What do you think?
Rate this book
Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories
Decoding the psychology of believing in conspiracy theories. We're all conspiracy theorists--some of us just hide it better than others.
Conspiracy theorists aren't just a handful of people who wear tin-foil hats and have bizarre ideas about shape-shifting reptilian aliens. Conspiracy theories are as likely to appeal to women as to men, college students as to retired professors, middle-class bloggers as to blue-collar workers.
Psychological research sheds light on why some people are more drawn to conspiracy thinking, especially when they feel discontented, distrustful, and desire privileged knowledge. But ultimately we are all natural-born conspiracy theorists. Our brains are wired to see patterns and to weave unrelated data points into complex stories. We instinctively see events in the world in terms of human motives and intentions, leading us to discount the role of chance and unintended consequences, and we look for some hidden hand behind catastrophic events. These psychological quirks can lead us to suspect a conspiracy where none exists.
Conspiracy theories have existed throughout history, from ancient Athens and Rome to present day theories about 9/11 and who shot JFK. Suspicious Minds explores the phenomenon and reveals the important consequences conspiracy theories can have--from discouraging parents from vaccinating their children against deadly diseases to hampering political policies to combat climate change.
Conspiracy theorists aren't just a handful of people who wear tin-foil hats and have bizarre ideas about shape-shifting reptilian aliens. Conspiracy theories are as likely to appeal to women as to men, college students as to retired professors, middle-class bloggers as to blue-collar workers.
Psychological research sheds light on why some people are more drawn to conspiracy thinking, especially when they feel discontented, distrustful, and desire privileged knowledge. But ultimately we are all natural-born conspiracy theorists. Our brains are wired to see patterns and to weave unrelated data points into complex stories. We instinctively see events in the world in terms of human motives and intentions, leading us to discount the role of chance and unintended consequences, and we look for some hidden hand behind catastrophic events. These psychological quirks can lead us to suspect a conspiracy where none exists.
Conspiracy theories have existed throughout history, from ancient Athens and Rome to present day theories about 9/11 and who shot JFK. Suspicious Minds explores the phenomenon and reveals the important consequences conspiracy theories can have--from discouraging parents from vaccinating their children against deadly diseases to hampering political policies to combat climate change.
304 pages, Hardcover
First published November 17, 2015
201 people are currently reading
3903 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 191 reviews
July 6, 2025
Behind the ostensible government sits an enthroned invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people
Who said that? Some truther writing about 9/11? No, it was Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.
This book is not about whether Obama is really a Muslim or if 9/11 was an inside job, it’s about why people appear to have so much time for such ridiculous guff. Mr Brotherton wishes to inform us that the conspiratorial is not tinfoil-hat stuff but is a profound part of the basic thinking patterns of human beings. Conspiracy theories are still loony, but the thinking behind them is universal, entirely ordinary, and unsurprising. As RB says
We’re all conspiracy theorists, at least some of the time
It’s interesting to note that if you buy one theory you’ll likely agree with them all. If you don’t believe the moon landings were faked you won’t believe 9/11 was done by the Bush regime. If you do believe that alien remains are being hidden in Area 51 you will probably think vaccines are unsafe. If you think climate change is a hoax you’re more likely to think that “Princess Diana got whacked by the British royal family”, in Mr Brotherton’s inelegant phrase.
So, the conspiracists think in general that
There are two worlds : one real and (mostly) unseen, the other a sinister illusion meant to cover up the truth
They therefore have an immediate a problem – if this conspiracy is so far-reaching and powerful, how come they don’t shut down YOU, the truther? Well, they have an answer. Some truthers think that other truthers are part of the conspiracy because they say such ridiculous things they must be plants put there to discredit the truther movement! This is not a new thought :
Astrophysicist and UFOlogist Jacques Vallee argues that many claims of UFO sightings and alien abductions are part of an elaborate disinformation campaign designed to undermine the credibility of serious UFO scholars …. Intimidating, paying off, murdering or otherwise shutting up every conspiracy theorist who stumbles on the incredible truth would presumably be fairly labour-intensive, the logic goes. It would be easier to discredit conspiracy movements from within, by spreading ever more convoluted, implausible, absurd theories, thereby manufacturing an atmosphere in which conspiracy theorists are invariably seen as unhinged whack-jobs
(If this is true it has certainly worked on me)
The truthers bravely and boldly say some truly repulsive things. In the immediate aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing professional theorist Alex Jones tweeted
Our hearts go out to those that are hurt or killed…but this thing stinks to high heaven #falseflag
The Sandy Hook massacre was likewise seen as a “false flag” operation.
All these horrific events , they say, are part of the same singular plot : a ruse staged by government operatives intent on taking away Second Amendment rights to bear arms.
So the idea is that the current American government will engineer the murder of 20 children in order to get the power to make gun owning illegal, or some such rubbish. I am stunned that any same person could think like that.
Talking of bizarre things some people can argue themselves into thinking :
TIMOTHY MCVEIGH (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST IF EVER THERE WAS ONE) EXPLAINS HOW JIHADIS THINK
An accomplice explained how McVeigh had rationalised killing secretaries and receptionists and other government employees who had nothing to do with debacles like Waco. “He explained to me that he considered all those people to be as if they were the storm troopers in the movie Star Wars. They may be individually innocent, but because they are part of the Evil Empire they were guilty by association.”
Ugh.
Let us take a pace back and start again.
Believing that someone somewhere is in control is preferable to thinking that the course of life is dictated by nothing more than chance.
This must be why creationists hate evolution so much, and how atheism inspires horror in many people. If no one (no God) is in charge then this universe is just gonna crash! And burn! And it’s also a real lonesome thought – nobody cares about us humans, we’re on our own here, cosmic orphans. Believers would rather have a tyrannical God than that, like some people will stay in an abusive relationship rather than leave.
One thing which got on my nerves was Mr Brotherton’s continual citing of like a million dubious psychological experiments designed to show this or that aspect of the way we think, or should I say the way some first year American students think, since they seem to be the perpetual guinea pigs here. This parade of uninteresting non-information was a complete bore. But still, if you skip those bits, there is still lots of great information here – the revelation of the Umbrella Man in the Zapruder film, how it is that the buttons on NYC pedestrian crossings were all disabled years ago but still light up (the lights change automatically), how doors-close buttons on lifts likewise do not work, how if a president escapes the assassin (Reagan) people will accept the attempt was by one lone gunman, but if the president dies (Kennedy) then it will be seen as a conspiracy – this is the result of the fallacious (but common) thinking which demands big causes of big events (it offends us to think of the mousy schmuck Oswald being capable of killing John F Kennedy – him?? That guy?? No way.)
This book is pretty good at what it sets out to do, which is to contextualise the paranoid conspiratorial tendency of modern thought and, almost, to domesticate it. The theories themselves are, of course, entirely bonkers, but the join-the-dots thinking is something human brains do all the time, even when the dots are not really there. It’s a vital pattern-noticing meaning-enhancing activity which our brilliant minds perform without our conscious intending much of the time, a mental breathing in and breathing out. That’s not ironical, our minds are brilliant. (Also stupid, but brilliant.). We create scintillating science, profound poetry and crazed conspiracy theories. Like Neil Young said, it's all one song.
Who said that? Some truther writing about 9/11? No, it was Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.
This book is not about whether Obama is really a Muslim or if 9/11 was an inside job, it’s about why people appear to have so much time for such ridiculous guff. Mr Brotherton wishes to inform us that the conspiratorial is not tinfoil-hat stuff but is a profound part of the basic thinking patterns of human beings. Conspiracy theories are still loony, but the thinking behind them is universal, entirely ordinary, and unsurprising. As RB says
We’re all conspiracy theorists, at least some of the time
It’s interesting to note that if you buy one theory you’ll likely agree with them all. If you don’t believe the moon landings were faked you won’t believe 9/11 was done by the Bush regime. If you do believe that alien remains are being hidden in Area 51 you will probably think vaccines are unsafe. If you think climate change is a hoax you’re more likely to think that “Princess Diana got whacked by the British royal family”, in Mr Brotherton’s inelegant phrase.
So, the conspiracists think in general that
There are two worlds : one real and (mostly) unseen, the other a sinister illusion meant to cover up the truth
They therefore have an immediate a problem – if this conspiracy is so far-reaching and powerful, how come they don’t shut down YOU, the truther? Well, they have an answer. Some truthers think that other truthers are part of the conspiracy because they say such ridiculous things they must be plants put there to discredit the truther movement! This is not a new thought :
Astrophysicist and UFOlogist Jacques Vallee argues that many claims of UFO sightings and alien abductions are part of an elaborate disinformation campaign designed to undermine the credibility of serious UFO scholars …. Intimidating, paying off, murdering or otherwise shutting up every conspiracy theorist who stumbles on the incredible truth would presumably be fairly labour-intensive, the logic goes. It would be easier to discredit conspiracy movements from within, by spreading ever more convoluted, implausible, absurd theories, thereby manufacturing an atmosphere in which conspiracy theorists are invariably seen as unhinged whack-jobs
(If this is true it has certainly worked on me)
The truthers bravely and boldly say some truly repulsive things. In the immediate aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing professional theorist Alex Jones tweeted
Our hearts go out to those that are hurt or killed…but this thing stinks to high heaven #falseflag
The Sandy Hook massacre was likewise seen as a “false flag” operation.
All these horrific events , they say, are part of the same singular plot : a ruse staged by government operatives intent on taking away Second Amendment rights to bear arms.
So the idea is that the current American government will engineer the murder of 20 children in order to get the power to make gun owning illegal, or some such rubbish. I am stunned that any same person could think like that.
Talking of bizarre things some people can argue themselves into thinking :
TIMOTHY MCVEIGH (A CONSPIRACY THEORIST IF EVER THERE WAS ONE) EXPLAINS HOW JIHADIS THINK
An accomplice explained how McVeigh had rationalised killing secretaries and receptionists and other government employees who had nothing to do with debacles like Waco. “He explained to me that he considered all those people to be as if they were the storm troopers in the movie Star Wars. They may be individually innocent, but because they are part of the Evil Empire they were guilty by association.”
Ugh.
Let us take a pace back and start again.
Believing that someone somewhere is in control is preferable to thinking that the course of life is dictated by nothing more than chance.
This must be why creationists hate evolution so much, and how atheism inspires horror in many people. If no one (no God) is in charge then this universe is just gonna crash! And burn! And it’s also a real lonesome thought – nobody cares about us humans, we’re on our own here, cosmic orphans. Believers would rather have a tyrannical God than that, like some people will stay in an abusive relationship rather than leave.
