posted on Sep, 8 2018 @ 07:47 PM
Humans occupying the top-tier in society have been thinking long and hard to figure out how best to control human beings, and there is little doubt in
my mind that today's internet has achieved the ultimate in mind control: dissociating each person from the sense of a shared human reality by
constantly baiting them to engage their smart phones.
The simple stuff is what our brain's are already inclined to do - to prefer short term pleasure over long term gains. The society we've grown within
has been sure to not emphasize that the long term gain - what we mean by wisdom - is something that can only happen if the self reflects and learns
from what it experiences. If, somehow, a human mind can be canalized to avoid or dissociate from intellectual reflection, then you could create a very
large system which does to every mind which engages with it in a naïve way, the same thing: center its affective interests (and its 'knowings') on
personalized and individualized things. Shared-referents, or "sharing the same semiotic environment", is quickly becoming a thing of the past, which
means the brain is becoming ever better at navigating a smart phone for its "dopamine", and more and more unable to represent (i.e. sense, based on
passed experience) what is driving another persons interests.
The entirety of the internet is conceptualized by its most influential "doers" as a large phase-space, with individuals 'acting' in ways predicted
by mathematics. If they decide to structure algorithms to preferentially guide users to sad stories, then they can do that:
“If it turns out that certain kinds of posts make you sad, and an algorithm is trying to make you sad, then there will be more such posts. No one
will necessarily ever know why those particular posts had an affect on you, and you will probably not even notice that a particular post made you a
little sad, or that you were being manipulated. The effect is subtle, but cumulative.” – Jaron Lanier, Ten Reason for Deleting Your Social Media
Account Right Now; pg. 32; Henry holt; 2018
This is more or less what mathematical modelling permits: very coarse yet statistically defensible models of 'how humans respond' when interacting -
via a simple understanding of pavlovian conditioning - can become grossly manipulative over time so that conditioning at one predictable stage
naturally segues into accepting a particular "meme" that is assumed to be compatible with people in a particular state i.e. "irritability". To be
made irritable can be done by, as Lanier writes, being 'guided' through such algorithms to negative information. Since states of feeling determine
judgements, a compulsively activated person can be made to act cynically after interacting with negative information i.e. like articles.
Real clever magic seeds the culture with interpretations, or cliche ways of responding, like the tone or mode that Kim Kardashian or other pop-stars
often speak in. Are they are even remotely aware that much smarter people encourage and promote such antics knowing it'll guide the interpretive
mechanisms of others far away in space and time? That they are mere mechanisms which they exploit for ends they could barely conceptualize?
If behavior is information, then flooding a culture with fiction - TV shows, movies, comics, novels, video games, etc - more or less creates
brain-minds that will reference fictional realities and situations when they cognize (since we think through metaphor) and not the iron-clad facts
which an education in science and philosophy moors the mind to. In other words, we live in a world where most people have been buried in fiction - not
even recognizing the floods that are being held back by a culture of 'excess' - that when the world is destroyed, the people will be destroyed -
from within moreso than from without; the powers-that-be mock your surety, your dependency, even though the world they have been fed makes them
dependent: their hatred is inapt and cruel; it is a hatred of 'reality' and 'God', or their own essential nature, a metaphysical concerm which
overrides any sense of concern for the real human other. A dissociative fantasy of metaphysical retribution - a cricket cricketing against the
universe. Their motivation might ultimately be rooted in what they can do: they can make life and existence hell for "Gods creatures", because, of
course, God or the Universe must be listening and must be angry.
You can't find any intellectual conversation online: its designed to stupify you, to lead you to a tech site, or a frenzied political site, or a
cliche liberal den like huffington post. Science or science based conversation, or anything having to do with reason and all that pertains to that, is
impossible to find: I wouldn't be posting here unless I felt dejected by the failure to find a better site. This site has intellligent posters, but
of course, the majority are swamped by demons, wanting nothing more in their insanity than to spread the infection, to spread the guilt, the erosion,
as if suffering were good. I cannot help but think that the person who thinks "suffering is good" hasn't suffered enough. Can a person be made to
hate the other so much that they would rather kill themselves than acknolwedge their own dependence on their own internal other? Call it God or the
Self or the Universe, you are imagining an Other whom you rely upon. How can any mind imagine it can be happy without that internal equilibrium - that
other side which we must pay attention to and understand if we are to be happy?
So the world has been thrown far down this road, and like the proverbial frog in the pot, we have had our spiritual and neurological systems hijacked
by hateful nihilists who fail to misrepresent the fear they cause others - the suffering which they maniacally believe they are beyond experiencing; a
dissociative identity disorder condition rules the minds of "elites", people who have been made in the image of their materialist motivations. Their
lust for Power corrupts perception and cognition, weaving the devilish lies and narratives that their own little brains reference to regulate
themselves, all-the-while insanely identifying conditions in the outside world that parallels their own dysfunction. They project and then forget;
amnesia rules, sleep is salvation - as if when we die "we go to sleep". We project our teenage psyches on the universe, believing we have some sort
of secret-passage way to evade its menacing presence. "Inside matter"? Or, more likely, the whole - the torus - the circle? And wont the circle, the
life, when finished, necessarily "eat itself", or see itself? Completing the circle, its semiotic journey?
The narrative is the biggest lie of all. A good lie and a necessary feature of human existence - we can't organize our relations coherently without
one - but to focus simply on the narrative without the interpretation, without the lawful cause and effect of feelings-with-others which narrative
emerges from, is insanity. Not articulating these differences, being "pulled" by the mythology, and wanting to believe in the legitimacy of the
myth, is positively adolescent - a state of delusion akin to teenage mania relative to the patient maturity and sanity of scientific analysis.
If you could only know that everything about you is a function of what you've had to do to defend yourself, you'd experience yourself in a very