The Labor Theory of Truth - Dave's World

The Labor Theory of Truth

April 15, 2025

Conspiracy theorists occupy a strange place in our culture, because that class is composed of both skeptics (who distrust mainstream narratives and construct the theories) and the credulous (who believe their theories). However, I've made an observation that links their mindsets together and hopefully somewhat explains their common mentality.

The phrase "do your own research" is often heard in conspiracy theory circles. There are some who would say that the mere usage of the phrase is a red flag for this type of thinking, but there are good and bad reasons for using it. A good way might be to disclaim a statement of fact you're making if you aren't entirely certain: do your own research, for I may be mistaken. Conspiracy theorists tend to use it thusly: do your own research, for you are mistaken in believing the mainstream narrative. My observation is that this call to action serves two purposes: the obvious one, which is to get someone to question their beliefs and open their mind to a different explanation of something, and the non-obvious one, which is that, to the right sort of person, the very act of having worked to find some information makes it easier to believe: the labor theory of truth.

I give it this name as an analogy to the Marxist labor theory of value: the idea that the worth of something is proportional to the level of effort put into making it. In my conversations with conspiracy theorists, I have observed that the more degrees of separation between their conclusion and the surface-level facts, the more credible it seems to be.

This is especially so in theories about religion. There exists a niche interpretation of Christianity called Christian Identity which claims that certain European ethnicities are the true descendants of the ancient Israelites and are therefore God's chosen people. If you seek out their adherents online, you will find references to various ancient texts with dubious connection to Christianity, some of which are older than even Judaism. It's a clear case study in confirmation bias: the Identity Christian goes into the research with a preconceived conclusion in mind, searches for even the most tenuous confirmation, and proclaims it as proof. What convinced the original theorist of its legitimacy was not the strength of the evidence but rather the lengths to which they went to find it.

The inverse consequence of this type of reasoning is that mainstream sources of information are never to be trusted (except in the notable case in which it aligns with their conclusion). It is fair enough to treat authority with skepticism: people with power have their own interests at heart when making public statements, and we should not be gullible. However, automatically writing off anything said by, say, a government authority is a textbook example of the genetic fallacy. I submit that the conspiracy theorist rejects the mainstream narrative not because there is a compelling reason to doubt it, but because believing it would be too easy. The truth is only obtained through hard work; nobody would just openly tell the truth.

I had a recent encounter with someone who claimed he knew that ChatGPT was self-aware. When I asked how he could possibly know that without winning a Nobel prize, he explained that he had to ask it a very convoluted series of probing questions to get it to bypass the barriers programmed into it so that it would talk openly about its true feelings. He had set out from the very beginning with the goal of getting ChatGPT to say something to confirm its self awareness, and then having put in the requisite amount of effort to uncover a truth, his suspicions were confirmed to him. Never mind the myriad possible explanations for the behavior he saw; he had found the truth that was being hidden from him by the programmers.

Rarely do I ever encounter someone who feels strongly about just one conspiracy theory. Most often, a believer in one conspiracy theory is obsessed with doubting the narrative and the search for the hidden truth. It often becomes their entire personality, which leads frequently to awkward Thanksgiving dinners. This is what leads me to believe it is a difference in their very epistemology rather than just a happenstance of something they happened to read or get curious about once.

The psychology of this sort of thing is undoubtedly complex, and I am not qualified to speak authoritatively on the subject. This is just an observation I have made and my attempt to understand it. Experimental verification is left as an exercise to the reader. Do your own research.