One thing which got on my nerves was Mr Brotherton’s continual citing of like a million dubious psychological experiments designed to show this or that aspect of the way we think, or should I say the way some first year American students think, since they seem to be the perpetual guinea pigs here. This parade of uninteresting non-information was a complete bore. But still, if you skip those bits, there is still lots of great information here – the revelation of the Umbrella Man in the Zapruder film, how it is that the buttons on NYC pedestrian crossings were all disabled years ago but still light up (the lights change automatically), how doors-close buttons on lifts likewise do not work, how if a president escapes the assassin (Reagan) people will accept the attempt was by one lone gunman, but if the president dies (Kennedy) then it will be seen as a conspiracy – this is the result of the fallacious (but common) thinking which demands big causes of big events (it offends us to think of the mousy schmuck Oswald being capable of killing John F Kennedy – him?? That guy?? No way.)
This book is pretty good at what it sets out to do, which is to contextualise the paranoid conspiratorial tendency of modern thought and, almost, to domesticate it. The theories themselves are, of course, entirely bonkers, but the join-the-dots thinking is something human brains do all the time, even when the dots are not really there. It’s a vital pattern-noticing meaning-enhancing activity which our brilliant minds perform without our conscious intending much of the time, a mental breathing in and breathing out. That’s not ironical, our minds are brilliant. (Also stupid, but brilliant.). We create scintillating science, profound poetry and crazed conspiracy theories. Like Neil Young said, it's all one song.
November 21, 2021
Бывает нонфикшн, набитый контентом под завязку, а бывает безвкусная, обтекаемая жижа, отдающая эффектом Барнума. “Недоверчивые умы” где-то посередине. Человеческий мозг любит находить закономерности в череде случайных событий — все мы любим собирать ментальные пазлы и обнаруживать причинно-следственные связи даже там, где их нет. Мы считаем себя всесторонне развитыми экспертами и склонны сильно переоценивать свои познания в чем-либо. Нам нравятся красивые и законченные истории, особенно про андердогов и прочее превозмогание вопреки всему. Мы постоянно проецируем свои эмоции и переживания на окружающих людей и приписываем им качества, которыми они не обладают. Мы очень предвзяты и не любим менять свои взгляды и убеждения. Мы обожаем интерпретировать факты в угоду своей точке зрения. Мы ведёмся на конспирологические теории, потому что полны багов, которые я перечислил чуть выше.
Сохранил вам несколько часов жизни, не благодарите.
Сохранил вам несколько часов жизни, не благодарите.
September 24, 2018
Great. Wish there had been more discussion of the most effective ways to talk about this stuff with believers, but the central message is very important and good. I recommend.
February 15, 2018
Suspicious Minds is not a book about conspiracy theories in the sense of recounting different conspiracy theories for the sake of convincing you of them, or indeed of debunking them. Instead it examines what makes people so susceptible to believing in conspiracies, with a good deal of sympathy — it can be tempting to ask what on earth some people are even thinking to believe the outrageous things they do, but Brotherton doesn’t laugh at them too much. Instead, he shows why the human brain is so prone to believing these things, so easy to influence.
It mostly wasn’t surprising to me, but it’s a good summary of what we know about conspiracy thinking, and it’s a healthy reminder to mind what you believe yourself lest you end up exclaiming that the naked emperor is wearing the most fabulous clothes.
It’s a Bloomsbury Sigma book, though, and I’m relatively unsurprised that it’s good; they tend to be very readable and cover interesting topics. I’m just about at the point where I’m willing to pick them up regardless of the subject.
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.
It mostly wasn’t surprising to me, but it’s a good summary of what we know about conspiracy thinking, and it’s a healthy reminder to mind what you believe yourself lest you end up exclaiming that the naked emperor is wearing the most fabulous clothes.
It’s a Bloomsbury Sigma book, though, and I’m relatively unsurprised that it’s good; they tend to be very readable and cover interesting topics. I’m just about at the point where I’m willing to pick them up regardless of the subject.
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.
May 30, 2023
شاید از اسم کتاب اینطور برداشت شود که کتاب درمورد نظریههای توطئهی مختلف صحبت میکند و ردشان میکند اما رویکرد کتاب این نیست اگرچه گاهی به تاریخچهی بعضی نظریههای توطئه سرک میکشد. راب برادرتن، نویسنده از عملکرد مغزمان و آنچه باعث میشود توطئهاندیششویم صحبت میکند و با ذکر مثال و معرفی سوگیریهای مختلف، حقههایی مغزمان را رو میکند. کتاب در کل برای من جالب بود و نشانم داد در طول روز چقدر با این سوگیریها مواجهم و باید تلاش کنم اسیر پیشداوری نشوم.
September 30, 2015
I received a free copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
Suspicious Minds by Rob Brotherton is an interest, slightly irreverent, study of what makes us believe what we all too often believe. From the harmless suspicious tendency to roll a pair of die gently in order to achieve a low number, to the paranoiac belief that the government is out to get you, to the all-encompassing conviction that interdimensional shape-shifting reptiles rule to the world - we all have some tendency towards superstition and belief in conspiracy theories. The why we believe what we believe can actually be more troubling and interesting than the what we believe. Unless it's dealing with interdimensional shape-shifting aliens. Those are probably the most creative.
See, the Queen's a reptilian. You can tell by the eyes.
Suspicious Minds may not have been as in-depth as I would have liked it to be, but it was still a very interesting book. The beginning is a brief history of conspiracy theories, meant to show that this style of thinking is endemic to the human condition rather than a more recent phenomenon bolstered by the internet and the now pervasive globalism. The history was fascinating, and at times mildly disturbing. I was especially thankful for the in-depth discussion of the Protocols of Zion after Dan Brown and Holy Blood, Holy Grail had popularized a new resurgence in belief that those are anything but a hoax. Hopefully this well-documented history of the forgery will put some of that to rest.
Following the history of conspiracy theories the book delves into what a conspiracy theory is exactly (and decides that an important facet of it is that it isn't and likely won't ever be proven) and then the hallmarks of conspiracy thinking. The bulk of the book is devoted to the hallmarks of conspiracy thinking and how every one of us is given to it to a certain extent.
The book is a good example of pop-science, without being erroneous. It's well-researched, intriguing, and would benefit greatly from a more in-depth bibliography in the back. I think that this is a good introduction to the subject overall - though perhaps the section regarding echo chambers was handled a bit more deftly by Jon Ronson in So, You've Been Publicly Shamed. It's still a valuable topic and an interesting book. I'm glad I read it.
Suspicious Minds by Rob Brotherton is an interest, slightly irreverent, study of what makes us believe what we all too often believe. From the harmless suspicious tendency to roll a pair of die gently in order to achieve a low number, to the paranoiac belief that the government is out to get you, to the all-encompassing conviction that interdimensional shape-shifting reptiles rule to the world - we all have some tendency towards superstition and belief in conspiracy theories. The why we believe what we believe can actually be more troubling and interesting than the what we believe. Unless it's dealing with interdimensional shape-shifting aliens. Those are probably the most creative.
See, the Queen's a reptilian. You can tell by the eyes.
Suspicious Minds may not have been as in-depth as I would have liked it to be, but it was still a very interesting book. The beginning is a brief history of conspiracy theories, meant to show that this style of thinking is endemic to the human condition rather than a more recent phenomenon bolstered by the internet and the now pervasive globalism. The history was fascinating, and at times mildly disturbing. I was especially thankful for the in-depth discussion of the Protocols of Zion after Dan Brown and Holy Blood, Holy Grail had popularized a new resurgence in belief that those are anything but a hoax. Hopefully this well-documented history of the forgery will put some of that to rest.
Following the history of conspiracy theories the book delves into what a conspiracy theory is exactly (and decides that an important facet of it is that it isn't and likely won't ever be proven) and then the hallmarks of conspiracy thinking. The bulk of the book is devoted to the hallmarks of conspiracy thinking and how every one of us is given to it to a certain extent.
The book is a good example of pop-science, without being erroneous. It's well-researched, intriguing, and would benefit greatly from a more in-depth bibliography in the back. I think that this is a good introduction to the subject overall - though perhaps the section regarding echo chambers was handled a bit more deftly by Jon Ronson in So, You've Been Publicly Shamed. It's still a valuable topic and an interesting book. I'm glad I read it.
February 19, 2021
عقلية المؤامرة «الحاجة إلى المعنى»
.
.
في تجربة حديثة ، دعى علماء النفس في جامعة أمستردام الطلاب إلى التفكير في شيء يشعرون بالتناقض تجاهه - أي موضوع لديهم مشاعر إيجابية وسلبية تجاهه. تخيل ، على سبيل المثال ، تناول حوض كامل من الآيس كريم. ستكون طريقة رائعة لقضاء عشرين دقيقة ، لكنها ستكون أيضًا سيئة للغاية بالنسبة لك على المدى الطويل. أنت تعلم أن هناك إيجابيات وسلبيات. هذا هو التناقض.
جلس كل طالب على جهاز كمبيوتر ، وفكر في كل ما جعله يشعر بالتردد ، وكتب بعض الإيجابيات والسلبيات. في تلك المرحلة ، ظهرت رسالة خطأ على الشاشة. لا تخف - كان كل هذا جزءًا من خطة علماء النفس الملتوية. تظاهر الباحث الذي يراقب التجربة بالدهشة ، وأخبر المشارك أنه سيتعين عليه إكمال الاستبيان (الذي لا علاقة له ظاهريًا) في مكتب مختلف. تم نقل الشخص عن غير قصد إلى حجرة عبر الغرفة ، حيث واجهوا مكتبًا في حالة من الفوضى ، ومليء بالأقلام والكتب والمجلات وقطع الورق المجعدة. بعد ذلك ، تم عرض سلسلة من الصور على المشارك ، وهو مستريح وسط المخلفات.
بعض الصور فيها أشكال يمكن تمييزها بشكل ضعيف - في هذه الحالة ، مركب شراعي. البعض الآخر يتكون من بقع عشوائية. لم يتم إخبار الطلاب بأي منهم ؛ كان عليهم ببساطة أن يقولوا ما إذا كانوا قد رأوا نمطًا في الثابت. لقد شاهد الجميع تقريبًا القارب وجميع الصور الحقيقية الأخرى. الأكثر إثارة للاهتمام ، في كثير من الأوقات ، قال الناس إنهم رأوا صورًا حيث كانت البقع العشوائية فقط. كانت هناك اثنا عشر صورة لا تحتوي إلا على نقاط عشوائية. في المتوسط ، رأى الطلاب صورًا خيالية في تسعة منهم.
على الأقل ، هكذا سارت التجربة لمجموعة واحدة من الطلاب. بالنسبة لمجموعة أخرى ، بدأت الأمور كما هي. كان عليهم أن يفكروا في شيء جعلهم متناقضين ، رأوا رسالة خطأ ، تم توجيههم إلى المقصورة الفوضوية. ثم كان هناك اختلاف جوهري واحد. قبل متابعة التجربة ، طلب المجرب من كل طالب المساعدة في ترتيب الفوضى. بمجرد ترتيب المكتب ، عرض على الطلاب نفس الصور. مقارنة بالطلاب الذين عملوا وسط الفوضى ، رأى هؤلاء الطلاب باستمرار عددًا أقل من الصور الوهمية. لقد رأوا أنماطًا خيالية في خمسة فقط من الصور الاثنتي عشرة التي لا معنى لها .
