The Public Discussion on Flat Earth Movement

Abstract

The paper reflects on public discourses about science and pseudoscience, proposing the same discursive structure for both—the Esperantist-Epideictic genre. This genre of discourse might bring together characteristics that we understand as constituents of the public discourse on science. It also enables us to depict the process by which to maintain cohesion on a group’s values. The discursive activity points to science as neutral, free, and independent of social influences captivating those already in this discursive sphere. The discursive hermeticity appears in the Esperantist content and the Epideictic form by avoiding the dialogical situations where there is no epistemological and axiological dispute. We thus, show that the Esperantist-Epideictic genre helps to understand the process of maintaining a cohesive group whose beliefs about the Flat Earth appear in social media. We use data from three sources: transcriptions from seminars held at that 1st FlatCon Brazil, most viewed videos on YouTube where affirmationists talk about Flat Earth, and semi-structured exploratory interviews conducted at FlatCon. Our findings indicate that some conceptions of validation of knowledge, scientific method, science bias, reality, and truth compound a distinct part in the current conversations about the Flat Earth movement. Moreover, the Esperantist-Epideictic genre of discourse can be an analytical tool for framing the echo chamber in social media while defending or attacking the Flat Earth movement. We conclude that in a time where there is a growing consensus that science is under attack, the ways in which its defenders are trying to stand up to it may be causing some harm.

The “Global” Deception: Flat-Earth Conspiracy Theory between Science and Religion

“…On the basis of the data collected and analyzed, the article frames flat earthism as a paradigmatic case of superconspiracy, that is, of a farreaching theory capable of linking and including within itself a hierarchy of other, more circumscribed theories (Barkun 2003). To this end, flat earthism combines a heterogeneous network of discursive sources (Soares de Melo et al 2020), formulating an ambivalent narrative that on the one hand borrows the register of science (Arroyo- Barrigüete et al 2023;Mattos et al 2022) but rejects academic science, and on the other hand, borrows the language of religion, but draws on heterodox knowledge and spiritual currents proper to the cultic milieu (sensu Campbell 1972) that are proposed as alternatives to traditional and organized religions. In composing these sources of knowledge, the discourse of Italian flat earthism turns out to be marked by an anti-globalist rhetoric, in a twofold sense: first, because it argues against the acquisitions of science regarding the spherical shape of the planet, by supporting the thesis expressed by the formula "Earth is not a globe"; second, because it accredits an anti-intellectualist path of knowledge, accessible to the "common man" that aims to create a space of autonomy to oppose the processes of secularization and globalization in which the flat earthers see the implementation of the political, economic, and cultural project of building a future dystopian society, referred to as the New World Order.…”