What makes a crackpot?

[Sisyphus]

So I was looking through the pseudoscience and speculations sections, and I found myself newly amazed by the number and depth of crackpot theories. They wildly twist mathematics, science, and the english language into incomprensibility and absurdity, yet I'm convinced they're not jokes, just because there was clearly so much time spent on them. They often show familiarity (if not correct understanding) with highly esoteric subjects, and are often accompanied by "calculations" which must have taken hours if not days. So I guess my question is, is there a name for this kind of behavior? What causes someone to do all this?

[insane_alien]

i'd say an extreme form of attention seeking, paranoia and a superiority complex could possibly result in the formation of a crackpot. acid trips are probably involved in more than a few cases.

 

Edit: i just thought, they usually have a problem with authority thinking that everything they say is false but in trying to get everyone over to their side, they would become an authority and hence hate themselves.wonder what would happen if a crackpot actually turned out to be right for once. damn thats scary.

[timo]

What causes someone to do all this?

I suppose the cause is trying to understand (often in the sense of explaining) the world we are living in.

As for the lot of effort you mentioned. I doubt that it´s so much effort. Giving a good starting idea I think I could give you a relativityiswrong-model with calculations supposedly proving it within a few days. Try learning relativity within a few days...

[swansont]

The big piece missing with most crackpost is that they don't know what it is they don't know. i.e. they asssume their knowledge is far more complete than it really is. And the megalomania/paranoia prevents them from seeing/acknowledging the mistakes that they make.

[mr d]

hello

 

its repression by the majority on minority.

 

or as the saying goes. ' i reject your reality(majority) and insert my own(minority).'

 

mr d

[Sayonara]

its repression by the majority on minority.

No it isn't.

 

And yes, I do see the irony here.

[Kyle]

The drive of a crackpot is the same as the drive of a scientist. They want to discover truth, they aren't happy with the truth that is offered by other sources, and they attempt to work it out and find a new possibility using the information they know. There is no problem with any of that – that's how most science starts.

The problem arises when the person is misinformed and absolutely staunch in their assertion. Anyone who is too prideful to admit that their “theory” is wrong is well on the road to being a crackpot.

[YT2095]

there`s probably as many reasons as to what Make a "crackpot" as there are crackpots out there.

although they May exhibit certain traits, I couldn`t be sure there is a Distinct commonality amongst them that may serve as a "Trigger" or something you could nail-down.

 

it`s all a matter of deffinition and degrees really, I think most of us have our "Crackpot" moments at some time or another.

 

it`s a Good question, but certainly a tough one! imo.

[scicop]

Hmm..what makes a crackpot? This is not an evidenced-based assertion, but here is my two cents..keep the change.

 

I figure a crackpot is one who subconscienciously knows that they are inadequet to perform in a proper research environment (i.e. peer-review, collaboration, exchange of ideas with established/reputable/independantly funded scientist). Therefore the come up with wacked out ideas in an attempt to gain either a following of like-minded crackpots or a small amount of fame from others in the crackpot community. They're trying to make up for their personal failures.

Thank you.

[gcol]

All the world is crackpot, except me and thee, and even thee is a bit cracked.

 

If anyone thinks all their ideas, opinions, beliefs and theories are as sound as a bell, they sure are in a tiny minority, possibly of one.

 

Those who have never had a crackpot moment should get out more and smell the roses.

[Sisyphus]

All the world is crackpot' date=' except me and thee, and even thee is a bit cracked.

 

If anyone thinks all their ideas, opinions, beliefs and theories are as sound as a bell, they sure are in a tiny minority, possibly of one.

 

Those who have never had a crackpot moment should get out more and smell the roses.[/quote']

 

That's not what I'm talking about. I would never say something like, "I know a way of harnessing gravity for limitless free energy, but I'm afraid it will be used for evil" or "I can answer any question at all with my access to the Universal Mind" or "I have proven that a Martian civilization built the pyramids, and here is the route they took."

[Royston]

I guess authors like Von Daniken, and Terrence Mckenna don't help, I'm sure there's loads more examples. I think the problem is that people jump in head first sometimes, before getting educated properly. I personally think it's healthy to explore new ideas, but getting attached and not listening to reason, when you have A. no evidence for your idea or B. mountains of counter evidence debunking your idea, then move on.

 

If you have an idea that's outside of science, then I think everyone is within their right to express it, and discuss it, but rattling on like it's a truth is not going to get you anywhere.

 

I think there's a lot of people that just don't realise the amount of work that goes into a scientific theory, and the minds behind it. Sure, there's a lot of people that can grasp the 'concept' of say relativity, if they saw the maths that lead to the theory, I think they'd go cold.

[mr d]

hello again

 

perhaps it's your use of the term 'crackpot'. i believe most people still consider a person referred to as a crackpot as a rather harmless individual. as opposed to your lunatics, nut jobs, and run of the mill wackjobs.

as to their theories or statements, most people will dismiss them out of hand, perhaps a few will agree, but if they hurt no one so what. are you expressing the belief all people should only believe excepted scientific doctrine. personally i find that more frightening then a crackpot and his bizarre theory.

plus who knows what may come of a crackpot idea. just look at doctor kellogg and his ideas of heath and abstinence that lead to the invention of kellogg's corn flakes. not to mention their suger coated descendant frosted flakes.

they're greaaaat!

 

http://www.encyclopedia-online.info/Corn_Flakes

 

mr d

[Sayonara]

Corn flakes have never flown in the face of scientific models.

[Sisyphus]

Ok, for the last time: I'm not talking about new ideas, I'm talking about crazy ideas. From the guy who thinks the reason nobody understands what he's talking about is that they're not wearing the right anti-mindcontrol helmet.

