| Username |
Post |
| Paschim |
Posted
on 24-Mar-03 07:10 PM
Given our mindboggling national ability to concoct, nurture, and sustain conspiracy theories -- from the Royal Massacre to Baburam Bhattarai's beard -- here's an insightful piece on human psychology from the latest issue of The Economist.
------------
Psychology
Who shot the president?
Mar 20th 2003
From The Economist print edition
A possible explanation for conspiracy theories.
ACCORDING to many otherwise rational people, the moon landings were faked. They point to signs of a flag fluttering in the wind in one of the photographs. It has even been suggested that the space shuttle Columbia was deliberately destroyed to prevent the launch of a probe that would prove that people never landed there. But why bother visiting the moon when there are already aliens living on Earth? The website of a group called Adult Children of Alien Abducteesthe internet's leading exoterran-DNA support group estimates that the exoterran community is nearly 4% of Earth's life forms .
Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, Patrick Leman of Royal Holloway, a college of the University of London, has presented the results of his research into conspiracy theories to the annual meeting of the British Psychological Society, which was held last week in Bournemouth. He thinks the reason people believe in conspiracy theories is that humans have an innate tendency to try to link major events with major causes.
To test this idea Dr Leman presented 64 students with clippings of articles that looked as though they had been taken from a newspaper. In fact, the articles had been made up. They were about the president of a fictional country, and they came in four versions, of which each student saw but one. In the first version, the president was shot and killed. In the second, he was shot but survived. In the third, the shot missed, but he died shortly afterwards from an unrelated cause. In the fourth, the shot missed and he lived. The students were asked to rate the likely truth of six statements on the subject of whether the assassin was a gunman acting alone, or whether there was a conspiracy at work. They were also asked to rate the accuracy of the facts in the article.
Some of the results were unsurprising. For example, subjects with high general levels of belief in conspiracy theories were much more doubting of the facts in the articles. That fits with what is already knownthat people who like conspiracy theories tend to bat away any evidence that contradicts their point of view.
More surprisingly, Dr Leman found that if the fictional president died after the shooting, readers were much more likely to believe that the gunman was part of a conspiracy. This was true even though the other facts in the story were unchanged, and even if the death was due to an unrelated cause, such as a heart attack. This curious observation is the basis of Dr Leman's hypothesis that there is some underlying process in human psychology that assumes that the bigger the effect is, the bigger the cause must have been.
Which leaves the question of who really did shoot the president? Zoran Djindjic of Serbia (actually that country's prime minister, not its president) was gunned down in Belgrade on March 12th. The Serbian government says it believes the assassination was arranged by a criminal group of underworld gangsters linked to allies of the former president, Slobodan Milosevic. That sounds pretty conspiratorial. But really keen conspiracy theorists are advised to consider the possibility that it was, in fact, all down to a gunman on a grassy knoll.
http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1648616
|
| goredai |
Posted
on 24-Mar-03 09:15 PM
I was really excited thinking someone shot Gyanendra when I saw the headline. Anyway, the day is coming closer. Bastard sold half of country's precious statues and considers himself Vishnu's avatar. Anyone has wondered how these MF Ranas and Shahs mangaged to control nepal being one of the least in number. We always blame Bahuns for every misery we have in our country. But the real culprits are these Bausabs. They are the ruling class for last two centuries and why do we blame only bahuns. They are the most uneducated class being provided all the oppertunities. They take away most of the resources while bahuns and chetris share small crums left behind. I wonder how Maobadi movement started to throw monarchy........very hard to figure out this question.
Sticking to the thread, very interesting. Same story with our palace massacre. People do not want to admit that Dipendra killed everyone because there is no conspiracy to the story. If Gyanendra is blamed for the killing then the story is much more exciting because there is conspiracy behind it. Who ever killed, I'm happy that those MF died the death they deserve.
|
| MainBatti |
Posted
on 24-Mar-03 09:17 PM
Screw you, Paschim. :) I thought this article was about the Royal Massacre in Nepal and clicked on the thread in one breath only to discover that it was not. :)
Once Saptaahik Bimarsa published a headline that said "Deubaa Maale maa". Many thought Deuba was switching to UML from NC. Guess what, he was actually paying a visit to Maa Le--the capital of Maldives. Did you intend to use the same trick? Or is it my conspiracy theory?
Interesting piece nonetheless. In tenth class, my English teacher used to say there were two mysteries that were not solved yet: the mystery of the Mary Celeste (I think it was just a story; my teacher had too much faith in what was printed) and the murder of JFKennedy. I heard there is a professor at Kennedy School of Public Affairs (or is it policy?) who does not mind spending a whole semester talking about JFK murder. Story goes--once during a politics class, a student asked him, "Professor, could you tell a little about JFK murder?", and the students had a hard time bringing him back to track. Can you verify this, please?
Bhawadiye,
"Agultaale Haaneko Kukur"
MainBatti, March 24 2003.
|
| Arnico |
Posted
on 24-Mar-03 09:59 PM
I agree with Mainbatti and goredai that the thread title is misleading... thought had some news from Kathmandu...
Meanwhile... I am not so sure about dismissing conspiracy theories just because there is a likelihood that we are attracted to them. I think the way to judge theories about who commited a murder is to consider whether they are PLAUSIBLE given the full range of evidence available. As long as there is insufficient evidence, the lone gunman theory and the consipiracy theory (for example) both remain plausible.... however, if evidence emerges that would make one theory implausible (for example, if the same gunman would have had to be in 2 places at once).... THEN that theory can be dismissed....
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 25-Mar-03 01:52 AM
:)
Keta-ho, raja maarne kuro ta bhayankar serious po ta! Tyesto sajilo bha bhaye, asti samma ahile ka naya raja lai purano raja mareko ("regicide") aarop laune BRB ra unka challa haru aajkal sajilai "Shree 5 Maharajdhiraj" ma kasari sarthe? Gajjab chha kraanti-rupi raktim naatak.
Mainbatti, I am not aware of there being a JFK-murder-fanatic at the Kennedy School of Government, but we can check with Nuru Lama who's attending that school now. I do know though they have an impressive wing of experts on international affairs, many specializing in distinct presidential terms. On the Kennedy tenure itself, Graham Allison's book, "Essence of Decision" on the Cuban missile crisis is considered some sort of a classic, for example.
|
| DWI |
Posted
on 25-Mar-03 12:09 PM
Paschim le jhukkayera hasayo.
I think I should title "I shot the sheriff" and post Bob Marley's lyrics.
Speaking about JFK, did anybody saw the new documentary on a new theory about his murder. It was pretty satisfying and thoroughly analyzed. The end conclusion was that the shot came from a main-hole right ahead of the JFK car, not from the Bush. I forgot who the killer was the evidences gathered and a surgical study supported the theory.
|
| DWI |
Posted
on 25-Mar-03 12:10 PM
main-hole=manhole
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 25-Mar-03 06:13 PM
Paschim,
Spent time as a visiting Journalist in "National Enquirer"? Their headlines used to shock me when I first saw them.
|