أوضح الباحثون أن الشعور بتضارب المشاعر بشأن شيء ما أمر غير سار. نسعى عادة إلى النظام والاتساق ، وأن نكون متناقضين هي تشبه تجربة الفوضى والصراع. عندما يحدث ذلك ، قد نحاول تغيير معتقداتنا ، أو ببساطة نتجاهل المشكلة. أو يمكننا استخدام المزيد من استراتيجيات الالتفاف للتعامل مع مشاعرنا غير المرغوب فيها. تهدد الازدواجية إحساسنا بالنظام ، لذلك ، للتعويض ، يمكننا البحث عن النظام في مكان آخر. هذا هو السبب في أن المجموعة الأولى من الطلاب شاهدت الكثير من الصور التخيلية. سمحت رؤية المعنى في اللطخات الغامضة العشوائية - ربط النقاط - بإشباع الرغبة في النظام التي نتجت عن إحساسهم بالتناقض. وهو يفسر أيضًا سبب رؤية المجموعة الثانية من الطلاب لصور خيالية أقل : الفعل البسيط المتمثل في ترتيب المكتب - تحويل الفوضى إلى نظام - قد أشبع بالفعل شغفهم. لم يعودوا يبحثون عن أنماط ثابتة. لم يكونوا بحاجة إلى ربط النقاط.
ما علاقة هذا بنظريات المؤامرة؟ في تجربة أخرى ، جعل الباحثون الناس يشعرون بالتناقض مرة أخرى. هذه المرة ، بدلاً من النظر إلى صور غريبة ، طُلب من الطلاب أن يتخيلوا أنه تم تجاوزهم للحصول على ترقية في العمل. سأل الباحثون ما هي فرص أن يكون لزميل العمل المتواطئ يد في قرار رئيسه؟ مقارنة بمجموعة من الأشخاص الذين لم يشعروا بالتردد ، كان الطلاب المتناقضون أكثر ميلًا للشك في وجود مؤامرة على قدم وساق. في بعض الأحيان ، يبدو أن الاقتناع بالمؤامرة هو المكافئ المعرفي لرؤية المعنى في العشوائية.
.
Rob Brotherton
Suspicious Minds
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
.
.
في تجربة حديثة ، دعى علماء النفس في جامعة أمستردام الطلاب إلى التفكير في شيء يشعرون بالتناقض تجاهه - أي موضوع لديهم مشاعر إيجابية وسلبية تجاهه. تخيل ، على سبيل المثال ، تناول حوض كامل من الآيس كريم. ستكون طريقة رائعة لقضاء عشرين دقيقة ، لكنها ستكون أيضًا سيئة للغاية بالنسبة لك على المدى الطويل. أنت تعلم أن هناك إيجابيات وسلبيات. هذا هو التناقض.
جلس كل طالب على جهاز كمبيوتر ، وفكر في كل ما جعله يشعر بالتردد ، وكتب بعض الإيجابيات والسلبيات. في تلك المرحلة ، ظهرت رسالة خطأ على الشاشة. لا تخف - كان كل هذا جزءًا من خطة علماء النفس الملتوية. تظاهر الباحث الذي يراقب التجربة بالدهشة ، وأخبر المشارك أنه سيتعين عليه إكمال الاستبيان (الذي لا علاقة له ظاهريًا) في مكتب مختلف. تم نقل الشخص عن غير قصد إلى حجرة عبر الغرفة ، حيث واجهوا مكتبًا في حالة من الفوضى ، ومليء بالأقلام والكتب والمجلات وقطع الورق المجعدة. بعد ذلك ، تم عرض سلسلة من الصور على المشارك ، وهو مستريح وسط المخلفات.
بعض الصور فيها أشكال يمكن تمييزها بشكل ضعيف - في هذه الحالة ، مركب شراعي. البعض الآخر يتكون من بقع عشوائية. لم يتم إخبار الطلاب بأي منهم ؛ كان عليهم ببساطة أن يقولوا ما إذا كانوا قد رأوا نمطًا في الثابت. لقد شاهد الجميع تقريبًا القارب وجميع الصور الحقيقية الأخرى. الأكثر إثارة للاهتمام ، في كثير من الأوقات ، قال الناس إنهم رأوا صورًا حيث كانت البقع العشوائية فقط. كانت هناك اثنا عشر صورة لا تحتوي إلا على نقاط عشوائية. في المتوسط ، رأى الطلاب صورًا خيالية في تسعة منهم.
على الأقل ، هكذا سارت التجربة لمجموعة واحدة من الطلاب. بالنسبة لمجموعة أخرى ، بدأت الأمور كما هي. كان عليهم أن يفكروا في شيء جعلهم متناقضين ، رأوا رسالة خطأ ، تم توجيههم إلى المقصورة الفوضوية. ثم كان هناك اختلاف جوهري واحد. قبل متابعة التجربة ، طلب المجرب من كل طالب المساعدة في ترتيب الفوضى. بمجرد ترتيب المكتب ، عرض على الطلاب نفس الصور. مقارنة بالطلاب الذين عملوا وسط الفوضى ، رأى هؤلاء الطلاب باستمرار عددًا أقل من الصور الوهمية. لقد رأوا أنماطًا خيالية في خمسة فقط من الصور الاثنتي عشرة التي لا معنى لها .
أوضح الباحثون أن الشعور بتضارب المشاعر بشأن شيء ما أمر غير سار. نسعى عادة إلى النظام والاتساق ، وأن نكون متناقضين هي تشبه تجربة الفوضى والصراع. عندما يحدث ذلك ، قد نحاول تغيير معتقداتنا ، أو ببساطة نتجاهل المشكلة. أو يمكننا استخدام المزيد من استراتيجيات الالتفاف للتعامل مع مشاعرنا غير المرغوب فيها. تهدد الازدواجية إحساسنا بالنظام ، لذلك ، للتعويض ، يمكننا البحث عن النظام في مكان آخر. هذا هو السبب في أن المجموعة الأولى من الطلاب شاهدت الكثير من الصور التخيلية. سمحت رؤية المعنى في اللطخات الغامضة العشوائية - ربط النقاط - بإشباع الرغبة في النظام التي نتجت عن إحساسهم بالتناقض. وهو يفسر أيضًا سبب رؤية المجموعة الثانية من الطلاب لصور خيالية أقل : الفعل البسيط المتمثل في ترتيب المكتب - تحويل الفوضى إلى نظام - قد أشبع بالفعل شغفهم. لم يعودوا يبحثون عن أنماط ثابتة. لم يكونوا بحاجة إلى ربط النقاط.
ما علاقة هذا بنظريات المؤامرة؟ في تجربة أخرى ، جعل الباحثون الناس يشعرون بالتناقض مرة أخرى. هذه المرة ، بدلاً من النظر إلى صور غريبة ، طُلب من الطلاب أن يتخيلوا أنه تم تجاوزهم للحصول على ترقية في العمل. سأل الباحثون ما هي فرص أن يكون لزميل العمل المتواطئ يد في قرار رئيسه؟ مقارنة بمجموعة من الأشخاص الذين لم يشعروا بالتردد ، كان الطلاب المتناقضون أكثر ميلًا للشك في وجود مؤامرة على قدم وساق. في بعض الأحيان ، يبدو أن الاقتناع بالمؤامرة هو المكافئ المعرفي لرؤية المعنى في العشوائية.
.
Rob Brotherton
Suspicious Minds
Translated By #Maher_Razouk
February 19, 2021
This was my first audio book and content wise it felt just like listening to a podcast which I really enjoyed. I found it a bit repetitive at times but still interesting as I had no prior knowledge of most of the mentioned conspiracy theories as well as the psychological biases that make us more susceptible to believing in them. "Suspicious minds" also explained me why I can't (and, probably, never will) have a reasonable discussion with anti-vaxxers:) Although this part is definitely NOT the highlight of the book, it really stuck in my mind:
"Jenny McCarthey appeared on The Operah Whinfrey Show to promote her book "Louder Than Words: A Mother's Journey in Healing Autism." In it, McCarthey describes how her son Evan came to be diagnosed with autism and argues that vaccines were to blame. Jenny McCarthey has a lot of strings to her bow: model, actress, author, but one thing she does not have is any formal medican training. So what qualified her to diagnose the cause of her son's autism? "The University of Google is where I got my degree from" she told Operah. <...> When Operah dutifully read a statement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention explaining that the best available science does not support the association between vaccines and autism, McCarthey had already her counterargument lined up: My science is named Evan and he's at home. That's my science.""
"Jenny McCarthey appeared on The Operah Whinfrey Show to promote her book "Louder Than Words: A Mother's Journey in Healing Autism." In it, McCarthey describes how her son Evan came to be diagnosed with autism and argues that vaccines were to blame. Jenny McCarthey has a lot of strings to her bow: model, actress, author, but one thing she does not have is any formal medican training. So what qualified her to diagnose the cause of her son's autism? "The University of Google is where I got my degree from" she told Operah. <...> When Operah dutifully read a statement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention explaining that the best available science does not support the association between vaccines and autism, McCarthey had already her counterargument lined up: My science is named Evan and he's at home. That's my science.""
January 17, 2016
This is a somewhat colloquially written pop psychology/sociology book that addresses various conspiracy theories and tries to distinguish "conspiracy types," or why everyone believes in some conspiracy. Although the book has lots of end notes, the author makes egregious generalizations and speculations without much proof. He blithely says that severe paranoia is a key symptom of mental illnesses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, whereas if you look at the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association, you will see that neither disorder is specifically linked to paranoia, but in some cases it may be subsets of them--schizophrenia particularly.
He appears to make such assumptions as the JFK assassination being part of a conspiracy plot, whereas the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1977 ruled that JFK's assassination was likely a conspiracy, and there are scores of books that will tell him that Lee Harvey Oswald's only involvement in it was getting shot for it. He seems to have no idea of that the public has never accepted the validity of the Warren Commission Report on the assassination.
He cites one study as using "perfectly ordinary college students," which is about the loosest definition of college students one could come up with. He could have tried "mostly sleepy English majors" if he wanted a general roundup as academically sound as the one he cites.
He defines the fabricated text of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a document that's "eons old," whereas it first was published in Russia in 1903. His lengthy treatment of this fraudulent publication appears to give it some credibility, whereas he should have debunked it, or at least not gone into all the accusations and predictions it held before finally declaring it a forgery.
He implies that Bertrand Russell, one of the great minds of the twentieth century, participated in a conspiracy by questioning the Warren Report. This alone is pretty outrageous.
When he started on anti-vaccination theorists, he regarded Jenny McCarthy, the former Playboy bunny, as the group's serious spokesman. After that, I just skimmed the rest of the book because my head was starting to hurt. I didn't expect this book to be an academic study, but it has pretensions of being that while making wholesale generalizations and cherry-picking sources that agree with his views.
