Would Mind Control Be Possible?

[swilow]

I'll have to consider your first point when my brain is working a bit more, buts its got something to do with the capacity for decision making that a car doesn't have. I think.

What's the difference then? And why is there such a difference?

The difference (to me) is probably semantic or a difference of degree in the context of this thread, where the OP is talking about a device/signal that "controls someones brain". To me, this implies something external having a causal influence on anothers thoughts/behaviours/etc. regardless of their own desire to do this. Influence is something more subtle. Its achieved via suggestion and direction rather than imposition. Influence still leaves the target with at least a better illusion of free will. Control is more absolute, in the way I thought this thread was discussing it.

My earlier point was that I do not think we could develop a device (at least any time soon) that could cause people to, say, start tap-dancing. Whilst we can map the physical processes involved in it, and the electrical signals that intiaite it in the brain, its not as simple as those two things. Its probable that, given the brains plasticity and versatility, people doing the same things are enacting it in sligtly different, unique ways in their brains. Think about how people have different gaits. I don't know how you could find the physical and neurlogical reason for the subtlty of such things, in the near future at least. But, yeah, we've developed ways (and probably always known them) to suggest strongly that people do certain things to the extent people even believe they are choosing to. Its still not control because the target can opt out willingly as soon as they wake up.

Speaking of, I'm pretty much fallign asleep.

 

[belligerent drunk]

I'll have to consider your first point when my brain is working a bit more, buts its got something to do with the capacity for decision making that a car doesn't have. I think.

Don't stress your membrane, it was just an analogy to illustrate a point. The point wasn't to compare a car to a human brain, but to say that in order for somebody to control something, it doesn't necessarily need to be control that results in benefit to the person; reason for me saying it is people associate "mind control" with somebody controlling a person in order to have the person commit certain acts that benefit the string-puller, my point is that that's a very narrow definition - control is a scenario when a person's thoughts are altered by outside means on purpose - it can be to benefit the person (all kinds of therapies), to make them buy stuff (ads etc) and so on; the motive is essentially irrelevant.

Influence still leaves the target with at least a better illusion of free will. Control is more absolute, in the way I thought this thread was discussing it.

I agree; as I wrote in one of my above posts, you can either influence the brain through its own sensors, or influence brain circuitry directly. Commercials, psychotherapy use the former way of controlling the brain, while psychoactive drugs, electroconvulsive therapy affect brain processes directly. As a side note, drugs' effects on the brain seem to be a lot harder to "shake off". For example, a serious benzodiazepine intoxication will result in lessened inhibition (to the point of committing acts that are regretted later) whether the person wants it or not. Same can be said for falling asleep on heavy GABAergics - it becomes practically involuntary, or feeling decreased levels of pain on opioids. These are all unconventional examples, but if you think about it, then the mechanism by which these things work is pretty much in line with what mind control is about.

 

[Ziiirp]

It is happening all the time since the beginning of time. It should not be considered as some force, that is performed by an oppressor on a victim. Sometimes the controlled people even would be more miserable without constant mind control.

IMHO the controlee is even more to blame than the controller, because they choose to constantly maintain a higher proportion of the perception to stay in the subconscious in relation to the conscious section, than is healthy.

When bored and unchallenged people are forced to live together with mainly subconscious bandwagoners, they inevitably have to choose between manipulation of or isolation from fellow citizens at some point.

If you want to discuss systematic violent abuse of innocent people as it happened within the scope of the MK Ultra program, now that is another story and should be considered as similarly severe as genocide and therefore be punished accordingly by international law IMHO. The violent reprogramming of a mind should not be confused with subtle (but powerful) mind manipulation of the masses. Two different approaches.

 

[Ninae]

I agree people don't really want to be conscious. They are happily unconscious about most things. Just in that state you're not able to be responsible for yourself and need someone to rule you.

 

[Xorkoth]

Society itself is the most fundamental and powerful form of mind control we experience. As social creatures who form tight groups, we have been teaching our children to be like us. Over time, this has formed countless specific cultures, and everyone is tremendously affected by their cultural programming. There is simply no way to escape it. Had you been born into a different culture, you would probably still have your same underlying tendencies and dispositions, but so much would be radically different about you. The average person in a culture has many very predictable characteristics and fits into a general mold of type of person. Through intelligence and choice, people can extricate themselves in significant ways as they age, but you've still been shaped since birth by the powerful influence of social programming.

It's not a bad thing, it's just part of how humans operate.

Jammin, I found most of your comments on ways we are being controlled quite insightful, and I agree.

I've got more thoughts about this topic but I can't seem to articulate them very well now so I'll come back another time.

 

[cyberius]

The abstract reasons for our behavior control us and you can say we already have a structure/higher order controlling every one of our actions already. If one day we can change how we interpret abstractions on a neurophysiological level than we can control minds. I forsee this happening very soon.

 

[vortech]

A lot of valid lines of interpretation here, advertising/consumerism/capitalism, religion, social media algorithms and viral memes, regulation of public school systems, cultural programming (including music trends) and our ever-evolving societal norms, all of these things shape our minds. More appropriately termed 'mind influence' rather than direct control, because overt mind control results in resistance when people realize their free will is being manipulated, so the more subtle and insidious forms work better when they remain just under the radar of conscious influence (sub-conscious), but things like advertising have become quite overt in the age of desensitization. People know they are being sold products and ideas and don't even care most of the time. Religion has always been overt in many ways, and maybe that is why there has been increased resistance to it in the last generation or two as many people wake up to how ridiculous it can sound and how many people have died as a result of religious indoctrination. Some tenets of religion have aged better than others. 'thou shalt not rape and pillage' are just as solid as ever, while 'marriage is a sacred union between man and woman' are antiquated because of the progressive gains for LGBTQA etc. rights.

And then there's drugs. It is no secret that 'Big Pharma' and their ties to the government is just getting started in their fight against the expansion of human consciousness. It makes a herd much harder to steer once the sheep have escaped the fences of the pasture and scattered all over the place. Putting the control back in our hands, to be free to modulate our brain chemistry at will, will be a great step forward for humanity. But it is a double edged sword because there just as many drugs that eat away at our free will as there are drugs that empower our free will. It doesn't even have to be a 'vast conspiracy'. Sometimes people just want to make some profit for themselves so they sell the drugs that most assuredly make people empty their wallets.

Things might not be bad as it used to be because the Internet potentially empowers anyone to be a mind influencer to a larger degree than ever before, but that also is a double edged sword because ignorance can be amplified, and the people can be unwittingly doing the work of those that seeded ideas into them subconsciously