Node at 11:18 – every statement is a generalisation to some extent. Nouns themselves group things with differences under a single label; I can think of no way of avoiding this.

However, denial is a genuine psychological phenomenon. We can spot it in others quite easily, but our own is of course hidden from us by its very nature.

There are various ways to theorise eg. scientifically, rationally, politically, superstitiously, religiously etc. These are not rigidly defined; rather, they are characterisations, and there is considerable overlap between most of them.

Conspiracy theory seems best characterised by its use of appeal to an assumed motive of some poorly defined group. You can see above in my April 10, 23:52 that I refer to the “mainstream conspiracy theory”, in which 9/11 was arbitrarily attributed to the motives of “Muslims”. There are plenty of others, blamed on, say “Russia”.

Denialism is similar to but the opposite of sensationalism; promoting certain facts while ignoring or dismissing others, and the slanting of language and use of rhetoric, primarily to convince others that a matter of concern is purely imaginary.

When you suggest that all theories are conspiracy theories, you’re like someone unable to smell their own fart.