Where We Go One, We Go All:How To Talk To Conspiracy Believers?

Have you ever described people who hold different opinions to you as 'sheeple'? If so, you're probably a moron. Whether or not you believe in conspiracy theories. Whether or not you believe the moon landings were faked, whether or not you believe 9/11 was an inside job. whether or not you think Covid was a hoax (or somehow caused by 5G), and whether or not you believe Donald Trump really won the US election of 2020.

If you believe all, or any of, those things as well you're not just a moron, you're a dangerously deluded moron. But if I was to meet someone who believed all, or any, of those things and I told them I thought they were a moron it seems that would not only not change their mind, it would more than likely make them double down on their beliefs. Most likely, they would think I was moron and a pompous one to boot.

So how do you speak to people who believe in obviously, and easily, discredited conspiracy theories? Do you, as was once suggested when dealing with people suffering from religion, put them on the metaphorical 'children's table' and talk to them as if they're small infants who still believe in fairies and Father Christmas?

That doesn't seem like it'd work either. The frustrating thing is almost every strategy you might care to try seems completely futile. That's the thing with conspiracy theories. Any attempt to disprove, or discredit, them simply becomes more proof of the conspiracy itself and we become the 'sheeple' in the eyes of those that belief the theories.

Ulrike Schiesser was with Skeptics in the Pub - Online last night to deliver a talk, Building Bridges:How To Talk To Conspiracy Believers, about just this subject and if it was slightly dry and, at times, rambling (Schiesser was, it should be noted, speaking in her second language) it was nonetheless still interesting.

Ulrike works in Austria for The Federal Office for Cult Affairs. An institution I'd not heard of before but one that was set up back in 1998 to give impartial information about cults, alternative religious movements, and various esoteric groups that may (or may not) be peddling misinformation. It seems admirable that the Austrian government should have such a body.

People often ask why do people believe obviously irrational things and how can that be stopped. You'd like to think that facts and logic would win the argument but that has been proved, time and time again, not to be the case. In reality, "believers" are not impressed with facts and logic. Often they come with 'alternative facts' (for which read - lies). Usually they're unimpressed with any attempt at debunking and it is not uncommon for them to aggressively assert that they are right and you are wrong.

With an absolute certainty they cannot reasonably have. That's because people are not logical in the way we build our belief systems and, instead, we are hugely influenced by emotion and regularly make decisions based on the social group we're in. 

Conspiracy theorists often see traditional family values and norms threatened by modernity and start to see themselves as saviours of the world. Online especially, it's easy for them to connect with others who share their misguided beliefs and groups are formed. As their beliefs move them away from their real family and friends, they become part of a new community. It's no coincidence that the QAnon motto is "where we go one, we go all".

Feel the power of positive reinforcement after a few retweets and likes. One of the best ways to play on people's heartstrings is, of course, the use of children - and conspiracy theorists have not been slow to get in on this. If the children are in danger (be that from evil vaccinations or from shady paedophile rings consisting of politicians you don't like which only Donald Trump has the power to stop) all the better.

It gets people's attention, it rouses emotion, and, often, it can end up in violence. It's so much easier to justify violence when you've been tricked into thinking you're carrying out violent acts to save the children.

Another popular trick used to coax people into conspiracy theory belief is to make people who may be of average, or low, intelligence feel they are clever. Make them they feel they know something others don't. Patterns are good for these (the human brain loves patterns) and it doesn't matter how ludicrous and convoluted they are. Many of them don't make sense. Ulrike showed us images of words relating to Covid that people had assigned numbers to and then added, subtracted, multiplied, and divided them until they finally got a result that included a 666 in the answer.

Thereby proving what? That Satan is responsible for Covid. Which you've already said is a hoax anyway. So the belief here is that someone who genuinely doesn't exist (Satan ) is the creator of a plague that does exist but you say doesn't exist. Conspiracy theories don't need to make sense. Often it's best if they don't because the believer can spend more time arguing about it which is one of the main points. To waste people's time and leave them feeling demotivated to even debate it any further.

Over the years, conspiracy theorists have been able to prove the existence (and malign influence) of the Illuminati because this shady, and all powerful, organisation chose, for some unstated reason, to hide clues in Goofy cartoons and episodes of Spongebob Squarepants. Some have even posited the existence of triangular foodstuffs like Toblerone and Dairylea cheese triangles is a sign from the Illuminati. Let's not even start on The Matrix.

So back to the question posed in the title of the talk. How do you change someone's mind? The short answer - not easily! A good start, suggested Ulrike - and I am inclined to agree, is to ask yourself when was the last time you changed your mind as regards a deep fundamental attitude? For example, on matters of religion or politics.

For me, it's been a while. But for those of you who have, what convinced you to change? Which people and which experiences inspired you and how long did it take? We often talk about changing other's minds but less so our own. If we find it so hard to change our own minds why do we expect others to change their minds so readily?

Studies show that people change their minds on these big issues for a relatively small number of reasons. There could have been an important, and sobering, personal event that has caused them to make significant changes, they may have reached a tolerance limit or lost faith in a peer group (an example would be being an anti-vaxxer but deciding that assaulting doctors or nurses is a step too far), or they may have a new focus in life. A new job, a new partner, a new child or even new, and positive, role models to look up to.

But, often, these changes are glacially slow. People are sometimes ashamed to admit they've been so wrong and that's why, Ulrike proposed, it's best to make a few basic considerations when we getting into debate with conspiracy theorists:-

Be an explorer and not a preacher, be friendly, try to discuss and not to argue, search for common ground, and aim to create small cracks in world views. Also to accept that you won't see results immediately.

But while giving respect, demand it for yourself too. In cases of aggression you're fully entitled to withdraw from the debate. Show solidarity with victims of hate messages and certainly don't join pile ons when people are already being abused. Intervene when boundaries are violated and never ever feed the trolls.

These, of course, are aspirations and we'll all fall short of them on occasions. In most things in the world, none of us are experts so, in direct contravention of Michael Gove, we have to trust experts. When discussing people's beliefs don't just ask about content, ask about sources and ask people if they don't trust experts then who DO they trust? 

If they don't trust a fully qualified medical expert then why do they trust a complete stranger on the Internet? If they don't trust anybody then doesn't that make their life intolerably miserable? We obvioulsy can't trust some people, we certainly can't trust the current government - even Rod Stewart's finally realised that, but we must have more faith and trust in each other. As ever, that was the overriding message that came through in this talk.

Thanks to Ulrike Schiesser for delivering it, thanks to Gerard Sorko for compering, and thanks to Skeptics in the Pub - Online for another diverting Thursday evening.