Conspiratorial ideation involves a number of characteristic features. One of course is motivated reasoning, in which evidence and arguments supporting one's theory is accepted uncritically, while hyper-scepticism is adopted towards to contrary.

Another characteristic feature is paranoia, fear and distrust - especially towards perceived authorities and the powerful. This is of course a pretty adaptive bias - it's usually less costly to be too vigilant rather than too trusting, when navigating normal social interactions.

The cognitive dimension is important too. The thing about conspiracy theories is that they're complex and inherently intruiging and interesting. Nevertheless, they are cognitively satisfying, in resolving a complex, messy reality with a single interconnected narrative .

Conspiracies are logically 'closed'. That is, they grow to incorporate elements which prevent disconfirmation, and firm up the weak links. Why isn't the MSM reporting on this? Becuase they're in the thrall of the Lizard people, obviously.

Emotionally, they provide a strong sense of validation, in being woke to what's going on. One enters a virtual community, in which mutual support and encouragement is offered. It is a bit like an ad-hoc, single issue cult, and the outsiders are the sheeple.

The subject-matter is important too. Conspiratorial reasoning pops up for some issues far more than others. Vaccination, climate change, GMOs, your community or country suffering some adversity or calamity. You rationalise backwards from what you feel must be true.

A classic case of this is people who worry about chemtrails . The long contrails don't feel right. They don't look natural, in fact obviously produced by an artificial process. They're a perfect target for attributing the cause of all kinds of psychosomatic and neurotic worries

Many conspiracies show naturalistic, intuitive reasoning. For flat eathers, the vast astronomical distances don't feel right. Same for anti-vaxxers, regarding putting biological contaminants in the bloodstream. It's reflexive, and the 'theory' is post-hoc rationalisation.

Now, you and me, we're smart, right? We don't believe in Lizard people or a lfat earth! We'd never fall into those kinds of errors! Uh uh. There's a spectrum, and we are all predisposed to it. It's likely that both of us have fallen into it, to one degree or another.

I think it's good for people to think about conspiracy theories, as well as belief in the paranormal and the supernatural. They may be delusional, but they speak to a real need by all of us to create meaning and structure from a confusing, messy, anxiety-provoking reality.

There's an awful lot more I could say about the links between these things. One common element is our bias towards an 'intentional stance' - i.e., prioritising human motivations in explaining salient events. The GFC was a big deal, right? It *must* have been masterminded by "X".

Perhaps the takeaway is to practice 'epistemic humility'. Recognise our brains evolved to deal with small group social interactions, and *not* the massively complex, interconnected world we find ourselves in. So *expect* yourself to be bad at it, and don't be so confident.

My second piece of advice (if you don't want to fall into these traps) is to be wary any time you read, hear, or think of some opinion that feels right, feels satisfying. You know the ones. I don't know the truth, but I do know that it's rarely simple and rarely satisfying.