The way conventional conspiracy theorists view the world mirrors how conventional co-incidence theorists view it. Their outlook is similar, but the conclusions they draw are opposite. The conspiracy theorist looks at suspicious world events and, rightly so, recognizes there is something beyond the surface. However, often they come up with a forced conclusion that is somehow related to something in their belief system, be it the Illuminati, Jesuits, Jews, aliens or the NWO. The co-incidence theorist criticizes the conspiracy theorist for this, and rightly so. Yet when the co-incidence theorist sees these suspicious world events, he might recognize there is something beyond the surface, but he understands he cannot know what the underlying actors and factors are, so he decides there is nothing there worth considering. It will, unfortunately, lead to more ignorance.
Myself being more of the conspiracy theorist outlook, I prefer that outlook, yet I can understand the desire of co-incidence theorists not to create more confusion by idle speculation. So I propose the kind of outlook that leads you away from dogma and ignorance into knowledge and understanding. Conspiracy theorists too, just like regular people, can be very dogmatic in their beliefs, which is not how they should be. Question everything should be the motto for most of us. At least, even if you look at events from a dogmatic viewpoint, you are still looking at them, which does not apply to the co-incidence theorist who washes his hands of the affair like Pilate.
The famous quote from Sigmund Freud goes: “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” It is true, but the underlying implication is that usually a cigar is not just a cigar, which is something most co-incidence theorists fail to recognize. It is mostly a matter of convenience to see a cigar and say it is a cigar, anybody can do it. It is more difficult to see a cigar and say what it actually is. That is the mistake many conspiracy theorists make. It’s not so difficult to say that something is not really the cigar it looks like, but it is extremely difficult to pinpoint what it actually is. We often pretend we know what it is, even though we don’t. Still, it works both ways. Let’s say a conventional conspiracy theorist and co-incidence theorist see a UFO. The former says it is an alien flying saucer, and the latter says it’s a weather balloon. Both are wrong, making an assumption based on their belief system. The UFO is naturally a transcendental cyborg unicorn chrysalising into a new cosmos in the minds of billiard players.
I tend to see everything as not being as it seems, even though sometimes things are that simple. I’m happy to be wrong in those cases, since most often I’m not. Also it does not mean there is a conspiracy behind everything, it simply means things always have a deeper meaning to what it looks like a surface, which is missed by anyone with a dogmatic view on things.