Welcome, David Icke fans!

Hi. You may very well be this blogpost because you’ve just heard the interview with David Icke that my friend Josh and I posted over at Podbean. If you have no idea what I’m talking about, go listen to said interview here.

Right, well, here’s a couple of links to inform new readers of who I am!

The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories, a book I wrote on the topic of how we should take talk of conspiracy theories seriously.

(You might also like to look at the basis of that book, my PhD on conspiracy theories, free to view here.)

Other, more recent philosophical work can be found here at Academia.edu and ResearchGate.

Finally, this is possibly the greatest thing I have even gotten to do on TV (thus far):


About Matthew Dentith

Author of "The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories" (Palgrave Macmillan), Matthew Dentith wrote his PhD on epistemic issues surrounding belief in conspiracy theories. He is a frequent media commentator on the weird and the wonderful, both locally and internationally. On occasion he can be caught dreaming about wax lions but, mostly, it is rumoured he works for elements of the New World Order.

3 comments:

  1. Fascinating interview with Icke, but also a little bit disappointing, letting him ramble on and on like that on the reptilian question unchallenged, providing his elaborate arguments around why people might reject his theory, rather than addressing the empirical basis for it. Also worth challenging was Icke’s claim that he was “not attached to how it was received” when his angry reaction to Jesse Ventura’s pointed questions back in 2012, and Icke’s hate-filled articles in response, suggest the opposite to be true. But there was some value in hearing him admit he had not gone public about Savile because he feared being sued.

    1. Hi, Will.

      Josh and I decided that the format of the interview would be to pose questions and let David answer them, as opposed to interject and challenge. We thought that letting our listeners hear the full range of David’s views would be of more interest to them than make it into a debate. As it stands, in the hour we had, we covered less than half the topics we wanted to go into; I had a question about what to make of claims we should take his views purely allegorically, for example, we never had time to broach. I am somewhat hopeful we will get a chance for a second interview after the talk here in Auckland in August, so there’s still a chance some of our unasked questions will get answered.

      1. Hi Matthew, I look forward to a second helping.

        Perhaps you can explore with your questions why each of his books seems to recycle key themes and content from preceding editions, whilst the main changes are in the names he gives to the conspirators and their system of control, with a recent ‘event’ conspiracy tacked on for good measure to provide some differentiation. A bit like a Smiths LP where there would be a couple of new songs in with some older ones.

Comments are closed.