Abstract
Napolitano (The epistemology of fake news, Oxford University Press, 2021) argues that the Minimalist Account of conspiracy theories—i.e., which defines conspiracy theories as explanations, or theories, about conspiracies—should be rejected. Instead, she proposes to define conspiracy theories as a certain kind of belief—i.e., an evidentially self-insulated belief in a conspiracy. Napolitano argues that her account should be favored over the Minimalist Account based on two considerations: ordinary language intuitions and theoretical fruitfulness. I show how Napolitano’s account fails its own purposes with respect to these two considerations and so should not be favored over the Minimalist Account. Furthermore, I propose that the Minimalist Account is the best conception of ‘conspiracy theory’ if we share Napolitano’s goal of advancing the understanding of conspiracy theories.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2105-2119 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Erkenntnis |
| Volume | 89 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| Early online date | 20 Sept 2022 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - Jun 2024 |
Funding
Thanks to M R. X. Dentith, René van Woudenberg, and Jeroen de Ridder, as well as the members of the CTTSC, for their helpful comments and interesting discussions on some of the arguments in this paper. This work was produced within a Ph.D. position on the Social Epistemology of Conspiracy Theories, affiliated with the Extreme Beliefs (ERC Grant) project at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
| Funders |
|---|
| CTTSC |
| European Research Council |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Conspiracy Theories are Not Beliefs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver