Levels of thinking for humanity
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (14)
sorted by:
This is the levels of thinking for humanity, through a conspiracy lens. Inspired by the conspiracy pyramid and iceberg memes. Generally speaking, the lower you go, the higher the level of thinking is required to come to that conclusion or research that subject.
However keep in mind that just because something is lower, that doesn't mean I necessarily think it is true. It is possible that someone who is on a higher level of thinking may come to a false conclusion. There are also true statements that are higher up, however these truths are very obvious and don't require a high level of thinking to realize.
This is obviously based on my own perspective, however I have not explicitly stated which things I think are true and which are false. Although you can probably figure it out with some logic and deductive reasoning. Not to mention my post history if you want to go down that road. These are the levels of thought from my perspective as a conspiracy theorist, that is all. Hope this explanation made sense, enjoy!
This is a great list. You could add fomenkos alternative timeline to that though i guess the “ all history is fake” thing covers it
A recent one that is kinda cool is the mudflood and christs millenial kingdom and the most recent civilization reset, worlds fairs etc
I bet you could zoom out and add more topics to it. Could make an excellent poster,
Thanks. This was removed on R/conspiracy...I think I know why. I've never heard of fomenkos but I have heard about Tartaria which I was hinting at. Not sure what the connection to Christ is. If there was a reset these same people gave us our religions, so I don't know why you would believe in it.
I agree with the tiered approach to classifying conspiracy theories. I had a similar thought a while ago. But my reasoning was different: You could classify conspiracy theories on the basis of how much you are willing to believe.
For example, someone who requires rigorous evidence in order to believe something would only believe a very few things (eg: the most extreme being a mathematician within his field of study). On the bottom, you'd have people willing to believe things without a shred of evidence. Conspiracy theorists tend towards the latter - I don't mean that in a bad way. They tend to be intuitive, and their intuition fills the gaps where data is missing. If we all waited for rigorous evidence, we'd all be asleep concerning the NWO takeover attempt.