Teleological thinking - common link between conspiracies and creationism

[essentialsaltes]

News article

“Although very different at first glance, both these belief systems are associated with a single and powerful cognitive bias named teleological thinking, which entails the perception of final causes and overriding purpose in naturally occurring events and entities.

In practice, a teleological approach means someone will agree with statements such as “the sun rises in order to give us light” or “the purpose of bees is to ensure pollination”.”

Research Article

"Teleological thinking — the attribution of purpose and a final cause to natural events and entities — has long been identified as a cognitive hindrance to the acceptance of evolution, yet its association to beliefs other than creationism has not been investigated. Here, we show that conspiracism — the proneness to explain socio-historical events in terms of secret and malevolent conspiracies — is also associated to a teleological bias. Across three correlational studies (N > 2000), we found robust evidence of a teleological link between conspiracism and creationism, which was partly independent from religion, politics, age, education, agency detection, analytical thinking and perception of randomness. As a resilient ‘default’ component of early cognition, teleological thinking is thus associated with creationist as well as conspiracist beliefs, which both entail the distant and hidden involvement of a purposeful and final cause to explain complex worldly events."

 

[pitabread]

I've noticed a lot of creationists go in for conspiratorial thinking (to explain why evolution is accepted by biologists). I've always wondered if there is a link. Thank you for this.

 

[SkyWriting]

News article

“Although very different at first glance, both these belief systems are associated with a single and powerful cognitive bias named teleological thinking, which entails the perception of final causes and overriding purpose in naturally occurring events and entities.

In practice, a teleological approach means someone will agree with statements such as “the sun rises in order to give us light” or “the purpose of bees is to ensure pollination”.”

Research Article

"Teleological thinking — the attribution of purpose and a final cause to natural events and entities — has long been identified as a cognitive hindrance to the acceptance of evolution, yet its association to beliefs other than creationism has not been investigated. Here, we show that conspiracism — the proneness to explain socio-historical events in terms of secret and malevolent conspiracies — is also associated to a teleological bias. Across three correlational studies (N > 2000), we found robust evidence of a teleological link between conspiracism and creationism, which was partly independent from religion, politics, age, education, agency detection, analytical thinking and perception of randomness. As a resilient ‘default’ component of early cognition, teleological thinking is thus associated with creationist as well as conspiracist beliefs, which both entail the distant and hidden involvement of a purposeful and final cause to explain complex worldly events."

People who question the validity of things often are more accurate.
The Power of Negative Thinking - The Atlantic

 

[pitabread]

People who question the validity of things often are more accurate.
The Power of Negative Thinking - The Atlantic

Like Darwin?

 

[durangodawood]

People are meaning-junkies.

If we cant find meaning, we'll invent it to satisfy our deep psychological need for events to form a story.

 

[mark kennedy]

There is no connection between the two, the article is fallacious. For one thing it defines nether teleology or creationism yet equivocated the two. They have been associated in natural theology for centuries because origins and the end to which things are directed related to God as cause of both. Ehere their getting conspiracies in all this just loses me, as far as I cat tell their just making it up.

 

[pitabread]

There is no connection between the two, the article is fallacious. For one thing it defines nether teleology or creationism yet equivocated the two.

Read the research paper (particularly the experimental methods). It provides the details.

 

[section9+1]

So then we can conclude that there is no reason whatsoever for an atheist to exist.

 

[Silmarien]

Serious misrepresentation of what teleology actually means in natural theology (and in some modern philosophy of science), but that's par for the course.

 

[Occams Barber]

People who question the validity of things often are more accurate.
The Power of Negative Thinking - The Atlantic

This article does not assert that "People who question the validity of things are often more accurate".

As suggested in its title, the article is a discussion of the effect of thinking on the pessimist/optimist spectrum; in particular what it refers to as 'defensive pessimism'.
OB

 

[JackRT]

Over the last while I have been pondering a phenomenon that has actually been going for a very long time. I am referring to Denialists and Conspiracy Theorists. While they might seem to be different behaviours, I think they have a commonality in the sort of mind that subscribes to them. What also struck me as curious is the number of them that are centered around science, technology and medicine. Let me list a few.

>> the link between tobacco and cancer, particularly lung cancer

>> the fluoridation of water supplies to prevent tooth decay

>> the role of chlorofluorinated hydrocarbons in the deterioration of the ozone layer

>> the build up of DDT in the food chain and its effect on both reproduction success in birds and human health.

>> the link between HIV and AIDS

>> the role of vaccination in causing other health issues

>> the historicity of the moon landings

>>UFOs and aliens

>>flat earth

>> chemtrails

>> the human role in CO2 production and climate change

This is hardly an exhaustive list and it is easy to also point out others that have very little, if any, linkage to science, technology or medicine. For example, the historicity of the Holocaust, of the Twin Towers, of the assassination of President Kennedy and of both President Obama's birth place and religion.

What most puzzles me most is the state of mind of both those who advocate these theories and those who so readily subscribe to them. I will throw out a few random thoughts here in the hope that they will generate some discussion.

>> fear and powerlessness --- people feel overwhelmed by events that are beyond their control and require a scapegoat on which to pin their frustration and their anger.

>> fear and ignorance --- people are frightened by their own lack of understanding of the concepts and issues involved and suggest that 'the intellectuals' are trying to put one over on them.

>> the 'little guy syndrome' --- people fear big organizations, big government in particular, and feel the need to lash out at them by suggesting that the little guy is being somehow exploited.

>>contrarianism --- some people love to be different just for the sake of it

>>special knowledge syndrome --- a form of elitism where people like to feel they have some special or secret knowledge that makes them feel smarter and/or better informed than the rest, even if it doesn't have much practical application.

