I think the argument could be a bit more nuanced. For instance, wouldn’t the world’s religions, especially the more “revealed” ones, amount to conspiracy theories, as explained here?
Then again, questioning those narratives was called “heresy,” rather than conspiracy theory. Which is today’s term for questioning the official narrative, such as; “Russia did it!” At least one won’t get burned at the stake for it.
The fact is that people are herd animals and such arguments are used to constrain the “Overton window” of acceptable thought. So is it illogical to try thinking outside the box?
I have an idea. Consider me a “conspiracy theorist.” Here are a couple of essays I wrote, positing various mainstream assumptions I see logical holes in. While you might not see fit to respond, it might give you something to think about;
