Denying the Existence of Denialism

Some clever dicks are trying to get together a body of work which attempts to degradingly categorize people who have questions over so called 'established truths' and 'actuality' as governed and defined by so called 'scholarly' and 'reputable' 'experts'.

They're trying to say that those who dispute official stories such as the lunar landings are 'denialists' , trying to tar anybody who questions so called academic professionals with a newly wetted brush , sticking a label on them worse than 'conspiracy theorist .' They're trying to say that it's really denialists who come up with conspiracy theories , and other nefarious logical fallacies .

They want to accuse you of being in same cliff bound bus as holocaust deniers , climate change deniers , aids deniers , flat earthers and evolution deniers , and even, the cheek of it, people who believe GM foods are unsafe !

Nowadays , you're not a skeptic , you dont provide a justified critique unless you're

Tara Smith of the University of Iowa also stated that moving goalposts, conspiracy theories, and cherry-picking evidence are general characteristics of denialist arguments, but went on to note that these groups spend the "majority of their efforts critiquing the mainstream theory" in an apparent belief that if they manage to discredit the mainstream view, their own "unproven ideas will fill the void".[16]

An apparent belief ? So she's making it up as she goes along ! Where've we heard that before ?

So , here's the response , there's no such thing as denialism , just the healthy growing skepticism of the learning morass , and the only place there's a need for course of action like inventing denialism to call perfectly healthy questioning people denialists is in these places of 'higher learning' which contain these people we used to see as experts . And in the halls of media vested interests and desperate plastering of ugly walls

The trend the people of the internets are taking is towards' questionalism ' , as over against the 'statementism' of years gone by . They no longer need to to be told . They've got research tools, and ultiple sources and they use them to answer questions , crucially making their own mind up .

These people trying to create a false problem called denialism cite that as being a problem , asking how that people who make their own minds up can be stopped from doing so .
Off the top shelf this all might be because eventually people will begin to question the age old 'commandism' over our community by refuting it with exclamationalism !
It all might make soup for some of us to stick something affirmativistic up inside their noses ! So there you go , denialism doesnt exist , except in the minds of the saddest trolls , and these dubious folk calling themselves their various titles will try to tell you it does .

Further reading : Denialism: what drives people to reject the truth ?

wiki: denialism

How freakin' elitist is that?!

Oh, you can only ever bother to think and question for yourself if you have ascended to the highest heights of the academic ivory towers to mingle with us. For everyone else, you must forever shutter the doors of your mind. It is unworthy to have anything resembling a thought other than that which we choose to put inside it.

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

Conspiracy theory encompasses everything from logical questioning of facts based in reality to the absurd, such as flat Earth, Reptilians and we never landed on the Moon.

Seems to me you are trying to corral it all into a nice little box, just as they are doing?

The catalyst for the idea conspiracy theorists are nuts is in fact things the conspiracy community does to itself. Even among the conspiracy community some things are considered so insane as to piss off people who consider themselves conspiracy theorists.

Look at how serious interest in UFO's and the possibility of alien life on other worlds, has been made a joke. I think to change thinking about what conspiracy theorists are requires some introspection and an admission not all conspiracy theory is the product of rational minds. It's hard to blame anyone for looking at it the way they do. The wounds are self inflicted.

How is that different than people here claiming a conspiracy for every conceivable event? From Chemtrails to the flat earth we are expected to entertain the most bizarre theories imaginable. Scientists are NEVER right. Government and companies can do NO right--ever. And every cockamamie theory and idea is expected to be received with sober acceptance because they, you know, "refute the mainstream." IMO the crap that is sown here on ATS vastly exceeds the crap sown by science.

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

Making the Middle Ages Great Again.

MMAGA.

Burn witch.

a reply to: ketsuko

You're dead right . They're also trying to claim the mainstream , that mainstream opinion is always correct . That's people in denial, when the real mainstream which is us know that stupid little media outlets create regular steaming piles of horse poo .

They wont get to define or claim the " mainstream " much longer when it's just been recognisably redefined

a reply to: Blaine91555

And the realization that even as insane as some seem, the questioning mind can sometimes be right even once or twice a day and nuts the rest of the time.

As crazy and abrasive as he is, Alex Jones does sometimes have a point.

As annoying and abrasive as he is, even as careful as he is to keep inside the box, Bill Maher can have a point too on occasion.

You can find things that make you think everywhere you look. And sometimes, the truth is crazy ... about as often as Alex Jones is right which is to say, not very often at all.

originally posted by: DoctorBluechip
a reply to: ketsuko

You're dead right . They're also trying to claim the mainstream , that mainstream opinion is always correct . That's people in denial, when the real mainstream which is us know that stupid little media outlets create regular steaming piles of horse poo .