>> religion and political ideologies --- in at least a few cases the culprit is viewed as challenging religious and/or political beliefs.

To illustrate this last point we could look at two examples.

Political --- the fluoridation of water supplies to prevent tooth decay was opposed as a tactic by communists to poison the whole nation. This was particularly effective in the days of the 'red menace' but has a modern counterpart in the paranoia surrounding international terrorism.

Religious --- new technologies are viewed as challenging religious understandings. This goes back a long way in history. Two hundred years ago Timothy Dwight, Presbyterian minister and president of Yale University wrote “If God had decreed from all eternity that a certain person should die of smallpox, it would be a frightful sin to avoid and annul that decree by the trick of vaccination.” Today we see an echo of that religious fear in the debate surrounding stem cell research.

My final observation is that it seems to me that denialists, conspiracy theorists, and biblical fundamentalists / creationists are often the same people.

 

[Occams Barber]

News article

“Although very different at first glance, both these belief systems are associated with a single and powerful cognitive bias named teleological thinking, which entails the perception of final causes and overriding purpose in naturally occurring events and entities.

In practice, a teleological approach means someone will agree with statements such as “the sun rises in order to give us light” or “the purpose of bees is to ensure pollination”.”

Research Article

"Teleological thinking — the attribution of purpose and a final cause to natural events and entities — has long been identified as a cognitive hindrance to the acceptance of evolution, yet its association to beliefs other than creationism has not been investigated. Here, we show that conspiracism — the proneness to explain socio-historical events in terms of secret and malevolent conspiracies — is also associated to a teleological bias. Across three correlational studies (N > 2000), we found robust evidence of a teleological link between conspiracism and creationism, which was partly independent from religion, politics, age, education, agency detection, analytical thinking and perception of randomness. As a resilient ‘default’ component of early cognition, teleological thinking is thus associated with creationist as well as conspiracist beliefs, which both entail the distant and hidden involvement of a purposeful and final cause to explain complex worldly events."

Thank you ES.

It would be fascinating to see a survey measuring the correlations between evolution denial, climate change denial, anti-vaccination theory, 9/11 conspiracists and the 'we didn't go to the Moon' crowd.

I suspect significant overlap, particularly in the first three 'conspiracies'.
OB

 

[pitabread]

Thank you ES.

It would be fascinating to see a survey measuring the correlations between evolution denial, climate change denial, anti-vaccination theory, 9/11 conspiracists and the 'we didn't go to the Moon' crowd.

I suspect significant overlap, particularly in the first three 'conspiracies'.
OB

I'd expect inverse or no correlation with anti-vaxxers. Reason being is that the demographics for climate change denial and creationism tend to be older. Whereas demographics of anti-vaxxers tend to be younger.

 

[Occams Barber]

I'd expect inverse or no correlation with anti-vaxxers. Reason being is that the demographics for climate change denial and creationism tend to be older. Whereas demographics of anti-vaxxers tend to be younger.

I think you may be right. The vaccination issue is directly relevant to the parents of young children. Those of us who are old enough to recall the impact of the introduction of bulk vaccination are probably less likely to question its effectiveness.

I have no idea on the demographics of climate change deniers or creationists although I suspect that 'older' is in there somewhere.
OB

 

[SkyWriting]

This article does not assert that "People who question the validity of things are often more accurate".

As suggested in its title, the article is a discussion of the effect of thinking on the pessimist/optimist spectrum; in particular what it refers to as 'defensive pessimism'.
OB

A pessimistic response.

 

[pitabread]

I have no idea on the demographics of climate change deniers or creationists although I suspect that 'older' is in there somewhere.

Climate change deniers tend to be older and right-wing politically. AFAIK, religion doesn't correlate much with climate change denial.

Creationists tend to be older, less educated and right-wing.

 

[mark kennedy]

Read the research paper (particularly the experimental methods). It provides the details.

I gave it a glance, they just made up 'conspiracism', there's no such word. Teleological arguments have been around since at least T. Aquinas, it was one of his arguments for God's existance like cosmological, governance etc. So they don't tell you what it is, they make up an awkward word for conspiracies and procede to elaborate on convoluted statistics probable based on survey information.

You really think that's scientific?

 

[pitabread]

I gave it a glance, they just made up 'conspiracism', there's no such word.

A similarly quick glance to Wikipedia suggests the term "conspiracism" is decades old.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory#Conspiracism_as_a_world_view

You really think that's scientific?

I'd at least read their published methodology before passing judgment.

 

[Gene2memE]

People who question the validity of things often are more accurate.
The Power of Negative Thinking - The Atlantic

There's a wild quantitative difference between reassessing the existing evidence to develop a new theory that has better explanatory and predictive power, on the one hand, and questioning the validity of something because it doesn't happen to fit with your particular interpretation of your particular religious text, on the other.

 

[mark kennedy]

A similarly quick glance to Wikipedia suggests the term "conspiracism" is decades old.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory#Conspiracism_as_a_world_view



I'd at least read their published methodology before passing judgment.

Ive read dozens of papers on Aristotilian teleology as it developed during the Rennesance and how it associated with Medieval natural theology. The early Darwinians had a taste for metaphysics but dismissed classic teleology.

I know how it relates to Darwinian presuppositions but it has no relivance to this decades old nonsensical term. I subscribe to a few conspiracy theories, Lee Harver Oswald didn't act alone and never fired a shot. Tonkin Bay and weapons of mass destruction were both faudilent excises for needless military action. And the ever popular Orphan Annie, the goblins are gonna get you if you dont watch out. What ob earth does that have to do woth creationism and classic teleology?