Talk:Conspiracy theory

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Conspiracy theory article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Do not attack other users For disputes, please see our guideline	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Conspiracy theory VS Conspiracy revelation[change source]

Any criminal would HIDE its crimes. Specially if it is a plot. Even more if its carried in conjuction with other many people. (This is the definition of a conspiracy). Selfprotection is the main reason keep anyone living.

So the term "conspiracy theory" has this connotation that "it is most probably false" and now even is portrayed as it has been proposed by a "paranoid". This is an injustice to logic that leaves out the possiblity that the theory explained actually REVEAL a true conspiracy planed or carried out (in present or in the past).

There is a need for a non-biased name that does not fall into a falacie.

What a whistleblower is doing about a conspiracy?

Possible verbs/names:

+ Reveal it.

+ Expose it.

+ Construct it.

+ Decontruct it.

I would go more in the OPPOSING LINE of the factual nature of the conspiracy, which is TO KEEP IT HIDDEN. So I would name it as an EXPOSURE.

So the person does a: Conspiracy exposure.

The person can be labelled as a: Conspiracy exposer. ((Very precise linguistic here))

And a conspiracy exposition would have at least 3 main states.

-- Just a theory. Either well formulated or not. Completed or not.

-- Proven by many facts, or very presumably truth, by a judge or a valid reliable social group.

-- Disregarded (discredited) by many opposing facts (that are solid facts themselves), or mostly presumably false by simple logic observation, or proved wrong/false by a neutral social group.

I hope this shed light on our use of the language and over our civilization.

NOTE: This linguistic logics comes from the "Logic Reasoning Methodology" course I held at the National Air Forces engineering studies. Where I failed the first time and the studied thoroughly and received the highest calification possible, 100/100. This LOGIC is what saves planes, countries, civilizations, creates science and pilots and engineers. I wish it was more widely know. It is available, everywhere, starting with the studies of the falacies.

Happy living, righteous living!

Hope you like this clarification @ImprovedWikiImprovment

2.138.180.33 (talk) 17:52, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:ImprovedWikiImprovment 2.138.180.33 (talk) 17:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not provide reliable sources then there is not much to discuss. --IWI (talk) 19:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]