Avoiding the Stereotyping of the Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories: A Reply to Hill

Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 11 (8):41-49 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX


I’m to push back on Hill’s (2022) criticism in four ways. First: we need some context for the debate that occurred in the pages of the Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective that so concerns Hill. Second: getting precise with our terminology (and not working with stereotypes) is the only theoretically fruitful way to approach the problem of conspiracy theories. Third: I address Hill’s claim there is no evidence George W. Bush or Tony Blair accused their critics, during the build-up the invasion of Iraq in 2003ACE, as being “conspiracy theorists.” Fourth (and finally): I will gently suggest that Hill has succumbed to a stereotypical view of work in Philosophy on conspiracy theories.

Author's Profile

M R. X. Dentith
Beijing Normal University


Added to PP

320 (#45,015)

6 months
131 (#20,741)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?