Logically Questioning Strange Ideas and Controversial Theories


As a Christian scholar and logic instructor, I often get asked about my thoughts on strange phenomena, controversial theories, and alternative conspiratorial explanations. Through the years I’ve frequently been asked about such unusual things as UFOs, the apparitions of Mary, near-death experiences, and a host of conspiracy theories such as those relating to the JFK assassination, denial of the Holocaust, the so-called moon-landing hoax, secret societies, and various speculative end-of-the-world scenarios.

Not all of these topics are on the same level when it comes to their rational or non-rational basis and their evidentiary or non-evidentiary support level, but they are all unusual and highly controversial issues. Thus, before accepting any strange and/or controversial idea these topics need to be thought through carefully—lest we affirm belief in something that is false, misleading, or possibly even harmful. Of course from a Christian perspective a believer in Christ should also ask if certain issues and beliefs are biblical and compatible with the Christian worldview.1

However, in this article I want to offer a basic logical checklist when it comes to thinking broadly about unusual phenomena. This list is intended to include basic questions to ask about the viability of strange ideas and beliefs. These questions will not necessarily resolve whether certain controversial ideas and theories should be affirmed, but will help to identify if some phenomenon or belief is problematic in nature. At minimum these questions will serve as a good place to begin a logical evaluation of challenging topics.

Questions to Ask about Strange Ideas and Controversial Theories

Here are five logical questions to ask when thinking about unusual phenomena or peculiar claims:

1. Does the theory hold together foundationally?

Well-conceived ideas and theories are logically sound and internally consistent. Viable explanatory theories avoid self-stultification or being self-defeating in nature (they do not contradict by both affirming and denying essential elements of the same theory). So begin by asking whether the idea, phenomenon, or explanation is logically coherent as a whole. For example: Does the grand theory that extraterrestrial civilizations are visiting Earth from other galaxies hold together internally as a whole?

2. Does the theory comport with the facts?

Good theories and explanations are closely connected to facts. They not only correspond to the known facts, they make sense of the facts by tying them together in a coherent fashion. So ask carefully about the factual nature and basis of the belief, phenomenon, or explanation. Grand conspiracy theories can often make short shrift of the facts. For example: What is one to do with the overwhelming physical evidence and eyewitness reports from various sources (Jewish, Axis, Allied) supporting the factual nature of the Holocaust?

3. Does the theory avoid unwarranted presumptions?

There is a huge difference between presuming to know something and in fact knowing something. Genuine knowledge includes proper justification for one’s true beliefs. Solid theories are based upon that which can be proved or verified. So reflect on the basic assumptions behind a theory or belief and ask whether they are well-grounded. For example: When it comes to big government conspiracy theories, can the assumption of the large number of people required to be involved in the conspiracy and keep a secret be reasonably grounded?

4. How well does the theory handle counter-evidence and viable challenges?

Feasible ideas and theories are flexible enough to accommodate possible counter-evidence. The most potent explanatory theories carefully regard the best critiques from alternative perspectives and can answer the challenges. Critical thinking, however, demands that a person fairly consider viable alternatives. Unfortunately, too often people who affirm strange beliefs and conspiracy theories in particular have not considered genuine challenges to their viewpoints. For example: If the moon-landing was a hoax how does one account for the physical evidence and eyewitness testimony supporting it?

5. Is the theory at least theoretically open to falsification; if so, how?

Viable ideas and explanatory theories make claims that can be tested and proven true or false (verified or falsified). Nonfalsifiable claims that cannot be investigated, evaluated, and critiqued carry little rational weight. So ask how an idea, theory, or phenomenon could at least theoretically be discredited. For example: How would one go about falsifying a religious-based apparition?

These are the logical questions that I begin with when something seems strange, unusual, or controversial. They help me to consider the rational and evidentiary basis of a challenging issue. I hope they will help you to think through peculiar topics. And, as a Christian, I invite people to ask these critical questions about Jesus’s resurrection.



  1. In thinking about the Christian worldview, see Kenneth Richard Samples, A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007).

  One thought on “Logically Questioning Strange Ideas and Controversial Theories

  1. July 11, 2017 at 6:24 am

    Reblogged this on Apologetics4all and commented:
    Another great post by Ken. Here’s a good quote from it, “Unfortunately, too often people who affirm strange beliefs and conspiracy theories in particular have not considered genuine challenges to their viewpoints.”

    • July 11, 2017 at 9:11 am

      Thanks for the reblog, D.L.

      Best regards.

      Ken Samples

  2. July 15, 2017 at 11:34 am

    A little humility would be helpful, too. To set oneself up as Judge and Jury of All Science is pretty arrogant.

    I would argue instead that we accept the scientific consensus as the best approximation of reality to date in those fields for which we’re not qualified to evaluate the evidence.

    • July 15, 2017 at 2:24 pm



      I agree with you that humility is critically important when evaluating challenging topics. In fact, humility is considered a Christian virtue.

      But my article nowhere suggests anyone should be “Judge and Jury of All Science.” Instead what I’ve written offers a logical checklist so to speak to think about unusual and controversial topics. I would think as an atheist you would value the logical categories I have highlighted.

      Regarding science, I deeply value the rational enterprise which, by the way, was birthed in the context of the Christian worldview. But science’s limits can be augmented by logic, philosophy, and theology–the queen of the sciences.

      With all due respect, I invite you to apply the five questions I introduce in my article to your naturalistic worldview.

      Best regards.

      Ken Samples

      • September 12, 2017 at 12:56 pm

        I see that I was unclear in my previous email. Sorry about that.

        I was referring to RTB’s rejection of evolution. I can see no option for the layman but to accept the scientific consensus as the best provisional statement of scientific truth that we have. That doesn’t make it true, but that’s the way to bet.

      • September 13, 2017 at 9:08 am

        Some Christians embrace evolutionary creation (or theistic evolution), but RTB does not. RTB embraces old-earth creationism.

        Best regards.

        Ken Samples

  3. Rita
    July 19, 2017 at 2:10 pm

    What great criteria to consider for any topic. Unfortunately, I think that those who need them the most prefer to Insist on the rightness of their cause without that criteria. And humility is best exhibited first by ourselves, rather than insisting on it in others.

    • July 19, 2017 at 2:46 pm

      Appreciate your comments, Rita.

      Thanks for reading my blog articles.

      Best regards.

      Ken Samples

    • July 31, 2017 at 8:21 am

      Thanks for the link.

      Ken Samples

  4. January 6, 2018 at 5:32 am

    ***The link in the citation below is “dead.” Is this article still available online somewhere? Thanks much, Rick.
    “For an article on some of the major big government conspiracy theories, see Kenneth R. Samples, “Thinking Through Big Government Conspiracy Theories,” Reflections (blog), Reasons to Believe, March 1, 2010, http://www.reasons.org/articles/thinking-through-big-government-conspiracy-theories.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: