system their is indeed a conspiracy.....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I think the idea is that it was the assassin who started that train of events and therefore was the citizen responsible.

Except the assassin was part of a resistance, and so can't be considered as an ordinary citizen any more than a soldier who goes to war can be considered one. Any more than we are considering the government officials as ordinary citizens....

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Except the assassin was part of a resistance, and so can't be considered as an ordinary citizen any more than a soldier who goes to war can be considered one. Any more than we are considering the government officials as ordinary citizens....

So there is no such thing as an ordinary citizen? That makes your original question meaningless. Up to you how you want to play this one, but either way you're in a pickle.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Except the assassin was part of a resistance, and so can't be considered as an ordinary citizen any more than a soldier who goes to war can be considered one. Any more than we are considering the government officials as ordinary citizens....

Ah, special pleading. Why not go the whole hog and define an 'ordinary citizen' as someone who isn't involved in starting a war? then the claim would be correct by definition...

 

[grasping the after wind]

Wish I had seen this thread earlier. I find the subject fascinating and it certainly would explain what is going on in Washington with the Russia collusion conspiracy theorists and their unethical behavior.

 

[NeedyFollower]

I don't think anyone is claiming group bonding happened because of music; it is a very effective way of maintaining and enhancing it. There are plenty of other developments that don't have to exist for life to exist but can have a significant influence on success, e.g. language.

I don't follow - what do you mean by 'musical components'?

Sound and the means to make sound are common in the environment, as are the materials to make art, tools, and other cultural artefacts; early humans made use of what was available.

The things that make music actually music verses just frequencies or sounds . And then assembled . Visual art most often is representative ...with the exception of abstract . Music ..the ability to think of a tune and whistle ..and again , the harmonies ...to me anyway ..they appear as a gift waiting to be explored and like the North Pole ..it existed before we discovered it .
There are many evolutionist ( I just read Evolution for Everyone by David Sloan Wilson ) who would say that language was very necessary for life and being a believer in God , I would say language has enabled us to define life . ( In the beginning was the Word or rather I like the greek ...Logos ( purpose -reason ) Music ..a gift and an enhancement but certainly not necessary .

 

[Ophiolite]

The things that make music actually music verses just frequencies or sounds . And then assembled . Visual art most often is representative ...with the exception of abstract . Music ..the ability to think of a tune and whistle ..and again , the harmonies ...to me anyway ..they appear as a gift waiting to be explored and like the North Pole ..it existed before we discovered it . .

Humans are very good at preceiving patterns. It is a survival trait, since sometimes the pattern we see is a predator that is stalking us through the undergrowth. (We are so good at pattern recognition we see patterns even when they aren't there: buildings in clouds; the face of Jesus on a piece toast.)

Our attraction to music, to harmonies, may well be one manifestation of this pattern recognition. That does not refute its creation by a supreme being, nor does it substantiate it. Personally I set such concerns aside and just enjoy the music.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The things that make music actually music verses just frequencies or sounds . And then assembled . Visual art most often is representative ...with the exception of abstract . Music ..the ability to think of a tune and whistle ..and again , the harmonies ...to me anyway ..they appear as a gift waiting to be explored and like the North Pole ..it existed before we discovered it .

To paraphrase a popular aphorism, I would suggest that music is in the ear of the beholder. If music was somehow 'out there' for us to appreciate, it would be hard to account for the sometimes stark differences in music across cultures, and for its developments over time. We can create new kinds of music and learn to appreciate what doesn't sound musical on first hearing. This is not to say that we don't take inspiration from natural sounds, or that we can't describe some of them as musical.

There are many evolutionist ( I just read Evolution for Everyone by David Sloan Wilson ) who would say that language was very necessary for life...

This implies that creatures that don't have language are not alive - or that you have redefined 'language' in some unspecified way. Perhaps you misinterpreted what Wilson said - do you have a relevant quote?

... being a believer in God , I would say language has enabled us to define life .

