编辑“陰謀論”（章节）

==陰謀論與證據的關係==
支持者因自身的信念而去信奉陰謀論，此舉一般並非建基於證據之上{{sfn|Barkun|2003|p=7}}。[[诺姆·乔姆斯基]]將陰謀論跟制度分析比較，指後者主要聚焦於知名機關的長期公開行為上，並以主流媒體或學術文件上的記錄佐證有關行為的真確性<ref name="WintonickQuébec)1994">{{cite book |editor-last=Achbar |editor-first=Mark |year=1994 |title=Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media |url=https://archive.org/details/manufacturingcon00achb|publisher=Black Rose Books Ltd. |isbn=978-1-55164-002-0 |page=[https://archive.org/details/manufacturingcon00achb/page/131 131]}}</ref>。阴谋论则跟制度分析相反，先假定世上存有跟某些人有關的秘密組織，然後推測他們會怎樣活動<ref>{{cite book | title = Conspiracy Panics: Political Rationality and Popular Culture | author = Jack Z. Bratich | publisher = State University of New York Press, Albany | pages = 98–100 | access-date = 2015-06-16 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=CaDA2uhr8lkC | isbn = 9780791473344 | date = 2008-02-07 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20190418133830/https://books.google.com/books?id=CaDA2uhr8lkC&printsec=frontcover | archive-date =2019-04-18 | deadurl=no }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | title = Conspiracy Theories: A Critical Introduction | author = Jovan Byford | publisher = Palgrave MacMillan | pages = 25–27 | access-date = 2015-06-16 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=m5Er9ELOwQkC | isbn = 9780230349216 | date =  2011-10-12 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20140125180033/http://books.google.com/books?id=m5Er9ELOwQkC&printsec=frontcover | archive-date =  2014-01-25 | deadurl=no  }}</ref>。相信陰謀論跟像[[合取谬误]]般的推理謬誤有關<ref name="BrothertonFrench2014">{{cite journal|last1=Brotherton|first1=Robert|last2=French|first2=Christopher C.|title=Belief in Conspiracy Theories and Susceptibility to the Conjunction Fallacy|journal=Applied Cognitive Psychology|volume=28|issue=2|year=2014|pages=238–248|issn=0888-4080|doi=10.1002/acp.2995}}</ref>。

[[伦敦国王学院]]的克莱尔·伯查尔（Clare Birchall）形容陰謀論為一種「通俗易懂的知識或詮釋」{{efn|伯查尔於2006年寫道：「我们可以把阴谋论理解为独特而又通俗易懂的知識或詮釋……以此作我們理解認識它的切入點<ref name=Birchall2006>{{cite book | last = Birchall | first = Clare | contribution = Cultural studies on/as conspiracy theory | editor-last = Birchall | editor-first = Clare | title = Knowledge goes pop from conspiracy theory to gossip | publisher = Berg | location = Oxford, New York | year = 2006 | isbn = 978-1-84520-143-2 }}</ref>{{rp|66}}」}}。伯查尔在這使用了知識一詞，用以顯示阴谋论可以跟正當的認識方法聯繫起來{{efn|伯查尔於2006年寫道：「我们很快就发现……不可能将阴谋论和学术话语明确劃分為不正當/正當」<ref name=Birchall2006/>{{rp|72}}}}。伯查尔認為與常见的阴谋论驳斥相比，正當與不正當的知識之間的關係比較接近<ref>{{Cite journal | last = Birchall | first = Clare | title = Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you | journal = Culture Machine, Deconstruction Is/In Cultural Studies | volume = 6 | year = 2004 |url= http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/view/12/11 | access-date = 2015-03-11 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20150923211857/http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/view/12/11 | archive-date =  2015-09-23|deadurl=yes}}</ref>。

若證明了多個陰謀者參與其中的說法是正確的，它們通常就會被稱為「調查性新聞」或「歷史分析」，而不是陰謀論——[[水门事件]]便是一例<ref name="knight-2003">{{cite book|author=Peter Knight|title=Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qMIDrggs8TsC&pg=PA730|date=2003-01-01|publisher=ABC-CLIO|isbn=978-1-57607-812-9|pages=730–|access-date=2016-01-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160906162011/https://books.google.com/books?id=qMIDrggs8TsC&pg=PA730|archive-date=2016-09-05|deadurl=no}}</ref>。而「水门事件阴谋论」則是用於代指被定罪者背後還有黑幕的假說<ref>{{cite magazine|author=Ron Rosenbaum|title=Ah, Watergate|url=https://newrepublic.com/article/104169/ah-watergate|year=2012|magazine=New Republic|access-date=2016-06-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160806155414/https://newrepublic.com/article/104169/ah-watergate|archive-date=2016-08-06|deadurl=no}}</ref>。