Conspiracies require faith?

[tupac]

Do some peoples personalities make them more inclined to be conspiracy theorists regardless if there is any actual evidence for their beliefs? In some cases people will go as far as manufacturing evidence and twisting facts to support their theories but why? It reminds me of how some religious people act when science throws a curve ball at their belief. The only differences between the 2 groups are George Orwells 1984 is their bible and Alex Jones is their Messiah.

[iomar]

Faith & logic are not opposed as many people think. Faith, infact, is entirely logical and exercised by many who dismiss it as illogical. 

For example, it is logical to assume that somewhere in the vastness of space that there exists an "earth like" planet capable of sustaining human life. 

Belief in the existence of such a planet, even though we cannot prove its existence yet, does not mean that it does not exist.  It is a logical conclusion.

So even though we cannot prove or disprove its existence , we go looking for evidence of its existence because we believe it must exist.......sounds like faith to me.

That said, faith, like many things can be misplaced and abused.

[roche]

You're absolutely correct - I had a conversation with my dad at Xmas about the illuminati - and he was forced all the way back to almost the point where he said "I have faith that it is true" - his opinion was unsupported by evidence. He has made the same mistake that those of faith do - they see a pattern in the universe and stick a creators face where he does not belong - my dad saw a pattern and stuck the illuminati's face on it.

It LOOKS like their are people in control of the world - it LOOKS like someone runs the universe - both are patterns that the brain sees and much like seeing faces on things or Jesus in a potato - it assumes there must be a pattern maker - which in both cases there is not. The universe has laws - and the world economics is also subject to rules that have emergent patterns that fools see as the results of pattern makers - when it is really just laws and rules.

So yes they are the same- requiring faith and not evidence.

[oz]

Is it faith that determines if a conspiracy has taken place? You could make a counter-argument that people who dismiss conspiracy theories despite evidence to the contrary (or even the allowance of such) are equally deficient.

You first have to understand what underlies a 'belief' in conspiracy theories in the first place: they actually do happen. Therefore, an excess belief in conspiracy theories (to a certain extent) is absolutely necessary and healthy, if for no other reason than an excess of doubt allows more to conspiracies to occur. You can not find what you are not looking for.

Having said that, what many 'crack-pots' fail to realize is that without a firm grasp of the boring and technical aspects, conspiracy theories can't occur either. A conspiracy theory revolving around secret doping experiments requires actual drugs produced by actual people conveyed in actual ways, done in actual facilities in actual increments of time. Simply believing secret drug experiments are taking place without understanding how the technical aspects (and consequences) confirm or deny your beliefs means you will believe anything.

Think of it as the difference between wanting to be a doctor and going to medical school and being certified by the medical profession. Crack-pots just start calling themselves Dr's because they like the respect it confers, while actual doctors go through all the drudgery needed to actually know why they can call themselves a Doctor. Crack-pots always fit the conspiracy to fit their feelings, not the other way around. It's one thing to believe in aliens, it's another to believe in aliens because you can't remember where you put your keys or your can jumped when you got out of bed in the morning. Only false conspiracies (and their theorists) rely on absolute faith