And then there's this sort of thinking, which is incredibly common and therefore typically considered fine (the medical establishment can hardly pathologize normal behavior).

EDIT: and the fact that this is so heavily downvoted demonstrates the truth of my comment.

> The author provides good edge cases where theories once labelled as conspiracy theories proved to be correct. The conspiracy was true. And since many legitimate theories, in science for example, turns out to be wrong, the author asks: "Why do people pick on conspiracy theories?" > > I think there is a problem in wording here. A conspiracy theory is, literally speaking, a theory about a conspiracy wherein bad intentions have led to error, lies and falsehood. > > The key here is the charge of bad intentions.

How would you draw a distinction between an idea/belief about human actions that is merely incorrect, and one that is a conspiracy theory: is whether one's intentions are "bad" the sole distinguishing factor? If so, that seems off as conspiracy theorists very often believe their intentions are good which generally speaking is not all that unlike all people and the beliefs they hold.