ABSTRACT
In the debate on belief in conspiracy theories there are two schools of thought: Generalism (the thesis that we can evaluate conspiracy theories as a class) and Particularism (the argument that we should assess particular conspiracy theories on their evidential merits). After discussing the role of defining what counts as a conspiracy or conspiracy theory, in this chapter we argue for a Particularist take in the epistemology of conspiracy theories. We focus on both the considerations that motivate how we define what counts as a conspiracy theory (and thus what counts as evidence for or against conspiracy theories), and the way in which knowledge of such theories is – in some sense – improvised.