The author says at one point that he has been very often a prophet and usually ridiculed for it. I would agree with the second half of that statement.
He appears to make such assumptions as the JFK assassination being part of a conspiracy plot, whereas the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1977 ruled that JFK's assassination was likely a conspiracy, and there are scores of books that will tell him that Lee Harvey Oswald's only involvement in it was getting shot for it. He seems to have no idea of that the public has never accepted the validity of the Warren Commission Report on the assassination.
He cites one study as using "perfectly ordinary college students," which is about the loosest definition of college students one could come up with. He could have tried "mostly sleepy English majors" if he wanted a general roundup as academically sound as the one he cites.
He defines the fabricated text of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a document that's "eons old," whereas it first was published in Russia in 1903. His lengthy treatment of this fraudulent publication appears to give it some credibility, whereas he should have debunked it, or at least not gone into all the accusations and predictions it held before finally declaring it a forgery.
He implies that Bertrand Russell, one of the great minds of the twentieth century, participated in a conspiracy by questioning the Warren Report. This alone is pretty outrageous.
When he started on anti-vaccination theorists, he regarded Jenny McCarthy, the former Playboy bunny, as the group's serious spokesman. After that, I just skimmed the rest of the book because my head was starting to hurt. I didn't expect this book to be an academic study, but it has pretensions of being that while making wholesale generalizations and cherry-picking sources that agree with his views.
The author says at one point that he has been very often a prophet and usually ridiculed for it. I would agree with the second half of that statement.
December 10, 2018
I wish the book was more about psychological reasons why we choose to believe in conspiracies, rather than reciting the well-known conspiracy theories (and bashing them). The text is also overloaded with quotes and citations, which sometimes makes it look uneven and fragmentary. Overall, the book, especially its second half, is an interesting read and can be recommended to those who are interested in how our brains are set up to work.
July 6, 2023
مخلوقات فضائية، وصحون طائرة، حكومات خفية، لقاحات قاتلة، رموز سرية، والأرض ليست كروية بل مسطحة، والإنسان لم يهبط على سطح القمر بل كانت خدعة. ومؤامرة كبرى ضد البشرية تحاك في الخفاء. هذه بعض الأفكار التي يؤمن بها أصحاب نظريات المؤامرة التي يدافعون عنها باستماتة منقطعة النظير. ولكن لماذا يؤمن البعض بأن الكثير من الأحداث التي تقع في هذا العالم المترامي الأطراف هو نتاج مؤامرة خفية؟ ولماذا يدافع البعض بشراسة عن ما يراه واضحاً من أدلة قطعية حول المؤامرات من حولنا؟ يحاول هنا الدكتور روب براذرتون في كتابه (عقول مُتشككة: لماذا نُصدق نظريات المؤامرة) الإجابة على الكثير من هذه الأسئلة التي تبدو مثيرة للاهتمام؛ لمعرفة كيفية عمل العقول التي تؤمن بنظريات المؤامرة، ولماذا البعض يحب تصديق الأشياء الغريبة، فالإنسان قديماً حينما استصعب عليه فهم الأحداث الطبيعية من حوله لجأ إلى التفسيرات الميتافيزيقية، وكان هذا هو المدخل الرئيس لتشكل الأديان لاحقاً وسد الحاجة الملحة لتفسير كل شيء غير مفهوم يراه و يعايشه، أما الإنسان الحديث بتطور فكره أصبح يقدم صورة مختلفة للنمطية القديمة في تفسيراته للأحداث. حيث أصبحت الرواية الرسمية المعلنة تواجه بأدلة معاكسة من الحدث نفسه، ومغلفة بنوع من الريبة العميقة الدالة على إخفاء شيء كبير عن الناس؛لأهداف ومصالح أكبر لفئة تحكم بالخفاء حسب نظرية أصحاب نظريات المؤامرة، ويركز الدكتور (براذرتون) في كتابه هذا على الكثير من الدراسات والأبحاث التي قام بها المختصون في علم النفس لمحاولة فهم سيكيولوجيا المؤمنين بنظريات المؤامرة. فالإيمان بهذه النظريات ورجاحة حججها وصمودها لوقت طويل يتأتى في المقام الأول في عصرنا الحالي من تدفق المعلومات الكبير في الإعلام بشكل عام وشبكة الإنترنت بوجه خاص، حيث يسهم هذا التدفق الكبير والسريع والمكثف للمعلومات حول انفجار ما أو عملية اغتيال لأحد الشخصيات المهمة لظهور متناقضات في الحدث نفسه، هذه المتناقضات هي ما يعتاش عليها أصحاب نظرية المؤامرة على أنها دليل مؤامرة لم يستطع مدبر الحدث التستر عليها أو معالجتها في حينه، وبالتالي يتكون مع الخطاب المفعم بالعاطفة جدار سميك ضد الرواية الرسمية التي ربما لن تجد تبريراً لبعض تناقضات الحدث إلا كونها صدفة تلاءمت الظروف لوقوعها في اللحظة نفسها، وأصحاب نظرية المؤامرة يكونون في العادة من أشد أعداء قدر المصادفات. ففي الفكر المؤامراتي لا يوجد للأحداث الكبرى في العالم ما يسمى بالصدفة بل هناك علاقة طردية قوية بين التخطيط المسبق والنتائج اللاحقة أو المعاشة لمجموعة متحكمة ومستفيدة. هذه العلاقة كما ذكرت يغذيها التدفق الهائل للمعلومات بمصداقيتها وتناقضاتها حيث يقول (براذرتون) عن هذه النقطة "...لا أقول إن التفكير المؤامراتي نتاج العصر الرقمي. فكلُّ من وسائل الإعلام بوجه عام ومنتقديها يسعون جاهدين لإشباع الطلب المتصارع على الحقيقة والرغبة في الوصول إلى إجابات سريعة. كلُّ ما هنالك أن شبكة الإنترنت جعلت تداول المعلومات أسهل وأسرع من أي وقت مضى، حتى أثناء تكشف الأحداث شيئًا فشيئًا فخلال دقائق من وقوع حدث ما يهز الشبكات الإخبارية، يمكن لأي شخص لديه اتصال بشبكة الإنترنت أن يبدأ في الإدلاء بدلوه كيف أن ما جرى دليل على نوع ما من المؤامرة أو التستر. وكما أشار عالم النفس مايك وود، فإن شبكة الإنترنت والأخبار التي لا تنقطع على مدار الساعة تُوفّران مادةً خصبة تستغلها نظريات المؤامرة إذ يقول: «نظرا إلى هذا الكم الهائل، تزداد احتمالات وجود تناقضات وشذوذات يمكن اقتناصها واستغلالها كأدلة ضد الرواية السائدة للحدث. وتتيح شبكة الإنترنت من ناحية أخرى، إمكانية دحض نظريات المؤامرة سريعًا بمجرد ظهورها..." ويحيل (براذرتون) هذا التعطش الدائم لوجود سيناريوهات مؤامرة محتملة إلى مشكلة نفسية لدى المؤمنين بنظريات المؤامرة تسمى ( الشخصية البارونية) فمن يصاب بالبارونية هم أناس يعتقدون أن الجميع يتحدث عنهم ويتآمر عليهم سراً. وينسج المصاب بالبارونية قصصاً خيالية يقوم بتحليلها، ومن ثم تصديقها ويكون الحذر وسوء الظن بالآخرين، وصعوبة نسج العلاقات الاجتماعية، والشك في إخلاص وولاء الآخرين لهم هي من أهم السمات البارزة للمصابين بالبارونية. وفي جانب آخر يقدم أصحاب نظريات المؤامرة تعليلاً لإيمانهم بهذه الأفكار من منطلق ما هو المانع من وجود أيادي خفية تحرك المشهد العام العالمي إذا ثبت أن هناك مؤامرة في حدث ما؟ أي أن الفكرة هي أقرب إلى أحجار الدومينو حينما تكون مصفوفة بجانب بعضها البعض فسقوط الحجر الأول معناه سقوط بقية الأحجار تباعاً، ورغم أن هذا الادعاء يحمل في رأيي جانباً منطقياً إلا أن أصحاب نظرية المؤامرة يدمرون هذا الزعم المنطقي من خلال تحليل كل شاردة وواردة من منظور المؤامرة، ويعلق الدكتور (براذرتون) على هذا الجانب بالقول
"...لماذا يعني اقتناعك بنظرية مؤامرة قبولك على الأرجح بجميع النظريات الأخرى (أو على الجانب الآخر، تشكيكك في إحدى نظريات المؤامرة معناه رفضك للنظريات الأخرى)؟ إحدى الإجابات المحتملة التي طرحها اختصاصي علم الاجتماع تيد جورتزيل، هو أن العقلية المؤامراتية تعمل وفقًا للمنطق المتزعزع القائل بأنه إذا كانت إحدى نظريات المؤامرة صحيحةً، فمن الممكن أن تؤخذ كدليل على صحة نظريات المؤامرة الأخرى. فإذا كنت تظن أن عملاء الحكومة الأمريكية قد تورّطوا في اغتيال جون كينيدي، فالأرجح أنهم تورطوا كذلك في شيءٍ مثل أحداث الحادي عشر من سبتمبر. وإذا كانت السلطات هاجمت مواطنيها في هجمة إرهابية خادعة، فما الذي يوقفها عن تسميمنا سرا بإضافة المواد الكيميائية إلى الماء وإضافة السموم إلى اللقاحات ؟ وإذا لم تجد غضاضة في الكذب على مواطنيها بشأن صحتهم وسلامتهم، فلماذا لا تختلقُ الهبوط على سطح القمر وتتستّر على وجود مخلوقات غريبة ؟ وإذا كانت هناك مجموعة صغيرة من المخططين الخارجين عن القانون يستطيعون أن يُفلتوا من العقاب رغم كلّ ما اقترفوه، فربما هناك مجموعة سرية ما من النخب تُخطَّط لكل شيء يحدث في العالم. وهكذا دواليك. فنظريات المؤامرة، تُشكّل شبكة أبدية من المعتقدات؛ لأنها جميعًا يدعم بعضها بعضا، وإذا لم تكن على استعداد لاتخاذ الخطوة الأولى في تصديق نظرية ما، فإن بقية النظريات تبدو غير وجيهة بالمثل. لكن بمجرد اقتناعك بنظرية ما، فإن هذا يفتح الباب لجميع النظريات الأخرى..."
