Abstract

Despite widespread concern over the alleged rise of conspiracy theories, scholars continue to disagree whether it is possible to distinguish specific kinds of conspiracist accounts that can justifiably be denounced as objectionable. In this article, we review scholarship from multiple disciplines to develop a composite definition of “conspiracy theories proper” (CTP) that violate fundamental norms of democratic discourse. Besides referring to grand conspiracies to account for social phenomena, we argue, such conspiracy theories: (a) assume conspirators’ pervasive control over events and information, (b) construct dissent as a Manichean binary, and (c) employ an elusive, dogmatic epistemology. We discuss the operational potential and limitations of our definition using news user talkbacks on the U.S., British and German online editions of Russia Today (RT), a popular platform among proponents of out-of-mainstream political views. Identifying key operational challenges in the classification of natural discourse, we sketch avenues toward a more rigorous study of contentious political talk.

中文翻译：

---

被谎言蒙蔽了？建立阴谋理论的综合定义

摘要

尽管人们普遍担心阴谋理论的兴起，但学者们仍然不同意是否有可能区分出可以合理地谴责为反对的具体阴谋论。在本文中，我们回顾了来自多个学科的学术研究，以开发出“适当的阴谋论”（CTP）的综合定义，这些定义违反了民主话语的基本规范。我们认为，除了指称大阴谋来解释社会现象外，这些阴谋理论还包括：（a）假定阴谋者对事件和信息的普遍控制；（b）将异议者构造成Manichean二元模型；（c）运用一种难以捉摸的教条主义认识论。我们将通过美国的新闻用户对谈来讨论我们定义的操作潜力和局限性，今日俄罗斯（RT）的英国和德国在线版本，是主流政治观点支持者中的流行平台。确定自然话语分类中的主要操作挑战后，我们为更严格地研究有争议的政治言论勾勒了途径。