How Conspiracy Theories Take Hold

Radical scepticism is a philosophical view that questions whether we can have any genuine knowledge about the world around us at all. Professor Genia Schönbaumsfeld argues that these radical sceptical scenarios and global conspiracy theories are importantly alike.

Both are essentially invulnerable to any potential counterevidence: everything and nothing is compatible with what these theories assert. Radical sceptical scenarios and global conspiracy theories also face the self-undermining problem: as soon as global unreliability is posited, the ensuing radical doubt swallows its children – the coherence of the sceptic’s proposal, or the conspiracy theorist’s preferred conspiracy.

What can these parallels tell us?

Conspiracy theories often explain world events as the outcome of secret plots by a powerful elite which represent a danger to our health, wellbeing or liberty. But what is the appeal of explanations which make the world appear more threatening compared to mainstream explanations?

Morbid curiosity described the tendency to seek out information about potential threats and is associated with interest in media which focuses on potential dangers, such as horror films or true crime. Can morbid curiosity lead people to seek out more the threatening explanations of world events provided by conspiracy theories?

In three studies testing links between morbid curiosity and conspiracy theories, people who rated higher in morbid curiosity showed higher general belief in conspiracy theories, a higher perception of threat in conspiratorial explanations of events, and a greater interest in learning more about conspiratorial explanations of events, compared to mainstream explanations. Of the sub-types of morbid curiosity, curiosity about the minds of dangerous people was consistently the strongest predictor of conspiracy theory belief and interest, suggesting a drive to learn more about the motivations of dangerous ‘others’ is key to the appeal of conspiracy theories.