وأستطيع القول إن العقلية المؤامراتية تحاول تجميع أجزاء متناثرة من هنا و هناك؛ لرسم صورة نهائية لأسئلة حائرة أو استكمال نواقص الرواية الرسمية للحدث الكبير الذي وقع أو حتى الذي يتوقع أن يحدث من خلال ربط الأحداث الحاصلة، هذه العقلية التي تجذب ملايين الأشخاص لها من خلال المجهر الذي تضعه على الحدث، وتقوم بتغليفه بخطاب غامض ومقلق يهدد البشرية على أصعدة مختلفة في حياتنا اليومية أو من خلال ما يحاك لمستقبلنا، وعلى الرغم من الشكوك الهائلة التي تفرزها العقلية المؤامراتية للجماهير التواقة للحقيقة، إلا أن ضعفها يبرز في أبسط تجربة علمية بسيطة تطبق عليها لتفنيد شكوكها، ودائما يلعب الوقت في مصلحة أصحاب نظريات المؤامرة لعدم تمكن الجانب الآخر من الرد عليها في حينه مما يساعد على تأكيد المزاعم والشكوك المصاحبة للحدث، وبالمجمل لن ينتهي هذا الجدل الحاصل بين أصحاب نظريات المؤامرة وخصومهم ما دامت هناك أسئلة وتفاصيل وحكايات وشكوك وقبل كل شيء عقل دائما يتسائل و يقول لماذا؟
فهد الجهوري
"...لماذا يعني اقتناعك بنظرية مؤامرة قبولك على الأرجح بجميع النظريات الأخرى (أو على الجانب الآخر، تشكيكك في إحدى نظريات المؤامرة معناه رفضك للنظريات الأخرى)؟ إحدى الإجابات المحتملة التي طرحها اختصاصي علم الاجتماع تيد جورتزيل، هو أن العقلية المؤامراتية تعمل وفقًا للمنطق المتزعزع القائل بأنه إذا كانت إحدى نظريات المؤامرة صحيحةً، فمن الممكن أن تؤخذ كدليل على صحة نظريات المؤامرة الأخرى. فإذا كنت تظن أن عملاء الحكومة الأمريكية قد تورّطوا في اغتيال جون كينيدي، فالأرجح أنهم تورطوا كذلك في شيءٍ مثل أحداث الحادي عشر من سبتمبر. وإذا كانت السلطات هاجمت مواطنيها في هجمة إرهابية خادعة، فما الذي يوقفها عن تسميمنا سرا بإضافة المواد الكيميائية إلى الماء وإضافة السموم إلى اللقاحات ؟ وإذا لم تجد غضاضة في الكذب على مواطنيها بشأن صحتهم وسلامتهم، فلماذا لا تختلقُ الهبوط على سطح القمر وتتستّر على وجود مخلوقات غريبة ؟ وإذا كانت هناك مجموعة صغيرة من المخططين الخارجين عن القانون يستطيعون أن يُفلتوا من العقاب رغم كلّ ما اقترفوه، فربما هناك مجموعة سرية ما من النخب تُخطَّط لكل شيء يحدث في العالم. وهكذا دواليك. فنظريات المؤامرة، تُشكّل شبكة أبدية من المعتقدات؛ لأنها جميعًا يدعم بعضها بعضا، وإذا لم تكن على استعداد لاتخاذ الخطوة الأولى في تصديق نظرية ما، فإن بقية النظريات تبدو غير وجيهة بالمثل. لكن بمجرد اقتناعك بنظرية ما، فإن هذا يفتح الباب لجميع النظريات الأخرى..."
وأستطيع القول إن العقلية المؤامراتية تحاول تجميع أجزاء متناثرة من هنا و هناك؛ لرسم صورة نهائية لأسئلة حائرة أو استكمال نواقص الرواية الرسمية للحدث الكبير الذي وقع أو حتى الذي يتوقع أن يحدث من خلال ربط الأحداث الحاصلة، هذه العقلية التي تجذب ملايين الأشخاص لها من خلال المجهر الذي تضعه على الحدث، وتقوم بتغليفه بخطاب غامض ومقلق يهدد البشرية على أصعدة مختلفة في حياتنا اليومية أو من خلال ما يحاك لمستقبلنا، وعلى الرغم من الشكوك الهائلة التي تفرزها العقلية المؤامراتية للجماهير التواقة للحقيقة، إلا أن ضعفها يبرز في أبسط تجربة علمية بسيطة تطبق عليها لتفنيد شكوكها، ودائما يلعب الوقت في مصلحة أصحاب نظريات المؤامرة لعدم تمكن الجانب الآخر من الرد عليها في حينه مما يساعد على تأكيد المزاعم والشكوك المصاحبة للحدث، وبالمجمل لن ينتهي هذا الجدل الحاصل بين أصحاب نظريات المؤامرة وخصومهم ما دامت هناك أسئلة وتفاصيل وحكايات وشكوك وقبل كل شيء عقل دائما يتسائل و يقول لماذا؟
فهد الجهوري
September 2, 2023
(The English review is placed beneath the Russian one)
Одна из лучших книг по объяснению такого явления как конспирология. Автор объясняет, что по большому счёту, все или прочти все люди, в той или иной степени, подвержены конспирологии, что впасть в конспирологию может абсолютно любой человек.
Книга начинается с краткого экскурса в историю, знакомя читателя с главной конспирологической идеей, которая в XX веке вылилась в геноцид еврейского народа. Как можно догадаться речь идёт о конспирологии, в которой евреи рисуются в виде опасного врага, которые плетут козни против <…>. Тут можно вставить слово «французов» или «немцев» или «испанцев» или «русских», ибо данная конспирология была широко распространена в Европе на протяжении веков, из-за чего евреи регулярно подвергались гонениям, погромам, а в XX веке и геноциду. Автор не зря рассказывает об этой самой известной конспирологической истории, ибо именно на этом примере лучше всего видно, что конспирология не является безвредной игрушкой сумасшедших людей. На самом деле конспирология, это очень серьёзное явление и более того, довольно опасное.
Как дальше мы узнаём из книги, человек, который верит в одну конспирологическую идею, более склонен верить и в другую или даже в другие конспирологические идеи. И если фальшивка под названием «Протоколы Сионских мудрецов», поддаётся относительно лёгкому развенчанию, то вот конспирология связанная с якобы опасностью прививок, поражает даже менее склонных к конспирологии людей. Да что там простые люди, как пишет автор, даже учёные, врачи могут поверить в какую-нибудь конспирологию даже связанную с медициной. По существу, автор большую часть книги будет обсуждать именно этот тип конспирологии, т.е. откуда появился этот страх перед прививками. Объяснение у автора получилось великолепное. Действительно, люди очень легко выводят ложную причинно-следственную связь. Если ребёнок умер после прививки, значит, именно прививка виновата, а не другие факторы – так мыслит типичный сторонник конспирологии о вреде прививок.
Более невинный их вид принимает какая-нибудь привычка человека делать что-то перед важный действием, как например, почесать за ухом, прежде чем совершить бросок меча. Происходит это всё также по причине, что один раз такое действие – почесать за ухом – принесло успех. Это мы находим во всей истории существования человека. Я думаю, запрет на потребление той или иной пищи был связан именно с этим, т.е. что в какой-то момент люди обнаружили ложную корреляцию между поеданием такой пищи и негативными последствиями, вследствие чего запрет закрепился в религиозных или иных правилах и законах.
Второй большой темой является убийство Кеннеди. Автор так же знакомит читателя с богатым набором самых разнообразных конспирологических теорий, включая, что убийство совершила/заказала жена Кеннеди – Жаклин. Разумеется, читать об этих откровенно бредовых идеях довольно забавно, однако автор переходит от одного – забавного – примера к другому, но уже менее забавному и даже опасному для общества, примеру. Как я написал выше, в какой-то момент конспирология из забавной диковинны небольшой группы может вылиться в геноцид или в отказ следовать наставлениям врачей. Это особенно опасно, если в стане таких фанатиков появляется человек облачённый властью, как например доктор, учёный или политическая фигура. В этот момент забава перестаёт быть забавой.
Многие читатели ставят в минус этой книге, что она слишком сосредоточена на примерах и меньше - на объяснении этого явления. Однако я нахожу эту претензию необоснованной. По существу автор написал всё, что можно написать по поводу конспирологии как явления. В книге мы встречаем объяснения того, почему конспирология свойственна людям как биологическому виду и почему её невозможно искоренить полностью, т.е. почему люди будут верить в неё и видеть в небе, на фотографиях и в природных явлениях то, что там явно отсутствует. Как пишет автор, человеку трудно примириться, что крупные явления вызваны либо случайностью, либо несущественными причинами. К примеру, человеку трудно принять идею, что американский президент был убит не тайной организацией, не тайным сговором, а обычным одиночкой. Или что принцесса Диана погибла в совершенно обычной, рядовой автокатастрофе, а не была убита королевской семьёй. Чем крупнее и значимей событие, тем более существенные силы должны стоять за этим событием, думают люди. Именно поэтому люди и ищут в фотографиях (к примеру, момент убийства Кеннеди) знаки, скрытые символы и пр., что может послужить поддержкой конспирологического объяснения. Как известно, если ночью смотреть на обои, то можно увидеть в хаосе линий определённый силуэты или даже сюжет. Мозг так устроен, что он ищет знакомые образы везде, где только возможно, ибо это объясняется историей нашего вида, когда опасность могла притаиться под любым кустом. Именно поэтому те люди, которые ради перестраховки видели змею в обычной палке, выжили, а те, кто меньше был склонен видеть в обычной палке змею – погибли. Такое объяснение конспирологии мы увидим, если обратимся к эволюционной психологии, что означает, что конспирология является вполне естественным явлением, которое возможно даже, и позволило нашему виду выжить. Однако как у всякого такого явление у него существуют и свои издержки и поэтому, чтобы не попасть под влияние конспирологии стоит больше обращать внимание не на то, что мы видим и слышим и не первому впечатлению, которому свойственно видеть связи между двумя событиями там, где их на самом деле нет, а науке и голым фактам. К примеру, такие голые факты можно найти и в итоговом докладе комиссии о причинах гибели принцессы Дианы и гибели президента Кеннеди и в заключении о терактах 11 сентября. Во всех этих событиях мы имеем полное описание того, как произошли эти события и причинах, к которым они привели. Но люди, если изначально настроены найти чёрную кошку в освещённой комнате, всё равно будут искать её и «найдут» именно там, куда свет от лампы не достаёт, даже если это пространство недостаточно для того, чтобы там могла спрятаться эта чёрная кошка. Возможно, что для некоторых, так жизнь становится более интересной, а для других это объясняет, почему с ними случилось то или иное трагическое событие. Очень часто или даже почти всегда, очень трудно принять, что это событие произошло просто потому, потому что произошло, т.е. без какой либо причины - случайность или стечение обстоятельства, независимые друг от друга.
This is one of the best books on explaining the phenomenon of conspiracy. The author explains that by and large, all or almost all people are, to some degree, subject to conspiracy, and anyone can fall into a conspiracy.
The book begins with a brief excursion into history, introducing the reader to the main conspiracy idea that culminated in the genocide of the Jewish people in the 20th century. As you can guess, this is conspiracy theorizing, in which the Jews are portrayed as a dangerous enemy who is plotting against <...>. Here you can insert the words "French" or "Germans" or "Spaniards" or "Russians" because this conspiracy was widespread in Europe for centuries, due to which Jews were regularly persecuted, pogroms, and in the XX century even genocide. The author tells the most famous conspiracy story not in vain, because in this example it is best seen that conspiracy is not a harmless toy of crazy people. In fact, conspiracy is a very serious phenomenon and quite dangerous.
