Should Books About Conspiracies be in the Non-Fiction Section?

[g2narat]

I really believe that a lot of authors of books dealing with conspiracies don't really believe them themselves. I think they're often just really passionate researchers and since people buy that kind of stuff, they just go with it. That being said, should books about conspiracies be in the non-fiction section? I think they don't quite belong in the fiction section either but they seem a bit out of place in the non-fiction category too, what do you think?

[deathbyprayer]

I think they should be thrown in the Fiction section. Why? Well they're not proven real. Those things are just speculations, they're no different from fantasy books or science fiction, however if the conspiracy book approaches the matter in a more academic and scientific way then I think it can be in the Non-Fiction section.

[beccagreen]

Well I think it depends on how the book is presented. I mean if it states that it's a "theory" only then it can be in the Non Fiction section but if takes itself way too seriously and just claims everything to be hardcore fact even though there is no proof then it might be in the Fiction section.

[Rosa]

Well, I think it has a lot to do with what the findings are. If their is enough evidence then why not have them in non-fiction but if the evidence are not substancial they should certainly go in fiction section.

[g2narat]

Well I think it depends on how the book is presented. I mean if it states that it's a "theory" only then it can be in the Non Fiction section but if takes itself way too seriously and just claims everything to be hardcore fact even though there is no proof then it might be in the Fiction section.

I think that's a good way of classifying them. What's interesting though is how by being too serious, the author of a conspiracy book lessens his/her credibility. I'm sure he/she meant to have the opposing effect. It's like the saying "the more you try to convince people that you are sane, the more you convince them that you're not". Haha. It's probably those authors that push so hard to have their work placed in the non-fiction section anyway. XD

[Baburra]

I think they should be in fiction section in general since they are not proven. Some may have a bit more credibility than others that just prefer to treat theories as fact, but it's still holy impractical to have to separate then all according to quality since there is no standard measure for it.

[Trellum]

I still think those books are in the right place to be honest.  I think placing it in the fiction category could be insulting for real authors.  Sure, some of the things those guys claim seem far-fetched, but they definitely don't belong in the fiction section. I'm sure many of those authors really believe in what they're saying, they'd not like it to be officially moved from one category to other.  I'm sure of that.  I know if it was me I'd get upset.

[Trellum]

Well I think it depends on how the book is presented. I mean if it states that it's a "theory" only then it can be in the Non Fiction section but if takes itself way too seriously and just claims everything to be hardcore fact even though there is no proof then it might be in the Fiction section.

I agree, some authors don't respect themselves and their work enough, so they use some really lame tactics.  I really think how the book is presented and the wording is important.  Theories should always be placed in the non-fiction section.

[NATASHA]

I personally think that they are theories like a scientist would have theories. I don't know if they should go into the non fiction section as some conspiracy theories have ended up being true. Stories on fictional characters that do not exist and are used in conspiracy theories could be in the fiction section, however there are  great number that have been identified as true and evidentual facts, which could go into the non fiction section. Perhaps it should go into an educational section or research section.

[js85]

I don't think they should go into the Fiction center. Fiction, to me, is a novel, a story with a beginning, middle, and end. Conspiracy books, as well as other subjective beliefs, aren't "stories". And if you start splitting hairs about subjective beliefs not being nonfiction, then you're going to eliminate a lot of it because you'll have to start getting into religion, health, and even some history (Holocaust deniers!). I think it would be too much to start to be "politically correct" about the topics, so lumping it all together is much easier than coming up with a whole new system.

[zabina12]

I think those kind of books about conspiracies should be classified as Fiction. It is since those are only theories or own opinions without enough basis. As the meaning of Fiction, it is theoretical or not based on facts or legal proofs. 

[OddVisions]

While I don't really think most conspiracy theories are real, they are still defined as theories. If we were to toss all things defined as theory no matter how crazy into fiction sections, it would make little sense considering all of the non-fiction pseudo science or ideas about what may have happened in history or written dramatizations of events. Generally, the non-fiction section usually also comes with subsections and I would likely put this into the ideologies subcategory of my local library.