[Royston]

Ok, for the last time: I'm not talking about new ideas, I'm talking about crazy[/i'] ideas. From the guy who thinks the reason nobody understands what he's talking about is that they're not wearing the right anti-mindcontrol helmet.

 

Well I guess you're describing delusional behaviour. I just see the majority of so-called crackpots on here as thinking they've stumbled across something, with no solid foundation to prove it. Though with people that are adamant that they are correct, regardless of what others say, they're probably suffering from feelings of grandeur, perhaps.

 

I think it's a hard thing to pin down. If somebody is genuinely misguided, and wants to spend the rest of their life proving something without using the already established, and accepted methods, then that's probably verging more on stupidity and ignorance rather than madness. However, if they believe that nobody else in the world understands them, unless they're wearing a tinfoil hat...to reflect the government controlled radio waves of obedience, then they're most probably barking.

 

I guess there's many, many reasons that could lead to such behaviour. I don't think asking a crackpot what drives them, is going to be met with a rational answer though.

 

I know you asked the question, but what do reckon could be the cause of obsessive mindless blathering.

[SkepticLance]

I think there are two things that make a crackpot.

 

1. Pure chance.

 

2. The very human inability to admit they are wrong.

 

In other words, these are people who by pure chance are exposed to silly ideas. Once they adopt those ideas (not having a better alternative) they refuse to change their minds.

 

One of the qualities that makes a good scientist is the ability to say : "I was wrong." That quality is totally absent from the crackpot.

 

Of course, there are lots of other factors. As said earlier, there are as many factors as there are crackpots. For example ; a deep suspicion of authority is one quality that makes crackpots reject conventional wisdom. A lack of good education, especially into critical thinking is another factor. etc. etc.

 

One thing I know for sure is that you cannot change their thinking. Once a crackpot has made a full emotional committment to an idea, that person will not sway from it, no matter how much evidence to the contrary you supply.

[mr d]

hello a third time

 

lets try this.

reality exsists in a number of forms, two of which are.

1) scientific - actual hard data, formula's.etc...

2) percieved reality - or how you percieve the world, what you in your mind believe to be real.

 

most people do not live in the scientific world. you live in your own percieved world. reality is what you believe it to be. a person you call a crackpot in a lot of cases actually believes what they espouse to is the real scientific fact. and to them it is because their percieved reality says that it is.

as stated above reasons may vary, comfirmation of beliefs, ego conflicts, etc. but they percieve their own scientific facts are reality. and for them it is. remember the world is what you believe it to be, not what it may in scientific reality actually be.

example: i percieve you to be a person, perhaps a student, interested in science who comes to this forums to discuss your area of employment or study. that is my percieved reality of you, and i respond to you based upon that perception.

you may in reality be a 60 year old woman confined to a mental hospital somewhere in canada. but i base my world on what i believe you to be, not scientific fact. i need that belief to function in dealing with you on this forum.

they need their beliefs to function in their world. it is how they explain what they, again, percieve the world to be and in so doing it is reality to them.

 

so basically they are people who for some reason, mental - emotionally..., need this reality of their's to exsist for their ability to function in life.

 

mr d

[gcol]

Found this quote from one Edward Franklin ("Digital Philosophy", whatever that is) on Crackpot Theories:

 

"Every good physicist must have a crackpot detector to keep himself or herself from wasting time on crackpot theories. Nevertheless, almost all physicists spend almost all of their time working on wrong theories in the hope that they will eventually find a correct theory, or at least, an important wrong theory. Witness Pauli’s famous remark, “That theory is worthless, it isn’t even wrong.” All of the wrong theories that physicists respect fall into a certain set of accepted classes; they are all trying to mine in fields where pay dirt is found from time to time".

 

So if all you smarty ar*se guys who know everything have necer had a crackpot moment, you ain't thinking or tryin'!

 

Roll up, crackpots one and all, you make life more fun and interesting.

[Sisyphus]

Apparently we haven't yet grasped the difference between wrong and crackpot.

[gcol]

Apparently we haven't yet grasped the difference between wrong and crackpot.

 

I have the feeling that crackpottery, like beauty, is often only in the eye of the beholder. You are right though, but who is to judge?

[Sisyphus]

I guess, but it does seem like there's a distinct and identifiable sort which lends itself to crackpottery, which is why I asked about it in the first place. I've been wrong lots of times, I've had crazy theories about stuff, and I've been just plain misinformed, as well. But when the truth comes to light I can generally see why I was wrong, admit as much, and change my views. The crackpot, on the other hand, just seems to get more insistent the more people point out flaws in his reasoning. They often accuse the whole scientific establishment of vast conspiracies, and that kind of thing. It's all very paranoid and obsessive. I was just wondering if "crackpottery" had any special characteristics beyond your typical paranoid obsessive.

[gcol]

It's all very paranoid and obsessive. I was just wondering if "crackpottery" had any special characteristics beyond your typical paranoid obsessive.

 

Agree. Seems like we need the advice of a psychiatric specialist if the type of crackpot you have in mind is genuinely mentally disturbed. A true paranoid obsessive is rather threatening to us all, in science or religion.

 

Dammit, you've made me come over all serious, now I'm depressed.

[SkepticLance]

Sisyphus.

I think you just nailed down that defining feature yourself.

 

To wit : "A crackpot is a person who clings to his theories even when presented with hard data that falsifies it."

[CanadaAotS]

Nevermind "even when", if anything it gets worse the more hard data that is presented lol.

 

I love how mr d defends the crackpot community. talk about courageous haha

 

I've always believed that the religion is sort of the flipside of science... and as such it seems to have its "religous" crackpots as well... but being the flipside of science they believe it, where as they are scorned on the science side lol.