1. Arguing against conspiracy theorists is often frustrating because the theorists seem to be able to handle any evidence that goes against the theory. But then again, someone with a true theory should be able to handle any evidence that goes against the theory. So what’s the difference?
2. Being willing to change your mind when there is good evidence against what you believe is usually considered an epistemic virtue. But are there cases in which someone should “stick to their guns”—that is, continue to defend their beliefs despite good evidence to the contrary?
3. (Paper assignment) Explore your favorite conspiracy theory. (A list of them can be found on Wikipedia’s page “List of conspiracy theories.”) Write a short paper in which you briefly explain the conspiracy theory, and then, examine the belief using what you have learned in this class. You might reflect on what motivates someone to believe the theory, how the theory’s believers handle evidence against their theory, ways in which that defense of the theory is rational, and ways in which belief in the theory is irrational.