What we’re about
We encourage open and light chat on interesting social, cultural and political issues.
We welcome diverse viewpoints and perspectives and encourage all members to treat the experience of hearing from people who think and understand the world differently to oneself as opportunities for personal and cultural growth, rather than as threats to our or other groups' identities.
We are interested in how people make sense of the world, and how people may arrive at different positions on one or multiple topics or issues despite having access to the same facts and information.
We are interested in finding common ground across political and social divides, but also in how to live with and work with those who hold different perspectives peacefully and productively.
We are a very young organisation, and happy to be shaped by our members as to what, how and when we go about having engaging, interesting and civil discussions between people who express different opinions and ideas to each other.
Upcoming events (1)
See all- Conspiracy Theories and Conspiracy TheoristsJeremiah's Taproom, Edinburgh
A conspiracy can be defined in a number of ways, all of which seems to involve some form of secretive collective action, the intentional withholding of information and knowledge from the general public, and most of which seem to impugn some degree or subversive and/or malevolent intent on behalf of the conspiracists. This recent science podcast discusses both conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists, delving into definitions and evidence both for the extent to which certain conspiracy theories were later shown to be correct, and the extent to which factors like personality may affect people's tendencies to be or become 'conspiracy theorists'.
One interesting tension apparent for me, in listening to the podcast, is between the definitions provided for a 'conspiracy theory', and the additional connotations inherent in the term 'conspiracy theorist'. The hosts consider a number of cases where they consider there to be enough evidence to believe that certain conspiracies have taken place. But at no point do they then seem comfortable self-defining as 'conspiracy theorists'. Instead, the term 'conspiracy theorist' appears strongly valanced and derogatory. Should it be?
Let’s discuss!
RSVPs: As the popularity of topics I've suggested is always difficult to predict, I tend not to book the location beforehand. If over three people RSVP by the Thursday before the meetup, I will attempt to book Jeremiah's Taproom, and if they can't accommodate us book somewhere nearby instead.
