Initial Reaction: Conspiracy Theories

Initial Reaction: Conspiracy Theories

Introduction

Critical thinking is the skill of examining and studying thought processes to make them better. It is autonomous, resolute, purposeful, and determined. It needs meticulous principles of perfection and respect in using it (Richard and Elder 9). Faith in conspiracy theories is the acknowledgment of intentional forces to entities that are more presumably to be unexpected or unplanned, for that reason, it is the needless presumption of conspiracy when other reasons are more likely to happen (Darwin et al. 2). This paper will analyze the reasons why critical thinking academicians use conspiracy theories as cases and why most critical thinking academicians don’t accept a majority of the conspiracy theories as the best explanations.      

Why Critical Thinking Academicians use Conspiracy Theories in Class

It is common for critical thinking academicians to use conspiracy theories as models of inadequate critical thinking because the conspiracy theories don’t come from reliable sources, aren’t supported by facts and evidence, and maybe meant to inflame, or entertain. Professors ask their students to stop and critically analyze information before liking or sharing posts or articles in the social media whose content is conspiracy theories. Not every article is worth sharing. Critical thinking is crucial in limiting the spread and harmful effects of conspiracy theories (Kosin and Kenneth n.p.).

Abductive Inferences, Conspiracy Theories and the Criteria of Adequacy

In abductive inferences, the conclusions don’t adhere to the premises. For example, if John and Doe had a misunderstanding that made them end their friendship and then later someone sees them jogging together, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they are friends again. Furthermore, we don’t have reliable statistical data about friendships, misunderstandings, and jogging that can help one to come up with that conclusion with accuracy. Most conspiracy theories are a risk to our societal well-being since they fail the criteria of adequacy (Douven, n.p.).     

Why Does A Majority of Critical Thinking Academicians Reject Conspiracy Theories?

Most professors don’t accept a majority of the conspiracy theories as reliable explanations, because they are founded on distrust and suspicion of existing institutions and processes. Instead, these professors encourage their learners to grow their critical thinking abilities as they debunk and examine conspiracy theories. This method enables students to realize that most theories are not based on facts. Most conspiracy theories contain a group of people who conduct their activities in secret to change institutions or hide the truth without considering the common good.

Conclusion

This paper analyzed the reasons why critical thinking academicians utilize conspiracy theories as models, and why most critical thinking professors don’t accept a majority of the conspiracy theories as the best explanations. Conspiracy theories want us to believe that nothing happens randomly, there is a hidden reason for everything that happens, all things are linked in a hidden manner, and every fact should be critically examined, the facts that don’t conform to the thesis should be rejected. To reduce the risk of students becoming vulnerable to conspiracy theories, students should be taught analytical skills and how to research the same information from different sources.  

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *