What do you think?
Rate this book
Conspiracies & Conspiracy Theories: What We Should and Shouldn't Believe - and Why
Listening Length: 6 hours and 30 minutes
The stuff of conspiracy theories makes for great, entertaining stories in movies, books, and television. And there is no shortage of subjects: from who really killed JFK to the truth behind 9/11. And then, there are subjects from alien invasions to the Moon landing was simulated - theories that are truly out of this world, which according to some, is flat. Many of these crazy concepts have jumped off the pages or screens to become so pervasive in our culture that thousands - even millions - subscribe to them as reality.
Does the idea that millions of Americans buy into conspiracy theories feel like a ... conspiracy? Consider that:
81 percent believes more than one person was responsible for the assassination of John F. Kennedy;
One-third of this country believes 9/11 was an "inside job" by the Bush administration;
21 percent believes aliens crash-landed in Roswell and are being hidden in Area 51; and
Seven percent believes the Moon landing was faked.
What causes people, frequently well-educated and highly regarded people, to advocate these unfounded - often disproven - ideas as reality? And more disturbing, why is the power of conspiracies so compelling - powerful enough to motivate people to act, to even participate in horrific undertakings?
In this eye-opening Audible Original, Professor Michael Shermer takes you through some of the most prevalent conspiracy theories of history, giving you a foundational understanding of how and why they came about, who was likely to believe and perpetuate them, and the reality behind the beliefs. Whether you are looking for the truth that is out there; fascinated by the psychology of why people buy into conspiracy theories; or interested in how conspiracy theories shaped and were shaped, by history, this course will provide you with all the tools you need to better understand the pervasiveness of conspiracy theories in our culture.
The stuff of conspiracy theories makes for great, entertaining stories in movies, books, and television. And there is no shortage of subjects: from who really killed JFK to the truth behind 9/11. And then, there are subjects from alien invasions to the Moon landing was simulated - theories that are truly out of this world, which according to some, is flat. Many of these crazy concepts have jumped off the pages or screens to become so pervasive in our culture that thousands - even millions - subscribe to them as reality.
Does the idea that millions of Americans buy into conspiracy theories feel like a ... conspiracy? Consider that:
81 percent believes more than one person was responsible for the assassination of John F. Kennedy;
One-third of this country believes 9/11 was an "inside job" by the Bush administration;
21 percent believes aliens crash-landed in Roswell and are being hidden in Area 51; and
Seven percent believes the Moon landing was faked.
What causes people, frequently well-educated and highly regarded people, to advocate these unfounded - often disproven - ideas as reality? And more disturbing, why is the power of conspiracies so compelling - powerful enough to motivate people to act, to even participate in horrific undertakings?
In this eye-opening Audible Original, Professor Michael Shermer takes you through some of the most prevalent conspiracy theories of history, giving you a foundational understanding of how and why they came about, who was likely to believe and perpetuate them, and the reality behind the beliefs. Whether you are looking for the truth that is out there; fascinated by the psychology of why people buy into conspiracy theories; or interested in how conspiracy theories shaped and were shaped, by history, this course will provide you with all the tools you need to better understand the pervasiveness of conspiracy theories in our culture.
7 pages, Audible Audio
First published September 11, 2019
About the author
Michael Shermer
100 books1,183 followersMichael Brant Shermer (born September 8, 1954 in Glendale, California) is an American science writer, historian of science, founder of The Skeptics Society, and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic, which is largely devoted to investigating and debunking pseudoscientific and supernatural claims. The Skeptics Society currently has over 55,000 members.
Shermer is also the producer and co-host of the 13-hour Fox Family television series Exploring the Unknown. Since April 2004, he has been a monthly columnist for Scientific American magazine with his Skeptic column. Once a fundamentalist Christian, Shermer now describes himself as an agnostic nontheist and an advocate for humanist philosophy.
more info:
http://us.macmillan.com/author/michae...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_...
Shermer is also the producer and co-host of the 13-hour Fox Family television series Exploring the Unknown. Since April 2004, he has been a monthly columnist for Scientific American magazine with his Skeptic column. Once a fundamentalist Christian, Shermer now describes himself as an agnostic nontheist and an advocate for humanist philosophy.
more info:
http://us.macmillan.com/author/michae...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 123 reviews
February 28, 2025
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE.
This was such an interesting look at the reasons why so many people believe in conspiracy theories - not the least of which is because conspiracies do happen.
But what's the psychology behind our obsessions with them? And why are they so hard to disprove? Why is it so much easier for us to believe that there are globally powerful and supernaturally nefarious forces at work behind the scenes, rather than to look at the evidence and follow the money?
Is it really somehow easier to comprehend Lizard People running pedophile rings on a flat earth, than to look at a who profits from misinformation about the dangers of smoking?
Yes. Yes, it is.
Apparently, our brains like to "know" the answers. That's fair. And it is far easier to believe something that claims to give you a black-and-white answer than it is to wrestle with the idea that you don't know the answer yet...or maybe ever.
And conspiracy theories give those pat answers.
They might be the wrong answer, but you have an answer that you can fall back on when things are seemingly out of control.
Which is another thing our brains don't like. The randomness of bad things. We want someone to blame, and the idea that sometimes bad shit just happens isn't going to cut it. When I'm worried about my job, my health, and the state of the world, the idea that multiple factors spreading back decades, including greedy humans, bumbling politicians, and plain old bad luck just doesn't make enough sense.
There needs to be some larger mechanism in play.
Because I'm important, dammit!
Big Pharma gave my kid autism! The Bush family engineered 9-11! The CIA killed Kennedy!
That's not to say that Big Pharma, the Bush family, or the CIA are on the side of angels, but it also doesn't make any of those statements true.
One of the things Shremer said that resonated with me was that you can ask people what would it take to convince you that {insert conspiracy theory} was wrong? and that most of the time, the answer is nothing but crickets.
There is no way to disprove it because the rationale is a loop. If you show documents, the documents are fake. If you speak to an expert, the expert is in on the conspiracy. If you produce a witness, the witness is lying or has been threatened. There's no way to show enough evidence to shake a belief that isn't rational to start with. I've seen this kind of behavior a lot, and it was interesting to learn some of the psychology behind it.
It's still frustrating, but now it's a bit more understandable.
It actually goes against our own ease to disbelieve something. And that makes it so much harder to be skeptical when your own confirmation bias starts to come into play. In other words, it's easy to believe what you want to believe. That's true for all of us, myself included.
If it sounds like something I tend to already agree with, then it's that much easier for me to nod along, and that much harder for me to make myself stop and ask for evidence.
There's so much interesting stuff in this short lecture, and I would really recommend this to anyone who is interested. Shermer might lean left, but I found him to be pretty unbiased when he discussed that both liberals and conservatives have their own equally silly pet conspiracies they like to marinate in, which I thought was a nice change of pace.
Recommended.
This was such an interesting look at the reasons why so many people believe in conspiracy theories - not the least of which is because conspiracies do happen.
But what's the psychology behind our obsessions with them? And why are they so hard to disprove? Why is it so much easier for us to believe that there are globally powerful and supernaturally nefarious forces at work behind the scenes, rather than to look at the evidence and follow the money?
Is it really somehow easier to comprehend Lizard People running pedophile rings on a flat earth, than to look at a who profits from misinformation about the dangers of smoking?
Yes. Yes, it is.
Apparently, our brains like to "know" the answers. That's fair. And it is far easier to believe something that claims to give you a black-and-white answer than it is to wrestle with the idea that you don't know the answer yet...or maybe ever.
And conspiracy theories give those pat answers.
They might be the wrong answer, but you have an answer that you can fall back on when things are seemingly out of control.
Which is another thing our brains don't like. The randomness of bad things. We want someone to blame, and the idea that sometimes bad shit just happens isn't going to cut it. When I'm worried about my job, my health, and the state of the world, the idea that multiple factors spreading back decades, including greedy humans, bumbling politicians, and plain old bad luck just doesn't make enough sense.
There needs to be some larger mechanism in play.
Because I'm important, dammit!
Big Pharma gave my kid autism! The Bush family engineered 9-11! The CIA killed Kennedy!
That's not to say that Big Pharma, the Bush family, or the CIA are on the side of angels, but it also doesn't make any of those statements true.
One of the things Shremer said that resonated with me was that you can ask people what would it take to convince you that {insert conspiracy theory} was wrong? and that most of the time, the answer is nothing but crickets.
There is no way to disprove it because the rationale is a loop. If you show documents, the documents are fake. If you speak to an expert, the expert is in on the conspiracy. If you produce a witness, the witness is lying or has been threatened. There's no way to show enough evidence to shake a belief that isn't rational to start with. I've seen this kind of behavior a lot, and it was interesting to learn some of the psychology behind it.
It's still frustrating, but now it's a bit more understandable.
It actually goes against our own ease to disbelieve something. And that makes it so much harder to be skeptical when your own confirmation bias starts to come into play. In other words, it's easy to believe what you want to believe. That's true for all of us, myself included.
If it sounds like something I tend to already agree with, then it's that much easier for me to nod along, and that much harder for me to make myself stop and ask for evidence.
There's so much interesting stuff in this short lecture, and I would really recommend this to anyone who is interested. Shermer might lean left, but I found him to be pretty unbiased when he discussed that both liberals and conservatives have their own equally silly pet conspiracies they like to marinate in, which I thought was a nice change of pace.
Recommended.
June 16, 2020
This was a fun book that talked about why people believe in conspiracy theories. Surprisingly, people of different political opinions, race, and gender believe in conspiracy theories at about the same rate—they just differ in *which* theories they believe in.
Michael Shermer breaks down all the biases that lead to belief and provides a framework for evaluating the plausibility of the most popular theories.
He also gets into the difference between conspiracies (which do exist) and conspiracy theories, and how to balance having healthy protective instincts while avoiding beliefs that leads to obsessive or harmful behavior.
Recommended to anyone that's into conspiracy theories or wants to know why other people are.
Michael Shermer breaks down all the biases that lead to belief and provides a framework for evaluating the plausibility of the most popular theories.
He also gets into the difference between conspiracies (which do exist) and conspiracy theories, and how to balance having healthy protective instincts while avoiding beliefs that leads to obsessive or harmful behavior.
Recommended to anyone that's into conspiracy theories or wants to know why other people are.
March 2, 2021
As the founding publisher of Skeptic magazine, and host of his own science podcast you might expect to be in the safe hands of an excellent teacher. While he did touch upon some relevant points when dealing with conspiracy theories, I found his digression into 9/11 and the murder on JFK distracting. In need of an update.
May 9, 2020
An introduction to an imperial approach with massive broad strokes. Accuses others of making claims without supporting evidence, then proceeds to state things are wrong without providing supporting evidence. Rejects and accepts ideas according to his middle-left perspective without recognizing his own bias. He does go through quite a few at the end, so it gets better over time.
The paranoid would claim he is in on the conspiracy and part of the problem. Those who know God would just acknowledge he is blind to what he does not know and refuses to see.
The paranoid would claim he is in on the conspiracy and part of the problem. Those who know God would just acknowledge he is blind to what he does not know and refuses to see.
July 14, 2025
Entertaining and educational.
Michael Shermer explains all things conspiracy, both the real and the imagined.
He explains why humans are susceptible to conspiracy theories through logic and a vast array of human research studies.
He goes through the 10 most common conspiracy theories rating them on a logic scale from 1 to 10.
Not having learnt much history in my educational years I enjoyed his dissertation on real conspiracies that included the successful plots to kill 4 American presidents , the conspiracy and murders that started World War One and his explanation of the famous Roswell incident and what subsequent sitings of UFOS actually were.
Far from being a series of lectures as listed on the cover I found this more like a one to one conversation that was delivered in a friendly concise way.
This book is well worth it for both conspiracy believers and non believers alike, because in one way or another we have all been touched by a conspiracy, be it real or a theory
Michael Shermer explains all things conspiracy, both the real and the imagined.
He explains why humans are susceptible to conspiracy theories through logic and a vast array of human research studies.
He goes through the 10 most common conspiracy theories rating them on a logic scale from 1 to 10.
Not having learnt much history in my educational years I enjoyed his dissertation on real conspiracies that included the successful plots to kill 4 American presidents , the conspiracy and murders that started World War One and his explanation of the famous Roswell incident and what subsequent sitings of UFOS actually were.
Far from being a series of lectures as listed on the cover I found this more like a one to one conversation that was delivered in a friendly concise way.
This book is well worth it for both conspiracy believers and non believers alike, because in one way or another we have all been touched by a conspiracy, be it real or a theory
May 29, 2022
this was an informative listen on audible about the psychology behind conspiracies and conspiracy theories. the author also debunked some conspiracies theories while discussing them in depth. it was very straightforward and thoroughly done. overall, i learned a lot about the topics discussed
December 24, 2019
Very entertaining while informative. The first half develops a framework on how to analyze conspiracies and why the human brain is prone to believing such. The second half debunks false conspiracy theories (e.g. JFK’s murder by something larger than Lee Oswald or Obama’s “false” birth certificate) or confirms actual conspiracies such as the murder of Frank Ferdinand by the “Black hand” organization rather than it being an orchestrated assassination by the Serb government. The course ends with an emphasis on why free speech and the rigor of the scientific method can protect us from the actual users of some conspiracy theories that undermine the progression of democratic societies.
May 19, 2020
The topic is interesting, but when presented as a "course" it probably shouldn't lean so heavily on the author's bias.
July 13, 2020
Too boring. I thought it was going to go into detail about actual conspiracy theories, but it was just about the theory of conspiracy theories.
June 28, 2025
Audiobook Review for "Conspiracies & Conspiracy Theories" by Michael Shermer
I expected this audiobook to focus mainly on famous conspiracy theories - and while it does cover several intriguing cases (like WWI, 9/11, Area 51, MK Ultra, MLK’s assassination, and even the Chinese social credit system 🤯), what stood out most was the deep dive into why people believe in conspiracies in the first place.
Shermer explores how belief in conspiracy theories isn’t just about gullibility - it’s often tied to a mix of personality traits and motivations. People who rely heavily on intuition, feel antagonistic or superior toward others, or constantly perceive threats in their environment are more likely to fall into conspiratorial thinking. Fear and doubt play a major role, and Shermer does a brilliant job unpacking the psychology behind that.
He also offers timely insights into how modern conspiracy theories gain traction - not by proving anything, but by exploiting repetition and emotion, especially on social media. The burden of proof is often replaced by viral conviction.
It’s largely US focused, (kinda justifiably so), the balance between historical events and psychological explanation kept me hooked. Thought-provoking, unsettling in places, and absolutely worth a listen.
I expected this audiobook to focus mainly on famous conspiracy theories - and while it does cover several intriguing cases (like WWI, 9/11, Area 51, MK Ultra, MLK’s assassination, and even the Chinese social credit system 🤯), what stood out most was the deep dive into why people believe in conspiracies in the first place.
Shermer explores how belief in conspiracy theories isn’t just about gullibility - it’s often tied to a mix of personality traits and motivations. People who rely heavily on intuition, feel antagonistic or superior toward others, or constantly perceive threats in their environment are more likely to fall into conspiratorial thinking. Fear and doubt play a major role, and Shermer does a brilliant job unpacking the psychology behind that.
He also offers timely insights into how modern conspiracy theories gain traction - not by proving anything, but by exploiting repetition and emotion, especially on social media. The burden of proof is often replaced by viral conviction.
It’s largely US focused, (kinda justifiably so), the balance between historical events and psychological explanation kept me hooked. Thought-provoking, unsettling in places, and absolutely worth a listen.
March 7, 2021
This is an interesting series of lectures on conspiracy theories as well as actual conspiracies.
It includes a nice little checklist on what to look for to separate what is likely true from what is most certainly nonsense. Some historical conspiracies are discussed along with some of the biggest conspiracy theories of recent memory. This didn’t come out recently enough to really cover the true gravity of the QAnon nonsense, but there was plenty here to sink your teeth into.
Worth my time.
It includes a nice little checklist on what to look for to separate what is likely true from what is most certainly nonsense. Some historical conspiracies are discussed along with some of the biggest conspiracy theories of recent memory. This didn’t come out recently enough to really cover the true gravity of the QAnon nonsense, but there was plenty here to sink your teeth into.
Worth my time.
January 4, 2023
Very pleasant and interesting and a good audio performance.
It did a great job of explaining where conspiracy theories come from, what types of conspiracy theories there are and their level of gravity, it also explained the difference between conspiracy theories and real conspiracies and came with chilling historical examples.
So give this a listen because "they" don't want you knowing this! :)))
It did a great job of explaining where conspiracy theories come from, what types of conspiracy theories there are and their level of gravity, it also explained the difference between conspiracy theories and real conspiracies and came with chilling historical examples.
So give this a listen because "they" don't want you knowing this! :)))
November 25, 2023
Well I definitely learned a lot about some of the classic conspiracies and why they're so much more common now than they were when people could just openly assassinate people for political power, but I was kinda hoping for more info on some of the more weird, newer conspiracies. But I literally didn't know the who killed JFK thing was as big a deal as it is.
October 20, 2023
A superb introduction to actual conspiracies as well as the paranoid conspiracy theories afflicting so many of us.
Shermer does an excellent job presenting the psychology of conspiracy theorists as well as the logical fallacies they trip themselves up with.
Take notes and listen to it twice.
Shermer does an excellent job presenting the psychology of conspiracy theorists as well as the logical fallacies they trip themselves up with.
Take notes and listen to it twice.
August 7, 2021
Review to come
May 27, 2020
So good. Anyone with a conspiracy theorist in their life should read this and encourage their person to read it too. The author does a wonderful job of breaking down the complexities of conspiracy and debunking common theories. Bravo!
June 22, 2020
Given its brevity (6.5 hours), this is a highly informative introduction to conspiracies and conspiracy theories. Overall, the lecture series is objective, professionally researched, and well organized. The first lecture explains the difference between conspiracies and conspiracy theories. The next three lectures provide a framework for understanding the psychology of people who believe in conspiracy theories. What are the characteristics of believers, why people believe what they do, and what are the cognitive biases that foster these beliefs? Lectures 6 and 7 (“Constructive Conspiracism” and “The Conspiracy Detection Kit”) provide specific tools for differentiating between true conspiracies and highly improbable conspiracy theories. The remainder of the lectures deal with the application of these tools to help the listener understand why specific conspiracy theories are highly improbable, the facts and events behind real conspiracies, and the devastating consequences that ensue when people are manipulated into believing that conspiracy theories are true conspiracies. For example, the six-second spark in Sarajevo that ignited WWI was the likely result of actual conspiracy by The Black Hand, but the war itself resulted from a conspiracy theory implicating the Serbian government. Lecture 11 presents this series of events as “The Deadliest Conspiracy Theory in History”. If you are not inclined to believe distorted versions of reality simply because someone in a position of authority says, “A lot of people are talking about…” and then goes on to make a preposterous statement with absolutely no facts to support it, then you will be well satisfied with “Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories”. My only criticism is that there is no PDF outline to accompany this course. The result of a conspiracy, no doubt.
May 10, 2022
An interesting and rational take on conspiracies and theories but I do wish there was more depth to the discussion of well-known conspiracy theories.
December 14, 2023
1 star because this "skeptic" knows very little about history and the world outside of America.
The author claims that Stalin had no idea Hitler was going to invade the USSR and that he trusted Hitler. The historical consensus is that Stalin DID anticipate the attack but used the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact to buy the USSR time to build up as much as possible before the inevitable invasion.
He also claims that war becoming rarer in the 20th century was due to war being made "illegal" and that before the 20th century justifications for war were unheard of and countries just declared war whenever they felt like it. This claim is so moronic I had to double check that the author and skeptic had any kind of education and was not just some teenage Redditor.
He ends the book with a biased rant about China being an oppressive state. While doing so he calls Alibaba the Chinese equivalent of Google (it isn't btw, it's the equivalent of Amazon and Baidu is much more like Google).
With how dangerous and increasingly common belief in conspiracies can be, errors like these show a lack of proper research and would make someone who does believe in conspiracy theories very skeptical of all the lectures.
He does a good job disproving many conspiracy theories and discussing why people believe in them, but all the historical and geopolitical inaccuracies spoil the whole thing.
January 15, 2025
Ugh just awful! This guy Shermer comes across as the personification of "nothing to see here folks, keep moving." He dismisses legitimate questions with such patronizing certainty you'd think he was being paid by the denial. His smug dismissal of anything outside the official narrative is so absolute it actually makes you more suspicious, not less. For someone who claims to champion critical thinking, he sure doesn't apply much to the accepted wisdom of powerful institutions. Seriously, who gave this guy a PhD? Has this man never followed more than 1 year of politics and never raised an eyebrow? Honestly, this is more likely to be psyops than the actual opinion of a professor.
December 27, 2023
My original review was very harsh. I did manage to persevere and finish this audiobook. I have to say that the second half was a LOT better than the first half.
September 27, 2025
Conspiracy theorists connect the dots of random events into meaningful patterns, and then infuse those patterns with intentional agency, believing that these intentional agents control the world, sometimes invisibly, from the top down, instead of the bottom-up casual randomness that determines much of what happens in our world.
--------
In the mind of the paranoid conspiracist, nothing happens by accident; everything is connected, and there are no coincidences.
-------
From a general psychological perspective, the problem is that transcendentalism is intuitive, while empiricism is not. You have to be trained to think like a scientist and a skeptic. We know from cognitive psychology and neuroscience, for example, that belief comes naturally, while skepticism is learned and often feels uncomfortable.
-------
Benedict Spinoza, a 17th-century Dutch philosopher, wrote with great insight that “mere comprehension of a statement entails the tacit acceptance of its being true, whereas disbelief requires a subsequent process of rejection.”
-------
“Feelings of control are essential for our well-being. We think clearly and make better decisions when we feel we are in control. Lacking control is highly aversive, so we instinctively seek out patterns to regain control, even if those patterns are illusory.” — Professor Whitson
-------
The economy is not this crazy patchwork of supply and demand laws, market forces, interest rate changes, tax policies, business cycles, boom and bust sequences, recessions and upswings, bull and bear markets, and the like. It’s a conspiracy of, say, a handful of powerful people, variously identified as the Illuminati, the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Rockefellers, and the Rothschilds, and the like, somehow determining economic outcomes.
-------
Hindsight bias is equally evident in times of war, which are major generators of conspiracy theories.
(this is really hits home for me)
-------
Just because you're paranoid
Don't mean they're not after you.
Territorial Pissings. Kurt Cobain
-------
Dramatic events leave traces in mood and memory longer than good events. For example, a single childhood traumatic event, like sexual molestation, can erase years of positive experiences. Morally bad actions far outweigh morally good actions when it comes to our moral evaluation of other people.
-------
As Leo Tolstoy famously observed in 1875: “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” Evil contaminates good more than good purifies evil. As an old Russian proverb says, a spoonful of tar can spoil a barrel of honey, but a spoonful of honey does nothing for a barrel of tar. (usually shortened in Russian to a spoonful of tar in a barrel of honey - ложка дёгтя в бочке мёда)
------
Progress is mostly made incrementally and in small steps, whereas regress can easily come about in one colossal calamity.
------
Entropy is a fundamental physical rule that closed systems, those not taking in energy, move from order to disorder, from organization to disorganization, from structured to unstructured, and from warm to cold. Although entropy can be temporarily reversed in an open system with an outside source of energy, such as heating cold food in a microwave, isolated systems decay as entropy increases. As an outside source of energy dissipates, systems run down: warm things turn cold, metal rusts, wood rots, weeds overwhelm gardens, bedrooms get cluttered, and social, political, and economic systems fall apart.
-------
Science begins with the null hypothesis, which assumes that a claim under investigation is not true until proven otherwise.
-------
It is telling that among of tens of thousands of government e-mails, documents and files leaked in recent years through Wikileaks there’s not one mention a of UFO cover-up, a faked moon-landing or that 9/11 was an inside job. Here, the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. The concept of null-hypothesis makes it clear that a burden of proof is on a person asserting a positive claim not on sceptics to disprove it.
-------
Instead of “I came, I saw, I conquered,” these declarations read more like: “I was just standing there, minding my own business, when he threatened me. I had to defend myself by attacking them.” The problem with this arrangement is obvious. Call it the moralization bias—the belief that our cause is moral and just, and anyone who disagrees is not just wrong but immoral.
--------
In the mind of the paranoid conspiracist, nothing happens by accident; everything is connected, and there are no coincidences.
-------
From a general psychological perspective, the problem is that transcendentalism is intuitive, while empiricism is not. You have to be trained to think like a scientist and a skeptic. We know from cognitive psychology and neuroscience, for example, that belief comes naturally, while skepticism is learned and often feels uncomfortable.
-------
Benedict Spinoza, a 17th-century Dutch philosopher, wrote with great insight that “mere comprehension of a statement entails the tacit acceptance of its being true, whereas disbelief requires a subsequent process of rejection.”
-------
“Feelings of control are essential for our well-being. We think clearly and make better decisions when we feel we are in control. Lacking control is highly aversive, so we instinctively seek out patterns to regain control, even if those patterns are illusory.” — Professor Whitson
-------
The economy is not this crazy patchwork of supply and demand laws, market forces, interest rate changes, tax policies, business cycles, boom and bust sequences, recessions and upswings, bull and bear markets, and the like. It’s a conspiracy of, say, a handful of powerful people, variously identified as the Illuminati, the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Rockefellers, and the Rothschilds, and the like, somehow determining economic outcomes.
-------
Hindsight bias is equally evident in times of war, which are major generators of conspiracy theories.
(this is really hits home for me)
-------
Just because you're paranoid
Don't mean they're not after you.
Territorial Pissings. Kurt Cobain
-------
Dramatic events leave traces in mood and memory longer than good events. For example, a single childhood traumatic event, like sexual molestation, can erase years of positive experiences. Morally bad actions far outweigh morally good actions when it comes to our moral evaluation of other people.
-------
As Leo Tolstoy famously observed in 1875: “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” Evil contaminates good more than good purifies evil. As an old Russian proverb says, a spoonful of tar can spoil a barrel of honey, but a spoonful of honey does nothing for a barrel of tar. (usually shortened in Russian to a spoonful of tar in a barrel of honey - ложка дёгтя в бочке мёда)
------
Progress is mostly made incrementally and in small steps, whereas regress can easily come about in one colossal calamity.
------
Entropy is a fundamental physical rule that closed systems, those not taking in energy, move from order to disorder, from organization to disorganization, from structured to unstructured, and from warm to cold. Although entropy can be temporarily reversed in an open system with an outside source of energy, such as heating cold food in a microwave, isolated systems decay as entropy increases. As an outside source of energy dissipates, systems run down: warm things turn cold, metal rusts, wood rots, weeds overwhelm gardens, bedrooms get cluttered, and social, political, and economic systems fall apart.
-------
Science begins with the null hypothesis, which assumes that a claim under investigation is not true until proven otherwise.
-------
It is telling that among of tens of thousands of government e-mails, documents and files leaked in recent years through Wikileaks there’s not one mention a of UFO cover-up, a faked moon-landing or that 9/11 was an inside job. Here, the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. The concept of null-hypothesis makes it clear that a burden of proof is on a person asserting a positive claim not on sceptics to disprove it.
-------
Instead of “I came, I saw, I conquered,” these declarations read more like: “I was just standing there, minding my own business, when he threatened me. I had to defend myself by attacking them.” The problem with this arrangement is obvious. Call it the moralization bias—the belief that our cause is moral and just, and anyone who disagrees is not just wrong but immoral.
July 8, 2026
What We Should and Shouldn't Believe
Michael Shermer presents himself as the model of the scientific-thinking skeptic, and on paper he has the credentials to back it up. As the founder and publisher of Skeptic magazine, a longtime columnist for Scientific American, and the author of numerous books on science and belief, he has spent decades promoting scientific literacy and critical thinking. That pedigree is real, and it deserves acknowledgment. Unfortunately, this course does not live up to it. For all his talk of skepticism, Shermer demonstrates a curious blind faith in the establishment and its official narratives—precisely the kind of uncritical acceptance he faults conspiracy theorists for.
The Missing Epistemological Framework
The course's foundational problem is that Shermer never presents a well-rounded account of the epistemological framework that he—or scientists generally—rely on. He repeatedly lauds the scientific method and criticizes conspiracy theorists for failing to be scientific, but he never outlines what the correct approach actually looks like in enough depth for the listener to apply it.
To be fair, this isn't a course on the scientific method, and I don't expect one. But if your entire thesis is that conspiracy theorists reason badly, you owe your audience at least a sketch of reasoning done well. The closest Shermer comes is his "Baloney Detection Kit," a list of ten questions borrowed and adapted from Carl Sagan—source reliability, track record, falsifiability, plausibility, and so on. It's a fine checklist, but it arrives late in the course and functions more as a mnemonic than a framework. He even concedes that scientists "intuitively sense" whether a claim is scientific or pseudo-scientific. Intuition is not epistemology, and a course promising to teach us what we should and shouldn't believe needs to do better than gesture at gut feelings dressed up as a checklist.
Ad Hominem Dressed Up as Psychology
Rather than engaging conspiracy theories on their merits, Shermer leans heavily on psychologizing the people who believe them. He tells us that a certain "combination of traits and styles appears to gravitate toward conspiracy theories, in order to attenuate anxiety over the uncertainty of a world that seems incomprehensibly nefarious." He cites research showing a negative correlation between science-mindedness and conspiratorial thinking, and Jennifer Whitson's work on how loss of control drives people to perceive illusory patterns. As Whitson herself puts it: "When individuals are unable to gain a sense of control objectively, they will try to gain it perceptually."
This is interesting psychology, but as an argument against any particular conspiracy theory, it is pure sophistry—a sustained ad hominem. Explaining why someone believes something says nothing about whether the belief is true. And notably, Shermer never seriously addresses the underlying premise: isn't there good reason to believe that bad people sometimes do bad things in secret? Randomness explains much of the world, but it doesn't follow that every event is best explained by randomness. Sometimes there really are conspiracies—a point Shermer himself is forced to concede when he admits that conspiracy skeptics are prone to false negatives, missing real conspiracies like Project MKUltra, in which the CIA conducted mind-control experiments on American citizens, and the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, in which the U.S. Public Health Service deceived hundreds of Black men and withheld treatment from them for decades. That admission should have prompted far more reflection than it receives.
Skepticism for Thee, But Not for Me
The deepest flaw in the course is its asymmetry. Shermer holds conspiracy theories to the highest standards of rigor while accepting official narratives without a modicum of the critical thinking he champions.
The JFK assassination treatment is a telling example. The official narrative, at its strongest, runs like this: Oswald said things that admitted guilt; therefore he did it, case closed. Fair enough—if the official record of what Oswald said is accurate and complete, that is genuinely powerful evidence. But that's precisely the question. Why should the official account itself be exempt from scrutiny? Why do we simply assume that government investigators—with institutional reputations and political interests at stake—did not shade the truth? It would have strengthened the course immeasurably to at least address these possibilities rather than treating official sources as self-validating. This is especially glaring given that Shermer himself cites Kathryn Olmsted's Real Enemies, which argues that "the institutionalized secrecy of the modern US government inspired a new type of conspiracy theories, which propose that the federal government itself was the conspirator." Shermer even acknowledges there are "good reasons to be constructively distrustful about the goings-on of government." Yet in practice, his distrust never materializes beyond what is officially accepted and admitted as true conspiracies—it's reserved entirely for the theorists.
The same one-sidedness shows up throughout. Early in the course, he presents the belief that some are "conspiring to abolish the Second Amendment" as self-evidently a conspiracy theory—yet prominent politicians openly advocate for sweeping gun restrictions. Why is this assumed to be incorrect rather than examined? And his own material cuts against him: he recounts Milgram's obedience experiments and Buck v. Bell—where the Supreme Court, in Justice Holmes's chilling words ("three generations of imbeciles are enough"), blessed the forced sterilization of a woman deemed unfit. These are case studies in how authority and official institutions can be catastrophically wrong, delivered by a lecturer who asks us to defer to authority and official institutions.
Verdict
There is real value here: the historical material is often engaging, and the psychological research is genuinely interesting. But as an exercise in critical thinking, the course fails its own test. Shermer argues that conspiracy theorists use faulty logic, then relies on faulty logic—ad hominem psychologizing, appeals to authority, selective skepticism—to dismiss them. A course on what we should and shouldn't believe ought to model even-handed scrutiny. This one models the very asymmetry it condemns.
Michael Shermer presents himself as the model of the scientific-thinking skeptic, and on paper he has the credentials to back it up. As the founder and publisher of Skeptic magazine, a longtime columnist for Scientific American, and the author of numerous books on science and belief, he has spent decades promoting scientific literacy and critical thinking. That pedigree is real, and it deserves acknowledgment. Unfortunately, this course does not live up to it. For all his talk of skepticism, Shermer demonstrates a curious blind faith in the establishment and its official narratives—precisely the kind of uncritical acceptance he faults conspiracy theorists for.
The Missing Epistemological Framework
The course's foundational problem is that Shermer never presents a well-rounded account of the epistemological framework that he—or scientists generally—rely on. He repeatedly lauds the scientific method and criticizes conspiracy theorists for failing to be scientific, but he never outlines what the correct approach actually looks like in enough depth for the listener to apply it.
To be fair, this isn't a course on the scientific method, and I don't expect one. But if your entire thesis is that conspiracy theorists reason badly, you owe your audience at least a sketch of reasoning done well. The closest Shermer comes is his "Baloney Detection Kit," a list of ten questions borrowed and adapted from Carl Sagan—source reliability, track record, falsifiability, plausibility, and so on. It's a fine checklist, but it arrives late in the course and functions more as a mnemonic than a framework. He even concedes that scientists "intuitively sense" whether a claim is scientific or pseudo-scientific. Intuition is not epistemology, and a course promising to teach us what we should and shouldn't believe needs to do better than gesture at gut feelings dressed up as a checklist.
Ad Hominem Dressed Up as Psychology
Rather than engaging conspiracy theories on their merits, Shermer leans heavily on psychologizing the people who believe them. He tells us that a certain "combination of traits and styles appears to gravitate toward conspiracy theories, in order to attenuate anxiety over the uncertainty of a world that seems incomprehensibly nefarious." He cites research showing a negative correlation between science-mindedness and conspiratorial thinking, and Jennifer Whitson's work on how loss of control drives people to perceive illusory patterns. As Whitson herself puts it: "When individuals are unable to gain a sense of control objectively, they will try to gain it perceptually."
This is interesting psychology, but as an argument against any particular conspiracy theory, it is pure sophistry—a sustained ad hominem. Explaining why someone believes something says nothing about whether the belief is true. And notably, Shermer never seriously addresses the underlying premise: isn't there good reason to believe that bad people sometimes do bad things in secret? Randomness explains much of the world, but it doesn't follow that every event is best explained by randomness. Sometimes there really are conspiracies—a point Shermer himself is forced to concede when he admits that conspiracy skeptics are prone to false negatives, missing real conspiracies like Project MKUltra, in which the CIA conducted mind-control experiments on American citizens, and the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, in which the U.S. Public Health Service deceived hundreds of Black men and withheld treatment from them for decades. That admission should have prompted far more reflection than it receives.
Skepticism for Thee, But Not for Me
The deepest flaw in the course is its asymmetry. Shermer holds conspiracy theories to the highest standards of rigor while accepting official narratives without a modicum of the critical thinking he champions.
The JFK assassination treatment is a telling example. The official narrative, at its strongest, runs like this: Oswald said things that admitted guilt; therefore he did it, case closed. Fair enough—if the official record of what Oswald said is accurate and complete, that is genuinely powerful evidence. But that's precisely the question. Why should the official account itself be exempt from scrutiny? Why do we simply assume that government investigators—with institutional reputations and political interests at stake—did not shade the truth? It would have strengthened the course immeasurably to at least address these possibilities rather than treating official sources as self-validating. This is especially glaring given that Shermer himself cites Kathryn Olmsted's Real Enemies, which argues that "the institutionalized secrecy of the modern US government inspired a new type of conspiracy theories, which propose that the federal government itself was the conspirator." Shermer even acknowledges there are "good reasons to be constructively distrustful about the goings-on of government." Yet in practice, his distrust never materializes beyond what is officially accepted and admitted as true conspiracies—it's reserved entirely for the theorists.
The same one-sidedness shows up throughout. Early in the course, he presents the belief that some are "conspiring to abolish the Second Amendment" as self-evidently a conspiracy theory—yet prominent politicians openly advocate for sweeping gun restrictions. Why is this assumed to be incorrect rather than examined? And his own material cuts against him: he recounts Milgram's obedience experiments and Buck v. Bell—where the Supreme Court, in Justice Holmes's chilling words ("three generations of imbeciles are enough"), blessed the forced sterilization of a woman deemed unfit. These are case studies in how authority and official institutions can be catastrophically wrong, delivered by a lecturer who asks us to defer to authority and official institutions.
Verdict
There is real value here: the historical material is often engaging, and the psychological research is genuinely interesting. But as an exercise in critical thinking, the course fails its own test. Shermer argues that conspiracy theorists use faulty logic, then relies on faulty logic—ad hominem psychologizing, appeals to authority, selective skepticism—to dismiss them. A course on what we should and shouldn't believe ought to model even-handed scrutiny. This one models the very asymmetry it condemns.
July 9, 2021
Most of the Great Courses skew heavily left, and with a topic like conspiracies and conspiracy theories, I was bracing myself for a one-sided liberal rant against the idiocy of conservatives. But I have to hand it to the author/lecturer: while it's clear that he identifies as liberal, for the most part he was quite fair and balanced. He made the point early on that there is (and should be) a distinction between conspiracies and conspiracy theories, because of course, some conspiracies are true. The purpose of the book was to help the listeners identify which conspiracies are likely to be true, which are likely to be false, and how to tell the difference. This section was great--I even listened to it a second time so that I could take notes. He summarized his "BS detection" section with the statement that most conspiracy theories fail either the competency problem or the leakage problem: that is, too many people had to be in on it, had to be perfectly competent (which we all know isn't likely with humans), had to not lose their nerve or have an attack of conscience or anything else, and had to maintain absolute secrecy after the fact. The wider the network of co-conspirators that would be necessary to pull this off, the more likely it is that the conspiracy is false. Then he gave examples throughout modern history as examples to illustrate his points, dissecting classics like the JFK assassination and (this one was new to me) 9-11 "truthers" who believe that it was an inside job. He even assigns ranks to certain types of conspiracy theories as being more or less likely to be true (without stating whether or not they are so) on the basis of his criteria.
The earlier section of the book discusses the psychological characteristics shared among those who tend to believe in conspiracy theories, and how people come to believe them. This section seemed to assume that the conspiracy theories believed are false, since it discussed things like confirmation bias, cherry-picking data and examples, a psychological mismatch between the magnitude of an event and the seemingly random cause which makes people want to assign the event a greater meaning, and such.
Finally, the book ends with the flip side: tools used by real conspirators to obfuscate their intentions. They will deny or minimize the problem, call for more evidence, or blame-shift. They too will cherrypick their data to their own ends. They will attack the whistleblowers (the classic ad hominem approach). They will attack the alternatives to their own goals. Or they will hire front groups and fund scientists with conflicts of interest, set them up to appear independent, and get them to argue their case for them.
Overall, very well balanced. I find having clear categories like this to be very helpful when approaching both sides of an issue.
The earlier section of the book discusses the psychological characteristics shared among those who tend to believe in conspiracy theories, and how people come to believe them. This section seemed to assume that the conspiracy theories believed are false, since it discussed things like confirmation bias, cherry-picking data and examples, a psychological mismatch between the magnitude of an event and the seemingly random cause which makes people want to assign the event a greater meaning, and such.
Finally, the book ends with the flip side: tools used by real conspirators to obfuscate their intentions. They will deny or minimize the problem, call for more evidence, or blame-shift. They too will cherrypick their data to their own ends. They will attack the whistleblowers (the classic ad hominem approach). They will attack the alternatives to their own goals. Or they will hire front groups and fund scientists with conflicts of interest, set them up to appear independent, and get them to argue their case for them.
Overall, very well balanced. I find having clear categories like this to be very helpful when approaching both sides of an issue.
August 4, 2022
I enjoyed this short audiobook course, it was very to the point and summarized the nature of conspiracy theories and theorists fairly well, if not too in depth.
The first half of the book deals with the psychology behind conspiracy minded thinking, the kind of people found in studies to be prone to conspiracy theories, why people are capable of believing ideas without sufficient evidence, and how some conspiracies are real. It was pretty familiar ground for me but I still enjoyed seeing When Prophecy Fails and Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me) summarized.
The second half of the book deals with examining various conspiracy theories and how they came to be, including 9/11 truthers, Obama birthers, JFK assassination, UFO and the like seen on X-files, and the "deadliest conspiracy theory of all time", the political assassination that led to World War 1. I only wish some more recent conspiracy theories had been examined.
A few notes:
• Conspiracy Theories make sense of what is otherwise confusing and chaotic facts about reality
• Conspiracy theories offer epistemic, existential, and social closure
• When there's a mismatch between the importance of an event and the insignificant of its cause, a way to reduce cognitive dissonance is to come up with a more significant cause - like the JFK assassination conspiracies, where a lone psychopath killer of the president seems unbelievable, a government conspiracy seems more believable
• In studies a loss of control leads to higher conspiracy thinking and illusory pattern recognition
• Those in power think they are in control more than they are, those without power think powers are out to get them more than they are
• Those with an external locus of control (focus on what others do to them) rather than internal locus of control are more prone to conspiracy theories
• Believing comes naturally, skepticism requires more work - brain processes true statements faster than false or unsure (Baruch Spinoza correctly predicted this)
• Brain activity shows processing true statements as rewarding and false or unsure as painful
• Belief in conspiracy theories are justified with cognitive biases and focusing on "unexplained" data, rather than strong supporting evidence
• Conspiracy thinking is influenced by overactive agency detection and negativity bias, Shermer calls this "patternicity" and "agenticity"
• When considering a possible real conspiracy "never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence or chance"
Overall it was an enjoyable, short, easy course, I just wish the philosophy and psychology of conspiracy theories had been more systematically analyzed and the examined conspiracy theories were more recent examples.
The first half of the book deals with the psychology behind conspiracy minded thinking, the kind of people found in studies to be prone to conspiracy theories, why people are capable of believing ideas without sufficient evidence, and how some conspiracies are real. It was pretty familiar ground for me but I still enjoyed seeing When Prophecy Fails and Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me) summarized.
The second half of the book deals with examining various conspiracy theories and how they came to be, including 9/11 truthers, Obama birthers, JFK assassination, UFO and the like seen on X-files, and the "deadliest conspiracy theory of all time", the political assassination that led to World War 1. I only wish some more recent conspiracy theories had been examined.
A few notes:
• Conspiracy Theories make sense of what is otherwise confusing and chaotic facts about reality
• Conspiracy theories offer epistemic, existential, and social closure
• When there's a mismatch between the importance of an event and the insignificant of its cause, a way to reduce cognitive dissonance is to come up with a more significant cause - like the JFK assassination conspiracies, where a lone psychopath killer of the president seems unbelievable, a government conspiracy seems more believable
• In studies a loss of control leads to higher conspiracy thinking and illusory pattern recognition
• Those in power think they are in control more than they are, those without power think powers are out to get them more than they are
• Those with an external locus of control (focus on what others do to them) rather than internal locus of control are more prone to conspiracy theories
• Believing comes naturally, skepticism requires more work - brain processes true statements faster than false or unsure (Baruch Spinoza correctly predicted this)
• Brain activity shows processing true statements as rewarding and false or unsure as painful
• Belief in conspiracy theories are justified with cognitive biases and focusing on "unexplained" data, rather than strong supporting evidence
• Conspiracy thinking is influenced by overactive agency detection and negativity bias, Shermer calls this "patternicity" and "agenticity"
• When considering a possible real conspiracy "never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence or chance"
Overall it was an enjoyable, short, easy course, I just wish the philosophy and psychology of conspiracy theories had been more systematically analyzed and the examined conspiracy theories were more recent examples.
February 3, 2023
The professor goes through various conspiracy theories showing where some are true and others are not. I agree. The MK Ultra conspiracy was true. Congress proved that. The Tuskegee Experiment happened. People were sterilized against their will in the USA (and that is STILL considered Constitutional even though all the laws permitting it were rescinded.) On the other hand, the Roswell Incident is so much BS. The 9/11 attacks were NOT an inside job. (At least it seems remarkably unlikely to the point of near certainty. I am convinced it was NOT an inside job.) Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald were not part of a vast conspiracy to assassinate JFK.
Many conspiracies are either confirmed or debunked, but the real value of this audio course is that the professor goes through a few rules to determine whether a particular conspiracy theory has merit or not.
I do have criticisms of this audio course. The professor was not comprehensive, but this is a short course. I imagine he wouldn't have glossed over a few important points if the course were longer. (OR WOULD HE!!!???) Just kidding. I think he would have gone more deeply into some important points given enough time.
I'll probably listen to this audio course again. There was a lot of information there.
Contents
Lect 01 The Difference Between Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories (31:17)
Lect 02 Classifying Conspiracies and Characterizing Believers (33:16)
Lect 03 Why People Believe in Conspiracy Theories (29:12)
Lect 04 Cognitive Biases and Conspiracy Theories (31:27)
Lect 05 Conspiracy Insanity (31:43)
Lect 06 Constructive Conspiracism (29:31)
Lect 07 The Conspiracy Detection Kit (32:19)
Lect 08 Truthers and Birthers: The 9/11 and Obama Conspiracy Theories (32:34)
Lect 09 The JFK Assassination: The Mother of All Conspiracy Theories (33:17)
Lect 10 Real Conspiracies: What if They Really Are out to Get You? (36:52)
Lect 11 The Deadliest Conspiracy Theory in History (32:26)
Lect 12 The Real X-Files: Conspiracy Theories in Myth and Reality (34:22)
Many conspiracies are either confirmed or debunked, but the real value of this audio course is that the professor goes through a few rules to determine whether a particular conspiracy theory has merit or not.
I do have criticisms of this audio course. The professor was not comprehensive, but this is a short course. I imagine he wouldn't have glossed over a few important points if the course were longer. (OR WOULD HE!!!???) Just kidding. I think he would have gone more deeply into some important points given enough time.
I'll probably listen to this audio course again. There was a lot of information there.
Contents
Lect 01 The Difference Between Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories (31:17)
Lect 02 Classifying Conspiracies and Characterizing Believers (33:16)
Lect 03 Why People Believe in Conspiracy Theories (29:12)
Lect 04 Cognitive Biases and Conspiracy Theories (31:27)
Lect 05 Conspiracy Insanity (31:43)
Lect 06 Constructive Conspiracism (29:31)
Lect 07 The Conspiracy Detection Kit (32:19)
Lect 08 Truthers and Birthers: The 9/11 and Obama Conspiracy Theories (32:34)
Lect 09 The JFK Assassination: The Mother of All Conspiracy Theories (33:17)
Lect 10 Real Conspiracies: What if They Really Are out to Get You? (36:52)
Lect 11 The Deadliest Conspiracy Theory in History (32:26)
Lect 12 The Real X-Files: Conspiracy Theories in Myth and Reality (34:22)
July 24, 2026
Conspiracies & Conspiracy Theories: What We Should and Shouldn't Believe – and Why is an engaging and highly accessible exploration of why people are drawn to conspiracy theories and how we can better evaluate extraordinary claims. Michael Shermer approaches the subject with a healthy dose of skepticism, encouraging readers to think critically without automatically dismissing every unconventional idea.
