We live in conspiratorial times. Deeply sinister motives appear to be at work everywhere beneath
the surface. No one, however high their reputation, is entirely beyond suspicion. Every institution,
even the most venerable, may be at it. Whatever may publically be said, something a whole
lot ghastlier is probably going on in private. Taking anything on good faith seems a sure
route to naivety and disillusion. It’s never been a more tempting moment to become a conspiracy
theorist. But the real choice isn’t between naivety on the one hand and conspiracy theory
on the other. The task is to find our way to an often-elusive third option: intelligent
scepticism. Both the intelligent sceptic and the conspiracy theorist start from the very
same place: with an awareness that things may well not be what they seem, and that what
is widely believed may be patently false. This is – in itself – no sign of madness
or delusion. It’s the basis of some of humanity’s greatest discoveries and insights. To claim
that the earth orbits the sun would have sounded the height of delusion in 1473. It would have
sounded no less peculiar to maintain, in the late 1950s, that the UK security services
were largely in the hands of a group of people working for the Soviet Union. A hypothesis
can be thoroughly outlandish, very unpopular – and still correct. What separates the
conspiracy theorist from the intelligent sceptic is not the possession of some odd-sounding
hypotheses; it’s what they then go on to do with these hypotheses. Here are some of
the key differences: - Evidence Intelligent sceptics know that hypotheses cannot be sustained
indefinitely without evidence. They can be trialled for a time, but eventually have to
be positively backed up by concrete proof or else graciously and uncomplainingly abandoned.
- The Burden of Proof Intelligent sceptics know that the burden of proving a hypothesis
must invariably fall on them, as the challengers to the status quo, and not on the upholders
of the established ideology. They accept that it is their duty to show that ghosts really
do exist; and not the responsibility of everyone else to prove that they don’t.
Upholding quarrelsome hypotheses delivers some hugely redemptive
emotional pleasures. One often feels empowered and superior to all those who still blindly
trust in the status quo. They, the idiots, may well think the rocket went to the moon;
we know the whole thing was filmed in a downtown studio. Our job may not be so significant
nor our house very grand, but we – unlike the stuck-up professors – know what really
happened to the Fuhrer after the war. Intelligent sceptics certainly know how nice it would
be if they were proved right; but they can bear the humiliation of turning out to be
miserably wrong. It would of course be deeply emotionally convenient if they really were
to discover the secrets of cheap nuclear fission, if the elderly, rich man was in truth a sexual
predator or if climate change did turn out to be a hoax. But they are also wise enough
never to let their wishes overpower the more stubborn and unyielding claims of reality.
- Basic Trust The conspiracy theorist sees skullduggery everywhere; their default position
is that everyone must be a liar and that simply everything is a cover up. Their fear of being
taken for a dupe is so great, there can be no glimmer of trust. For their part, the intelligent
sceptic proceeds through the world with an attitude of basic credence and initial benevolence.
They dare to take things at face value, confident in their power to alter their views – perhaps
quite quickly – in a much darker direction were the facts to demand it. They are internally
strong enough to take a chance to believe in the goodness and truthfulness of strangers.
Conspiracy theory is never really a problem of intelligence. It’s an emotional wound
that overpowers the higher faculties of the mind – and is therefore best treated not
with a barrage of countervailing facts, but with reassurance, kindness and love, for it’s
here that the problem invariably began. The choice we face isn’t between naive credulity
and conspiracy theory. By understanding the fragility of our psyches, we have the option
of navigating our perilous times with a judicious mixture of doubt and trust.