As we learn in the book, a person who believes in one conspiracy idea is more inclined to believe in another or even other conspiracy ideas. And if the fake called "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," can be debunked relatively easily, then the conspiracy related to the alleged danger of vaccinations, strikes even less inclined to conspiracy people. As the author writes, even scientists and doctors can believe in some conspiracies (even related to medicine). In fact, the author spends most of the book discussing this type of conspiracy, i.e., where this fear of vaccinations came from. The author's explanation is excellent. Indeed, it is very easy for people to deduce false causation. If a child dies after a vaccination, it is the vaccination that is to blame, not other factors - this is the typical conspiracy theorist's view of the harms of vaccinations.
A more innocent form of them takes the form of a person's habit of doing something before an important action, such as scratching behind the ear before throwing a sword. This also happens for the reason that once such an action - scratching behind the ear - has been successful. We find this in the whole history of human existence. I think the prohibition of eating this or that food had to do with just that, i.e., that at some point, people discovered a false correlation between eating such food and negative consequences (so the prohibition became enshrined in religious or other rules and laws).
The second major theme is the Kennedy assassination. The author also introduces the reader to a rich set of various conspiracy theories, including that Kennedy's wife Jacqueline committed/ordered the assassination. Of course, it is quite amusing to read about these frankly delusional ideas, but, the author moves from one amusing example to another, but already less amusing and even dangerous for society. As I wrote above, at some point, conspiracy theories can go from being an amusing curiosity of a small group to genocide or a refusal to follow doctors' instructions. This is especially dangerous if a person of power, such as a doctor, scientist, or political figure, appears in the camp of such fanatics. At that point, the fun ceases to be fun.
Many readers cons this book that it focuses too much on examples and less on explaining the phenomenon. However, I find this claim unfounded. Essentially, the author has written everything that can be written about conspiracy as a phenomenon. In the book, we meet explanations of why conspiracy is peculiar to humans as a biological species and why it cannot be eradicated completely, i.e., why people will believe in it and see in the sky, in photographs, and in natural phenomena, what is not there. As the author writes, it is difficult for a person to accept that major events are caused either by chance or by unimportant causes. For example, it is difficult for a person to accept the idea that the American president was assassinated not by a secret organization, not by a secret conspiracy, but by an ordinary loner. Or that Princess Diana died in an ordinary car accident and was not killed by the royal family. The larger and more significant the event, the more significant the forces must be behind the event, people think. That's why people are looking for signs, hidden symbols, etc., in photos (for example, the moment of Kennedy's assassination), which can support the conspiracy explanation. It is well known that if you look at wallpaper at night, you can see in the chaos of lines a certain silhouette or even a plot. The brain is so organized that it looks for familiar images wherever possible because this is explained by the history of our species when danger could lurk under any bush. That is why those people who, for the sake of reassurance, saw a snake in an ordinary stick survived, and those who were less inclined to see a snake in an ordinary stick - died. This explanation of conspiracy we will see if we turn to evolutionary psychology, which means that conspiracy is a perfectly natural phenomenon that may even have allowed our species to survive. However, like any such phenomenon, it has its own costs, and therefore, in order not to fall under the influence of conspiracy it is worth paying more attention not to what we see and hear and not to the first impression, which tends to see connections between two events where they do not really exist, but to science and bare facts. For example, such bare facts can also be found in the final report of the commission on the causes of the death of Princess Diana and the death of President Kennedy and in the conclusion of the September 11 attacks (The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks). In all of these, we have a full description of how these events occurred and the causes to which they led. But people, if initially set up to find a black cat in a lighted room, will still look for it and "find" it exactly where the light from the lamp does not reach, even if this space is not enough for this black cat to hide there. It may be that for some, it makes life more interesting, and for others, it explains why a tragic event happened to them. Very often, or even almost always, it is very difficult to accept that this event happened simply because it happened, i.e., without any reason - chance or coincidence, independent of each other.
Одна из лучших книг по объяснению такого явления как конспирология. Автор объясняет, что по большому счёту, все или прочти все люди, в той или иной степени, подвержены конспирологии, что впасть в конспирологию может абсолютно любой человек.
Книга начинается с краткого экскурса в историю, знакомя читателя с главной конспирологической идеей, которая в XX веке вылилась в геноцид еврейского народа. Как можно догадаться речь идёт о конспирологии, в которой евреи рисуются в виде опасного врага, которые плетут козни против <…>. Тут можно вставить слово «французов» или «немцев» или «испанцев» или «русских», ибо данная конспирология была широко распространена в Европе на протяжении веков, из-за чего евреи регулярно подвергались гонениям, погромам, а в XX веке и геноциду. Автор не зря рассказывает об этой самой известной конспирологической истории, ибо именно на этом примере лучше всего видно, что конспирология не является безвредной игрушкой сумасшедших людей. На самом деле конспирология, это очень серьёзное явление и более того, довольно опасное.
Как дальше мы узнаём из книги, человек, который верит в одну конспирологическую идею, более склонен верить и в другую или даже в другие конспирологические идеи. И если фальшивка под названием «Протоколы Сионских мудрецов», поддаётся относительно лёгкому развенчанию, то вот конспирология связанная с якобы опасностью прививок, поражает даже менее склонных к конспирологии людей. Да что там простые люди, как пишет автор, даже учёные, врачи могут поверить в какую-нибудь конспирологию даже связанную с медициной. По существу, автор большую часть книги будет обсуждать именно этот тип конспирологии, т.е. откуда появился этот страх перед прививками. Объяснение у автора получилось великолепное. Действительно, люди очень легко выводят ложную причинно-следственную связь. Если ребёнок умер после прививки, значит, именно прививка виновата, а не другие факторы – так мыслит типичный сторонник конспирологии о вреде прививок.
Более невинный их вид принимает какая-нибудь привычка человека делать что-то перед важный действием, как например, почесать за ухом, прежде чем совершить бросок меча. Происходит это всё также по причине, что один раз такое действие – почесать за ухом – принесло успех. Это мы находим во всей истории существования человека. Я думаю, запрет на потребление той или иной пищи был связан именно с этим, т.е. что в какой-то момент люди обнаружили ложную корреляцию между поеданием такой пищи и негативными последствиями, вследствие чего запрет закрепился в религиозных или иных правилах и законах.
Второй большой темой является убийство Кеннеди. Автор так же знакомит читателя с богатым набором самых разнообразных конспирологических теорий, включая, что убийство совершила/заказала жена Кеннеди – Жаклин. Разумеется, читать об этих откровенно бредовых идеях довольно забавно, однако автор переходит от одного – забавного – примера к другому, но уже менее забавному и даже опасному для общества, примеру. Как я написал выше, в какой-то момент конспирология из забавной диковинны небольшой группы может вылиться в геноцид или в отказ следовать наставлениям врачей. Это особенно опасно, если в стане таких фанатиков появляется человек облачённый властью, как например доктор, учёный или политическая фигура. В этот момент забава перестаёт быть забавой.
Многие читатели ставят в минус этой книге, что она слишком сосредоточена на примерах и меньше - на объяснении этого явления. Однако я нахожу эту претензию необоснованной. По существу автор написал всё, что можно написать по поводу конспирологии как явления. В книге мы встречаем объяснения того, почему конспирология свойственна людям как биологическому виду и почему её невозможно искоренить полностью, т.е. почему люди будут верить в неё и видеть в небе, на фотографиях и в природных явлениях то, что там явно отсутствует. Как пишет автор, человеку трудно примириться, что крупные явления вызваны либо случайностью, либо несущественными причинами. К примеру, человеку трудно принять идею, что американский президент был убит не тайной организацией, не тайным сговором, а обычным одиночкой. Или что принцесса Диана погибла в совершенно обычной, рядовой автокатастрофе, а не была убита королевской семьёй. Чем крупнее и значимей событие, тем более существенные силы должны стоять за этим событием, думают люди. Именно поэтому люди и ищут в фотографиях (к примеру, момент убийства Кеннеди) знаки, скрытые символы и пр., что может послужить поддержкой конспирологического объяснения. Как известно, если ночью смотреть на обои, то можно увидеть в хаосе линий определённый силуэты или даже сюжет. Мозг так устроен, что он ищет знакомые образы везде, где только возможно, ибо это объясняется историей нашего вида, когда опасность могла притаиться под любым кустом. Именно поэтому те люди, которые ради перестраховки видели змею в обычной палке, выжили, а те, кто меньше был склонен видеть в обычной палке змею – погибли. Такое объяснение конспирологии мы увидим, если обратимся к эволюционной психологии, что означает, что конспирология является вполне естественным явлением, которое возможно даже, и позволило нашему виду выжить. Однако как у всякого такого явление у него существуют и свои издержки и поэтому, чтобы не попасть под влияние конспирологии стоит больше обращать внимание не на то, что мы видим и слышим и не первому впечатлению, которому свойственно видеть связи между двумя событиями там, где их на самом деле нет, а науке и голым фактам. К примеру, такие голые факты можно найти и в итоговом докладе комиссии о причинах гибели принцессы Дианы и гибели президента Кеннеди и в заключении о терактах 11 сентября. Во всех этих событиях мы имеем полное описание того, как произошли эти события и причинах, к которым они привели. Но люди, если изначально настроены найти чёрную кошку в освещённой комнате, всё равно будут искать её и «найдут» именно там, куда свет от лампы не достаёт, даже если это пространство недостаточно для того, чтобы там могла спрятаться эта чёрная кошка. Возможно, что для некоторых, так жизнь становится более интересной, а для других это объясняет, почему с ними случилось то или иное трагическое событие. Очень часто или даже почти всегда, очень трудно принять, что это событие произошло просто потому, потому что произошло, т.е. без какой либо причины - случайность или стечение обстоятельства, независимые друг от друга.
This is one of the best books on explaining the phenomenon of conspiracy. The author explains that by and large, all or almost all people are, to some degree, subject to conspiracy, and anyone can fall into a conspiracy.
The book begins with a brief excursion into history, introducing the reader to the main conspiracy idea that culminated in the genocide of the Jewish people in the 20th century. As you can guess, this is conspiracy theorizing, in which the Jews are portrayed as a dangerous enemy who is plotting against <...>. Here you can insert the words "French" or "Germans" or "Spaniards" or "Russians" because this conspiracy was widespread in Europe for centuries, due to which Jews were regularly persecuted, pogroms, and in the XX century even genocide. The author tells the most famous conspiracy story not in vain, because in this example it is best seen that conspiracy is not a harmless toy of crazy people. In fact, conspiracy is a very serious phenomenon and quite dangerous.