One of the book’s greatest strengths is its balance between psychology, history, and science. Shermer explains how cognitive biases, pattern recognition, and our desire for simple explanations can lead us to see conspiracies where none exist. At the same time, he acknowledges that real conspiracies do occur, making the discussion far more nuanced than a simple debunking exercise. The numerous examples, ranging from historical events to modern conspiracy movements, keep the book engaging throughout.
I particularly appreciated Shermer’s emphasis on evidence-based reasoning. Rather than telling readers what to think, he provides practical tools for assessing claims, questioning sources, and distinguishing between healthy skepticism and outright cynicism. These lessons feel especially relevant in an age of social media, misinformation, and political polarization.
The reason I’m giving it 4 rather than 5 stars is that some sections can feel repetitive, especially when revisiting similar psychological concepts through multiple examples. Readers already familiar with Shermer’s work or the broader skeptical movement may find some of the arguments familiar. A deeper examination of certain modern conspiracy theories and their social impact would also have strengthened the book.
Overall, Conspiracies & Conspiracy Theories is a thoughtful, informative, and timely read. Whether you're fascinated by conspiracy theories or simply want to become a more critical consumer of information, this book offers valuable insights and plenty of food for thought. Highly recommended for anyone interested in psychology, critical thinking, and the ways we make sense of the world.
One of the book’s greatest strengths is its balance between psychology, history, and science. Shermer explains how cognitive biases, pattern recognition, and our desire for simple explanations can lead us to see conspiracies where none exist. At the same time, he acknowledges that real conspiracies do occur, making the discussion far more nuanced than a simple debunking exercise. The numerous examples, ranging from historical events to modern conspiracy movements, keep the book engaging throughout.
I particularly appreciated Shermer’s emphasis on evidence-based reasoning. Rather than telling readers what to think, he provides practical tools for assessing claims, questioning sources, and distinguishing between healthy skepticism and outright cynicism. These lessons feel especially relevant in an age of social media, misinformation, and political polarization.
The reason I’m giving it 4 rather than 5 stars is that some sections can feel repetitive, especially when revisiting similar psychological concepts through multiple examples. Readers already familiar with Shermer’s work or the broader skeptical movement may find some of the arguments familiar. A deeper examination of certain modern conspiracy theories and their social impact would also have strengthened the book.
Overall, Conspiracies & Conspiracy Theories is a thoughtful, informative, and timely read. Whether you're fascinated by conspiracy theories or simply want to become a more critical consumer of information, this book offers valuable insights and plenty of food for thought. Highly recommended for anyone interested in psychology, critical thinking, and the ways we make sense of the world.
July 25, 2020
Last week, a conspiracy theory about Wayfair spread amidst a resurgence of #PizzaGate and "the Rothschilds." It is helpful to have constructive paranoia and skepticism, especially these days with the social internet. It's a fact that some conspiracies are actually true. (See: Fred Hampton; MK Ultra; PORTLAND.) I thought it'd be helpful to have a framework and approach to vet theories.
The world is chaotic. Our brains want to move away from the cognitive dissonance that makes us uncomfortable to cognitive harmony. We wonder how some things could happen. Could it really be that simple? Our brains try to make sense of things by creating an explanation that matches the cognitive scale of those things. We're especially vulnerable when we feel we lack power or the agency to control our own outcomes or life situation.
Are we seeing random clusters as some type of orderly, meaningful pattern? Do we attribute those patterns to some someone or something with power?
Michael Shermer provides a framework to sift through the incessant flow of conspiracy theories and gives us the tools that help us quickly sniff out what has legs and what should be dismissed. Expeditiously.
"Never attribute to malice than can be explained by randomness or incompetence." Everything should start with a null hypothesis meaning not true until proven otherwise. Many people let their conclusion dictate their evidence instead of their evidence dictating their conclusion.
Remember, burden of proof is on the person asserting a claim not on the skeptic to disprove it. We generally are not very good at probabilities, and have a hard time explaining random occurrences.
Most of the time stuff just happens, and our brains just connect the dots.
The world is chaotic. Our brains want to move away from the cognitive dissonance that makes us uncomfortable to cognitive harmony. We wonder how some things could happen. Could it really be that simple? Our brains try to make sense of things by creating an explanation that matches the cognitive scale of those things. We're especially vulnerable when we feel we lack power or the agency to control our own outcomes or life situation.
Are we seeing random clusters as some type of orderly, meaningful pattern? Do we attribute those patterns to some someone or something with power?
Michael Shermer provides a framework to sift through the incessant flow of conspiracy theories and gives us the tools that help us quickly sniff out what has legs and what should be dismissed. Expeditiously.
"Never attribute to malice than can be explained by randomness or incompetence." Everything should start with a null hypothesis meaning not true until proven otherwise. Many people let their conclusion dictate their evidence instead of their evidence dictating their conclusion.
Remember, burden of proof is on the person asserting a claim not on the skeptic to disprove it. We generally are not very good at probabilities, and have a hard time explaining random occurrences.
Most of the time stuff just happens, and our brains just connect the dots.
July 31, 2026
Michael Shermer's Conspiracies & Conspiracy Theories: What We Should and Shouldn't Believe – and Why explores why conspiracy theories are so appealing, how they spread, and what separates legitimate conspiracies from imaginative speculation. From the assassination of JFK and 9/11 to Roswell, Area 51, and the Moon landing, Shermer examines the psychology behind belief while encouraging listeners to weigh evidence over emotion.
I found this to be an interesting listen, especially because Shermer doesn't simply dismiss every conspiracy out of hand. One of the biggest takeaways is that governments and powerful institutions have, at times, engaged in genuine conspiracies and cover-ups, making it understandable why public skepticism exists. That nuance kept the course engaging, and I learned quite a bit about the historical events and psychological factors discussed.
At times, the course feels more like a lecture than a gripping narrative, and some sections drag more than others. Even so, Shermer does a solid job of explaining why people are drawn to extraordinary claims while reminding us that extraordinary evidence should still matter. Whether you end up agreeing with all of his conclusions or not, it's an informative and thought-provoking overview that encourages critical thinking rather than blind acceptance—or blind dismissal. A worthwhile listen, even if it didn't completely blow my mind.
I found this to be an interesting listen, especially because Shermer doesn't simply dismiss every conspiracy out of hand. One of the biggest takeaways is that governments and powerful institutions have, at times, engaged in genuine conspiracies and cover-ups, making it understandable why public skepticism exists. That nuance kept the course engaging, and I learned quite a bit about the historical events and psychological factors discussed.
At times, the course feels more like a lecture than a gripping narrative, and some sections drag more than others. Even so, Shermer does a solid job of explaining why people are drawn to extraordinary claims while reminding us that extraordinary evidence should still matter. Whether you end up agreeing with all of his conclusions or not, it's an informative and thought-provoking overview that encourages critical thinking rather than blind acceptance—or blind dismissal. A worthwhile listen, even if it didn't completely blow my mind.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 123 reviews