I would say that language has enabled us to make multiple definitions of life, none of which are entirely satisfactory. Belief in God is not necessary, or, I would argue, even useful, for constructing definitions of life.

 

[NeedyFollower]

To paraphrase a popular aphorism, I would suggest that music is in the ear of the beholder. If music was somehow 'out there' for us to appreciate, it would be hard to account for the sometimes stark differences in music across cultures, and for its developments over time. We can create new kinds of music and learn to appreciate what doesn't sound musical on first hearing. This is not to say that we don't take inspiration from natural sounds, or that we can't describe some of them as musical.

This implies that creatures that don't have language are not alive - or that you have redefined 'language' in some unspecified way. Perhaps you misinterpreted what Wilson said - do you have a relevant quote?

I would say that language has enabled us to make multiple definitions of life, none of which are entirely satisfactory. Belief in God is not necessary, or, I would argue, even useful, for constructing definitions of life.

Actually I have read a number of evolutionist ..Darwin, Sloan , Dawkins , etc. and I believe a better communication would be to say that many of these would rather seem to indicate that communication is necessary for the propagation or the survival of the species . And that was not related to a specific quote but rather my own interpretation of many statements of understanding . And while I may be misinterpreting the thoughts they are trying to convey, I can see that this is potentially true whether our communication ( or language ) is verbal or nonverbal . Regarding life ..I do not know if plants communicate not being one but I am aware that non human's do communicate.
There are, I believe certain principals that give credence to principals I read and observe ....for example ...life and death is in the power of the tongue . Communities of believers ( or unbelievers ) propagate their existence through words . ( Although some utilize rituals. )
Regarding Sloan ...he speaks of Darwin and another colleague searching for fossils ( troglobites ) and not finding any , Darwin noticed the boulders and massive stones all around him and realized that glaciers had deposited these during the ice age . Having a frame of reference for what he was seeing allowed him to see . ( The frame of reference was "the ice age. " ) Likewise , without a frame of reference , we often can not understand what we see . To potentially understand what we we do not understand , we often use theorems ...such as " If x plus Y equals then" ..... and so forth . It seems to me anyway , that many very brilliant people refuse to do what I call the " If God " ..If God , then . So without God , there is no God ..No frame of reference despite the boulders of evidence everywhere and also in prophetic scriptures ...despite everything we do which has purpose , there is no purpose . Even the scriptures allude to a conspiracy but it does seem to be trending that way ...( The great falling away or apostasy which I believe started two thousand years ago but has truly become great in our time . ) And the writing that says " If our gospel be hidden , it is hidden to those who perish , who the god of this world has blinded their hearts and their minds . " There seems to be a bit of evidence for this ....but only " If " because if no " if" then no then . No reason .

 

[NeedyFollower]

Humans are very good at preceiving patterns. It is a survival trait, since sometimes the pattern we see is a predator that is stalking us through the undergrowth. (We are so good at pattern recognition we see patterns even when they aren't there: buildings in clouds; the face of Jesus on a piece toast.)

Our attraction to music, to harmonies, may well be one manifestation of this pattern recognition. That does not refute its creation by a supreme being, nor does it substantiate it. Personally I set such concerns aside and just enjoy the music.

Ha ! Yes ...we do perceive patterns ..it is called learning. Cause and effect ( though there be many who would say it only appears to be cause and effect . ) Cause and effect without a cause . Patterns with no patterns . It seems like an affirmative No to me which is of course nonsense.
I shall give you a pattern which you are free to deny. The increase of knowledge and the decrease of humility . The increase of wealth in the "developed" countries and the decrease of the pursuit of wisdom ( not to be confused with secular knowledge which gives one the ability to pursue a higher education , wealth and " Be Somebody . " ...poor children and underperformers of course have no value to the "machine" of society, and god forbid they may cost us something . ) In my opinion , this is not much different than Hitlers mentality ...they have no intrinsic value to society .
Do you not see these trends ? It "appears" life is becoming as cheap as it was in the days of the first Rome. And because iniquity abounds , the love of many will grow cold .