As we learn in the book, a person who believes in one conspiracy idea is more inclined to believe in another or even other conspiracy ideas. And if the fake called "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," can be debunked relatively easily, then the conspiracy related to the alleged danger of vaccinations, strikes even less inclined to conspiracy people. As the author writes, even scientists and doctors can believe in some conspiracies (even related to medicine). In fact, the author spends most of the book discussing this type of conspiracy, i.e., where this fear of vaccinations came from. The author's explanation is excellent. Indeed, it is very easy for people to deduce false causation. If a child dies after a vaccination, it is the vaccination that is to blame, not other factors - this is the typical conspiracy theorist's view of the harms of vaccinations.
A more innocent form of them takes the form of a person's habit of doing something before an important action, such as scratching behind the ear before throwing a sword. This also happens for the reason that once such an action - scratching behind the ear - has been successful. We find this in the whole history of human existence. I think the prohibition of eating this or that food had to do with just that, i.e., that at some point, people discovered a false correlation between eating such food and negative consequences (so the prohibition became enshrined in religious or other rules and laws).
The second major theme is the Kennedy assassination. The author also introduces the reader to a rich set of various conspiracy theories, including that Kennedy's wife Jacqueline committed/ordered the assassination. Of course, it is quite amusing to read about these frankly delusional ideas, but, the author moves from one amusing example to another, but already less amusing and even dangerous for society. As I wrote above, at some point, conspiracy theories can go from being an amusing curiosity of a small group to genocide or a refusal to follow doctors' instructions. This is especially dangerous if a person of power, such as a doctor, scientist, or political figure, appears in the camp of such fanatics. At that point, the fun ceases to be fun.
Many readers cons this book that it focuses too much on examples and less on explaining the phenomenon. However, I find this claim unfounded. Essentially, the author has written everything that can be written about conspiracy as a phenomenon. In the book, we meet explanations of why conspiracy is peculiar to humans as a biological species and why it cannot be eradicated completely, i.e., why people will believe in it and see in the sky, in photographs, and in natural phenomena, what is not there. As the author writes, it is difficult for a person to accept that major events are caused either by chance or by unimportant causes. For example, it is difficult for a person to accept the idea that the American president was assassinated not by a secret organization, not by a secret conspiracy, but by an ordinary loner. Or that Princess Diana died in an ordinary car accident and was not killed by the royal family. The larger and more significant the event, the more significant the forces must be behind the event, people think. That's why people are looking for signs, hidden symbols, etc., in photos (for example, the moment of Kennedy's assassination), which can support the conspiracy explanation. It is well known that if you look at wallpaper at night, you can see in the chaos of lines a certain silhouette or even a plot. The brain is so organized that it looks for familiar images wherever possible because this is explained by the history of our species when danger could lurk under any bush. That is why those people who, for the sake of reassurance, saw a snake in an ordinary stick survived, and those who were less inclined to see a snake in an ordinary stick - died. This explanation of conspiracy we will see if we turn to evolutionary psychology, which means that conspiracy is a perfectly natural phenomenon that may even have allowed our species to survive. However, like any such phenomenon, it has its own costs, and therefore, in order not to fall under the influence of conspiracy it is worth paying more attention not to what we see and hear and not to the first impression, which tends to see connections between two events where they do not really exist, but to science and bare facts. For example, such bare facts can also be found in the final report of the commission on the causes of the death of Princess Diana and the death of President Kennedy and in the conclusion of the September 11 attacks (The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks). In all of these, we have a full description of how these events occurred and the causes to which they led. But people, if initially set up to find a black cat in a lighted room, will still look for it and "find" it exactly where the light from the lamp does not reach, even if this space is not enough for this black cat to hide there. It may be that for some, it makes life more interesting, and for others, it explains why a tragic event happened to them. Very often, or even almost always, it is very difficult to accept that this event happened simply because it happened, i.e., without any reason - chance or coincidence, independent of each other.
October 15, 2022
Interesting deep dive into the underlying psychology behind conspiracy; redundant in stretches and arguably not structured in the most effective/intuitive way, but it was overall solid. Biggest takeaway is that I have more compassion for those who fall prey to the outlandish stuff.
January 21, 2023
доступне і дотепне пояснення того, чому ми віримо в конспірологію. ні, це не хиба в прошивці матриці, а нормальний стан психіки, що постійно думає. проблеми починаються тоді, коли схильність до конспірологічного мислення стає нав´язливою. втім, допитливість — не вада, а інструмент, який можна по-різному використовувати. цікаво розписані психологічні передумови виникнення віри в теорії змови та безліч прикладів того, на базі чого виникає конспірологія, найчастіше — це неспівмірність причини і наслідків.
September 20, 2019
“The Moon Landing was faked.” “The September 11th attacks were an inside job.” “The Illuminati is going to take over the world or already has or something.” “Elvis and Jim Morrison are still alive somewhere.”
As you can see, the extreme fringe of Conspiracy Theories is an interesting place to be. With Suspicious Minds, Rob Brotherton explores the Psychology behind conspiracies and delves into their history. For example, around when was the first Conspiracy Theory you can think of? The JFK plot? No, you can go earlier than that. It is certainly true that the Internet has given voices to the voiceless with many situations, but you can go far earlier than that, even back to the Roman Empire.
The main issue with conspiracy theories is that you can’t argue with people about it. This is another portion that is built into the theory itself. There has to be room for doubt in what it says. Take the 9-11 truthers for example. The confusion and rapid-fire news reports worked to the disadvantage of people that don’t believe it was an inside job.
So Brotherton picks apart the basic ideas inherent in all conspiracy theories. It makes for a fascinating and enjoyable book.
As you can see, the extreme fringe of Conspiracy Theories is an interesting place to be. With Suspicious Minds, Rob Brotherton explores the Psychology behind conspiracies and delves into their history. For example, around when was the first Conspiracy Theory you can think of? The JFK plot? No, you can go earlier than that. It is certainly true that the Internet has given voices to the voiceless with many situations, but you can go far earlier than that, even back to the Roman Empire.
The main issue with conspiracy theories is that you can’t argue with people about it. This is another portion that is built into the theory itself. There has to be room for doubt in what it says. Take the 9-11 truthers for example. The confusion and rapid-fire news reports worked to the disadvantage of people that don’t believe it was an inside job.
So Brotherton picks apart the basic ideas inherent in all conspiracy theories. It makes for a fascinating and enjoyable book.
September 5, 2022
2nd read:
I read this book a couple years ago when I first got really interested in why people believe in conspiracy theories and misinformation. As a lover of psychology, Rob Brotherton’s book quickly became my favorite. Recently, as I saw more and more people believing in conspiracy theories around stolen elections and other ridiculous things, I wanted to give this book another read. Although I’ve read quite a few books on this topic since I first read this one, it’s still my favorite. Brotherton references so many studies in this book and really helps the reader understand why people believe in conspiracies. He also has empathy for these people and explains how we can all be susceptible to believing strange things due to the various flaws in our thinking.
If you’re interested in the psychology behind all of this, you definitely need to check this book out.
1st read:
As a psychology nerd, I'm regularly fascinated with how people can believe in such ridiculous conspiracies. For months, I've been looking for a book that's just about the psychology behind conspiracy theorists, and while I've read some great books, I never found one that was specifically about the topic…that is until I came across Suspicious Minds by Rob Brotherton. I'll keep this review short and sweet: if you enjoy psychology and/or just want to understand how the minds of conspiracy theorists work, get this book right now. I can't wait to start his next book Bad News about why we fall for fake news.
I read this book a couple years ago when I first got really interested in why people believe in conspiracy theories and misinformation. As a lover of psychology, Rob Brotherton’s book quickly became my favorite. Recently, as I saw more and more people believing in conspiracy theories around stolen elections and other ridiculous things, I wanted to give this book another read. Although I’ve read quite a few books on this topic since I first read this one, it’s still my favorite. Brotherton references so many studies in this book and really helps the reader understand why people believe in conspiracies. He also has empathy for these people and explains how we can all be susceptible to believing strange things due to the various flaws in our thinking.
If you’re interested in the psychology behind all of this, you definitely need to check this book out.
1st read:
As a psychology nerd, I'm regularly fascinated with how people can believe in such ridiculous conspiracies. For months, I've been looking for a book that's just about the psychology behind conspiracy theorists, and while I've read some great books, I never found one that was specifically about the topic…that is until I came across Suspicious Minds by Rob Brotherton. I'll keep this review short and sweet: if you enjoy psychology and/or just want to understand how the minds of conspiracy theorists work, get this book right now. I can't wait to start his next book Bad News about why we fall for fake news.
July 2, 2017
An excellent introduction to the psychology of the minds obsessed with conspiracies. The book is less about smirking at the conspiracy minded than it is about understanding how many of us have elements of this thinking ourselves.
There is more compassion and understanding, deep understanding, in this book than there is in most books on this subject that spend more time criticizing than attempting to understand.
Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars.
There is more compassion and understanding, deep understanding, in this book than there is in most books on this subject that spend more time criticizing than attempting to understand.
Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars.
July 24, 2017
It seems we're all conspiracy theorists to some degree. Brotherton examines the psychological attributes that we all share - and use daily just to function in the world - and shows how these same habits of mind contribute to belief in conspiracies under the right conditions. Well written and organized.
April 21, 2025
Ho veramente apprezzato il testo di Brotherton grazie a tre elementi: il preciso e innovativo delineare le caratteristiche fondamentali di una teoria del complotto, la descrizione del cultic milieu e dei suoi estesi confini, l’aver fatto luce sui quei pregiudizi cerebrali che ci fanno cascare in teorie strampalate e arzigogolate. Tra assassinii presidenziali, malvagi rettili alieni, UFO e torri che collassano sulle proprie fondamenta, Brotherton ci mostra che alla fine siamo solo dei poveri esseri umani in cerca di un senso all’interno di un caos che sfugge al nostro controllo, in cerca della linea che connetta i punti, della narrazione che allevii il nostro senso di impotenza e smarrimento.
Con l’invito a leggere questo saggio (imparerete cose meravigliose sul vostro cervellino: da quanto sia pretenzioso di sapere cose che non sa - come il funzionamento di una bicicletta - a quanto ami grandi storie e grandi cause) vi lascio un assaggio di cosa siano, secondo Brotherton, gli elementi fondamentali di una teoria del complotto:
1. La verità non è mai palese ma è sempre al di là, a un passo dalla rivelazione. Il velo di Maia è sempre sul punto di strapparsi, eppure il suo segreto si lascia solo intravedere e mai afferrare appieno.
2. Nulla è come appare. Vi è sempre un mondo falso, una maschera, che cela una verità al di là. Le teorie del complotto sono intrinsecamente dissenzienti, sostengono che il nero sia bianco e il bianco sia nero, sono in contraddizione col mondo e dubitano delle apparenze.