They wont get to define or claim the " mainstream " much longer when it's just been recognisably redefined

And the mainstream press is dumb by design. I know. They aim for a 5th grade or lower level in what they put out so that it's accessible by everyone or as many as possible. That doesn't leave much room for depth or explanation or even nuance.

a reply to: ketsuko

Conspiracy theory can do harm and Jones is an excellent example of a case where it does do harm. He may be all politics all the time now, but lets not forget the lies about community coffins, train cars for FEMA to round us all up and the never did exist FEMA camps he used to scare people out of their money.

In fact a lot of it now is about following the money. Natural News, InfoWars and ...................... It gives serious people a black eye and makes rational people loath to even entertain conspiracy theories put forth by rational minds.

The conspiracy world has a dark side to it, that deserves to be called out for the phony garbage it is.

They aim for a 5th grade or lower level in what they put out so that it's accessible by everyone

Yeah that's about the level that they've aimed this attempt to explain the nonexistent denialism at ; oddly enough about the same level of thick as Alex Jones exudes

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

From your link:

Empathy with denialists is not easy, but it is essential.

I feel you DoctorBluechip

______________________

The trend the people of the internets are taking is towards' questionalism ' , as over against the 'statementism' of years gone by . They no longer need to to be told . They've got research tools, and ultiple sources and they use them to answer questions , crucially making their own mind up .

They no longer need to be told - because the internet tells them ?

Facts are now a choice? :-)

Cool

I'm experiencing some questionalism right now

a reply to: Blaine91555

I never claimed he didn't. It's just an example of the broken clock, and Jones is very broken. One can even find the occasional jumping off point at BIN even though I haven't been by there for some entertainment in quite some time.

Skepticism is the key for all of it. There's always more, but you have to be willing to look.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: ketsuko

Conspiracy theory can do harm and Jones is an excellent example of a case where it does do harm.

But what if he did that on purpose?

a reply to: BrianFlanders

I think the OP meant for a more general discussion, so we probably should not drift this into a conversation only about Jones.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: BrianFlanders

I think the OP meant for a more general discussion, so we probably should not drift this into a conversation only about Jones.

No intention of doing so but Jones was mentioned and I think it is relevant when people are using that as an example as to why questioning the establishment is dangerous. What if Jones deliberately sabotaged the conspiracy theory crowd?

Just like mama always told me....

"Because I said so, that's why!"

A2D

a reply to: ketsuko

I don't think we find truth by using those who tell us what to think as resources. Real conspiracy is rooted out through hard work and searching in unlikely, but mainstream places.

We don't see much of that anymore.

A genuine search down the rabbit hole is tedious and boring and few do that, including me.

Looking from the outside in, it's not hard to see why many see us as loons. Everything is a false flag, Reptilians are among us, every third rock on Mars is proof of life and on and on and on.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Facts are now a choice? :-)

Facts are now selectable , there's a difference .

Yes it was meant as a get the ball rolling op .

I don't think it's a matter of denial versus acceptance. I see it as more of a difference in philosophies. On one hand you have strict empiricism, which focuses heavily on consensus to verify the reality of a particular thing. In some ways it attempts to exclude the observer from the process, apparently with the notion that while one person can be see or hear crazy things that couldn't be real, it's far less likely that two or twenty people will experience that same crazy thing, so that makes the thing more "real."

Around these parts, though, we give a little bit of weight to the notion that it's essentially impossible to eliminate the observer from the event of them experiencing something, and that reality exists on a kind of spectrum and there's no way to objectively eliminate the observer from the process as either a generator of or witness to some experience that does not fall within a strictly materialist, empirical framework.

Materialism is the easiest position to argue, since a proponent can hold up various examples of agreed-upon reality and if it doesn't fit the parameters, it can be dismissed as a misinterpretation or hoax. Along with being easy, it's also satisfying to people who want a solid yes or no answer so they can categorize the thing/experience and feel that existence really is grounded and secure. In this forum, if you come at everything as a skeptic, you're going to be "right" most of the time.

That's the way I usually like to play it. However, I sometimes feel that there are strange things in the world, and how our minds interact with reality is not as cut and dried as it seems. I suspect that real reality is a lot more complex than our little monkey brains can parse out, and that pure materialism is more there to keep us calm and from going insane in the actual complex crush of existential chaos.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

I don't think he cares that much. He's a confidence man, a literal snake oil salesman. I don't even see him as a member of the conspiracy community, he's instead a parasite. Sadly there are many and the internet has greatly amplified their voices.

Instead of worrying about how others view us, we look inward IMO.