3. I complotti sono sempre perfettamente orchestrati. I cospiratori sono professionisti del cinismo, spietatamente fedeli al loro intento, in cui sempre e massimamente riescono. Gli eventi decisivi sono le conseguenze della volontà inarrestabile di qualcuno. Non esiste caos, ma un ordine perseguito con una freddezza spietata.
4. Chi guadagna da una data situazione è sempre sospettato di averla creata. Gli eventi non sono il frutto della casualità ma di un genio maligno.
5. Una sproporzionata importanza è da attribuirsi all’anomalia, rispetto al dato ufficiale. Vi è una maniacale attenzione all’outlier rispetto al dato in-range, anche quando il dato in-range è nettamente maggioritario.
6. Le teorie del complotto sono inconfutabili per natura, poiché in fieri. Qualsiasi prova che la confuti diventa invece prova del fatto che il complotto in atto sia ancora più perfetto, che stia diffondendo notizie false con il solo obbiettivo di disinformare. La teoria del complotto prospera sulla sua confutazione.
Un testo veramente interessante. Che non scade nell’insulto al complottismo beandosi della propria superiorità intellettuale. Ma che nemmeno naviga a gonfie vele su teorie strampalate pretendendo di aver capito, esso solo nella moltitudine di cervelli che popola il pianeta, come funziona il mondo.
Con l’invito a leggere questo saggio (imparerete cose meravigliose sul vostro cervellino: da quanto sia pretenzioso di sapere cose che non sa - come il funzionamento di una bicicletta - a quanto ami grandi storie e grandi cause) vi lascio un assaggio di cosa siano, secondo Brotherton, gli elementi fondamentali di una teoria del complotto:
1. La verità non è mai palese ma è sempre al di là, a un passo dalla rivelazione. Il velo di Maia è sempre sul punto di strapparsi, eppure il suo segreto si lascia solo intravedere e mai afferrare appieno.
2. Nulla è come appare. Vi è sempre un mondo falso, una maschera, che cela una verità al di là. Le teorie del complotto sono intrinsecamente dissenzienti, sostengono che il nero sia bianco e il bianco sia nero, sono in contraddizione col mondo e dubitano delle apparenze.
3. I complotti sono sempre perfettamente orchestrati. I cospiratori sono professionisti del cinismo, spietatamente fedeli al loro intento, in cui sempre e massimamente riescono. Gli eventi decisivi sono le conseguenze della volontà inarrestabile di qualcuno. Non esiste caos, ma un ordine perseguito con una freddezza spietata.
4. Chi guadagna da una data situazione è sempre sospettato di averla creata. Gli eventi non sono il frutto della casualità ma di un genio maligno.
5. Una sproporzionata importanza è da attribuirsi all’anomalia, rispetto al dato ufficiale. Vi è una maniacale attenzione all’outlier rispetto al dato in-range, anche quando il dato in-range è nettamente maggioritario.
6. Le teorie del complotto sono inconfutabili per natura, poiché in fieri. Qualsiasi prova che la confuti diventa invece prova del fatto che il complotto in atto sia ancora più perfetto, che stia diffondendo notizie false con il solo obbiettivo di disinformare. La teoria del complotto prospera sulla sua confutazione.
Un testo veramente interessante. Che non scade nell’insulto al complottismo beandosi della propria superiorità intellettuale. Ma che nemmeno naviga a gonfie vele su teorie strampalate pretendendo di aver capito, esso solo nella moltitudine di cervelli che popola il pianeta, come funziona il mondo.
August 2, 2021
This was the book I have been waiting for to provide an psychological approach to conspiracy thinking. Well researched and written. The most interesting contribution is to push (successfully, IMO) that everyone is capable of conspiracy thinking. It is not a fringe position. This book does not attempt to work through personal relationships beset by conspiracy thinking - there are other books like Escaping the Rabbit Hole for that. But this was the grounding I needed to tackle other, newer texts. Interestingly, since this book was published before the rise of Trump, it perhaps allows a sense of holistic overview of conspiracy thinking without being boxed into the various conspiracies prevalent from the Trump era.
April 28, 2020
Очередная очень хорошая книжка в моих руках. И так, кому хочется с пользой провести время, советую вам почитать именно её. Книга призывает мыслить рационально и критически. Автор рассказывает о самых популярных теориях заговоров , но при этом объясняет почему люди в них верят и даже сами их придумывают. Понравилось, что узнала много интересных исторических фактов , например историю антисемитизма. Анализируются психология человека, почему нам нравится верить в теории заговоров. Книга хорошая ! Зря время не потеряете!
August 27, 2020
Does as advertised and speaks on why we believe conspiracy theories - but really only in the very literal, researcher-led study sense. Enjoyed a lot of it but looking for a different book on the subject, really - how conspiracy theories are or can be used, and why they're so effective. The book flirts with this but remains apolitical.
December 22, 2017
This is such a timely book, given utter craziness in which our U.S. government is currently embroiled. This book explains what's behind this foolishness. What we do about it is something else again. Best of luck to y'all. You're gonna need it before this is put to rest.
March 22, 2021
Knyga padeda suprasti žmonių polinkį tikėti sąmokslo teorijomis. Kartu pagalvoji, o kiek konspirologo ir confirmation bias yra pas mane.
April 12, 2021
I will use this in an upcoming continuing education event about conspiracy thinking. Highly recommend
January 12, 2023
Delighted I kicked off the year with this book. Absolutely fascinating and not just an insight into why we believe in conspiracies but why we believe anything at all.
October 27, 2025
DNF - got bored xx
June 9, 2020
The premise of the book is that we've all evolved to think conspiratorially to some degree due to our evolutionary psychological heuristics. If you are interested in the psychology behind why people believe conspiracy theories, then this is an excellent read.
April 5, 2023
A highly fascinating book about the psychology behind conspiracy theories. I read this for school.
December 3, 2015
http://www.themaineedge.com/style/con...
Conspiracy theories have been a source of fascination for centuries. Whenever anything big – or even not-so-big – happens, there are people who seek alternative explanations. These are the people who refuse to accept conventional wisdom, the people who believe that there is always more to the story than what we are told.
So what is it about conspiracy theories that makes them so attractive?
That’s the central question in Rob Brotherton’s “Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories.” The book aims to explore some of the reasons why people are so willing to dig deep and dig in to build connections where connections might not otherwise be.
The appeal of conspiracy theories is unmistakable – who wouldn’t want to feel like they are better informed than those around them? At the core of human nature is a desire for logical explanations for how things happen and why. Our inclination is to want things to make sense across the board.
However, reality is rarely that neat and tidy; there are always going to be pieces that don’t quite fit together in the way that our brains feel that they should. Brotherton goes in-depth to explain some of the psychological gymnastics our minds are willing to do in order to construct the reality we believe to be so; some will go so far as to latch onto the tiniest of outliers as a rationale to utterly abandon the narrative as generally accepted. In short, we focus on the evidence that “proves” our ideas and dismiss the rest as “proof” that the conspiracy is working as intended.
Thus are the seeds of conspiracy theory planted.
This isn’t about internet nutcases wearing tinfoil hats and yammering about the extradimensional reptilian creatures that rule the world (though the folks spreading those ideas – hello, David Icke! – are fascinating in their own right). The truth is that we’re all drawn to conspiracy theories in some way; it’s just how our brains work.
With “Suspicious Minds,” Brotherton delves into the history of conspiracy theories and discusses how that history impacts us. There’s no denying that these theories often have unforeseen consequences, but that doesn’t prevent people from being drawn to them. Whether we’re talking about the Illuminati or the Freemasons or the JFK assassination or 9/11 or any number of other grand “deceptions,” these theories tap into our psyches in meaningful ways, mining our foibles and fears and painting pictures that fit with our own basic biases and assumptions.
It’s tempting to dismiss conspiracy theories and their proponents as crazy, but the reality is that we’re all at least a little paranoid. Maybe you don’t believe with the fervor of the converted, but odds are that you’ve heard a theory or two in your time that gave you pause. Sure, you don’t REALLY think that there’s a massive conspiracy at work, but perhaps there’s a stray detail that makes you wonder if there might be more to the story. If that describes you, then congratulations – you’re a conspiracy theorist.
“Suspicious Minds” is a fascinating and readable dive into the deep end of conspiracy psychology. Bear in mind – Brotherton isn’t trying to prove any of these theories (or disprove them, for that matter). This book is about what leads your brain to make these sorts of theoretical connections and why they might become so very important.
And always remember – just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.
Conspiracy theories have been a source of fascination for centuries. Whenever anything big – or even not-so-big – happens, there are people who seek alternative explanations. These are the people who refuse to accept conventional wisdom, the people who believe that there is always more to the story than what we are told.
So what is it about conspiracy theories that makes them so attractive?
That’s the central question in Rob Brotherton’s “Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories.” The book aims to explore some of the reasons why people are so willing to dig deep and dig in to build connections where connections might not otherwise be.
The appeal of conspiracy theories is unmistakable – who wouldn’t want to feel like they are better informed than those around them? At the core of human nature is a desire for logical explanations for how things happen and why. Our inclination is to want things to make sense across the board.
However, reality is rarely that neat and tidy; there are always going to be pieces that don’t quite fit together in the way that our brains feel that they should. Brotherton goes in-depth to explain some of the psychological gymnastics our minds are willing to do in order to construct the reality we believe to be so; some will go so far as to latch onto the tiniest of outliers as a rationale to utterly abandon the narrative as generally accepted. In short, we focus on the evidence that “proves” our ideas and dismiss the rest as “proof” that the conspiracy is working as intended.
Thus are the seeds of conspiracy theory planted.
This isn’t about internet nutcases wearing tinfoil hats and yammering about the extradimensional reptilian creatures that rule the world (though the folks spreading those ideas – hello, David Icke! – are fascinating in their own right). The truth is that we’re all drawn to conspiracy theories in some way; it’s just how our brains work.
With “Suspicious Minds,” Brotherton delves into the history of conspiracy theories and discusses how that history impacts us. There’s no denying that these theories often have unforeseen consequences, but that doesn’t prevent people from being drawn to them. Whether we’re talking about the Illuminati or the Freemasons or the JFK assassination or 9/11 or any number of other grand “deceptions,” these theories tap into our psyches in meaningful ways, mining our foibles and fears and painting pictures that fit with our own basic biases and assumptions.
It’s tempting to dismiss conspiracy theories and their proponents as crazy, but the reality is that we’re all at least a little paranoid. Maybe you don’t believe with the fervor of the converted, but odds are that you’ve heard a theory or two in your time that gave you pause. Sure, you don’t REALLY think that there’s a massive conspiracy at work, but perhaps there’s a stray detail that makes you wonder if there might be more to the story. If that describes you, then congratulations – you’re a conspiracy theorist.
“Suspicious Minds” is a fascinating and readable dive into the deep end of conspiracy psychology. Bear in mind – Brotherton isn’t trying to prove any of these theories (or disprove them, for that matter). This book is about what leads your brain to make these sorts of theoretical connections and why they might become so very important.
And always remember – just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 191 reviews