• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

At What Point is Manipulation Mind-Control?

lemurien said:
True. Possibly something could be learned form the problems the veterans are having in the 'normal' society after the service. My parents' generation went to war but nobody was talking about psychological war traumas at the time. How much did it have to do with training, how much with the constant threat of getting killed, hunger, cold and exhaustion.
Click to expand...

And how much did it have to do with social consequences and legal repercussions that encouraged people not to talk about it at the time, followed by social and legal changes to encourage the opposite?

Not sure which generation you're referring to (from my experience as an American, I'm guessing it would be the Korean war generation or before, since talk about psychological trauma has been pretty widespread from Vietnam to the present), but this ought to cover most people's parents through great great grandparents: Shook Over Hell: Post-Traumatic Stress, Vietnam and the Civil War. (or a review here).
 
Now my parents were there under the Winter war and the Continuation War.
The former started in 1939 and the latter from 1941-44.
Everybody knew about people been broken by the war. My father howled like an animal in his sleep, keeping all the family awake. Jus a couple of flesh wounds, nothing at all...
A 24-year ol orphan who had lost everything in the Civil war...it might have hit deeper than the flesh.

But nobody was talking about it.
We Finns are tough until we break.
 
lemurien

At least, the mind control should remain exclusively in the hands of a democratically elected government...?
Click to expand...

No, while the degree of mental manipulation for military service does cross the line into what could be argued as mind-control; the most extreme degrees which I'm talking about (i.e. the ability to control a person via manipulating their brain activity and so forth) should never be legal ever.
 
INRM said:
No, while the degree of mental manipulation for military service does cross the line into what could be argued as mind-control; the most extreme degrees which I'm talking about (i.e. the ability to control a person via manipulating their brain activity and so forth) should never be legal ever.
Click to expand...

No exceptions? What if we can turn a captured terrorist into a peaceful ally eager to help? Let's say there are no side effects and you simply remove their insane delusions while leaving their humanity intact. Do you think they will avoid using this technology?

And what if it becomes possible to cure pedophiles and psychopaths in this manner, will it be unethical to do so without their permission before releasing them into the public? Many of them will simply volunteer for such a procedure, could we justify keeping them locked up if they refuse to undergo it?
 
INRM: the most extreme degrees which I'm talking about (i.e. the ability to control a person via manipulating their brain activity and so forth) should never be legal ever.

Chemical mind control is going on already.
How else could you explain the lenience toward alcohol with all it health effect.
If beer is cheap, people do not rise to barricades. Or they might, but they'd fall.

Any electronical mind controllin device with implanted electrodes is beyond the reach of our capabilities for the time being. The electrodes available for the time being are far too coarse to target the minuscule areas...a slight change in the position could change the effect totally as was seen in the Pitie Salpetriere clinic in Paris.

A lady had electrodes implanted to control a very specific form of Parkinsonism.
The lead budged less than a millimetre and the lady just cracked out in insane laughter whenever the stimulator was switched on.
 
Everybody

Personally, I think there are at least three factors that can be used to gauge the extremity of mind-control -- this is just conceptualizations so refinement will probably be necessary

Invasiveness
The degree of the method of manipulation/control to intentionally influence one's thoughts, behaviors, and actions.

Detectability
The ability of a person to be aware that they are being manipulated

Resistability

The ability to resist the method of manipulation/control.


Joey McGee

No exceptions? What if we can turn a captured terrorist into a peaceful ally eager to help? Let's say there are no side effects and you simply remove their insane delusions while leaving their humanity intact. Do you think they will avoid using this technology?
Click to expand...

That's what worries me as a potential issue the next couple of years down the road. The potential for exactly that use seems so tantalizing. Of course, the problem is that it will not be just confined for making terrorists not terrorists; it will eventually be used to make violent criminals non violent; eventually making all criminals not criminal; and eventually towards fixing any non-desirable trait.

The question is what constitutes an undesirable trait? Does critical thinking constitute an undesirable threat? Not to me, but to a government it might.

And what if it becomes possible to cure pedophiles and psychopaths in this manner, will it be unethical to do so without their permission before releasing them into the public?
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure something of this nature would first be implemented on one or all of the following first

- Terrorists
- Soldiers
- Psychopaths
- Pedophiles
- Prisoners

Terrorists (suspected or not) have pretty much no rights; soldiers and prisoners cannot say no; nobody cares what the rights of psychopaths and pedophiles are.

With the government having the power to impose this on others, it would be a slippery slope before it would be imposed on the mentally ill, and anybody whom the government doesn't like.


lemurien

Any electronical mind controllin device with implanted electrodes is beyond the reach of our capabilities for the time being.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of this, but technology does advance with time. Eventually, it will be doable.
 
Last edited:
INRM said:
Everybody

Personally, I think there are at least three factors that can be used to gauge the extremity of mind-control -- this is just conceptualizations so refinement will probably be necessary

Invasiveness
The degree of the method of manipulation/control to intentionally influence one's thoughts, behaviors, and actions.

Detectability
The ability of a person to be aware that they are being manipulated

Resistability

The ability to resist the method of manipulation/control.
Click to expand...

Not a bad start, but I do see some gauging and other problems.

Invasiveness


I might limit this aspect to physical invasion, the introduction of a chemical, instrumental or just a restrictive environment upon a person.

These can be gauged by the amount of chemicals introduced (and their relative effectiveness), the functional parameters of some invasive instrumentality or the degree of restriction in the given environment.

Detectability


This is difficult to gauge, certainly it is detectable to some degree by an intent perpetrator, but how would you gauge how much of the thoughts you have are your own thoughts (given the precept that they could be someone else's)?


Resistability

Now this may not be difficult to gauge, given that some have problems just resisting their own inclinations. However, given the detectably gauging problem above, how can you gauge what one is resisting, themselves or some external influence? Technically those most susceptible would be lacking in such resistance. So the resistance becomes more a factor of the target rather than the excerted influence.
 
Last edited:
The Man said:
Not a bad start, but I do see some gauging and other problems.

Invasiveness


I might limit this aspect to physical invasion, the introduction of a chemical, instrumental or just a restrictive environment upon a person.

These can be gauged by the amount of chemicals introduced (and their relative effectiveness), the functional parameters of some invasive instrumentality or the degree of restriction in the given environment.

Detectability


This is difficult to gauge, certainly it is detectable to some degree by an intent perpetrator, but how would you gauge how much of the thoughts you have are your own thoughts (given the precept that they could be someone else's)?


Resistability

Now this may not be difficult to gauge, given that some have problems just resisting their own inclinations. However, given the detectably gauging problem above, how can you gauge what one is resisting, themselves or some external influence? Technically those most susceptible would be lacking in such resistance. So the resistance becomes more a factor of the target rather than the excerted influence.
Click to expand...

I agree.

If I may add, we humans are very open to suggestion, which would fall into mind control.

For example, take the old "Don't think of a white elephant" trick.

That's a form of mind control, too and no drugs, no coercion, no invasiveness, you've detected it, you tried to resist it, and in your resisting, chances are good that you still thought of a white elephant.

That was just a straight out command.
 
The Man

Not a bad start, but I do see some gauging and other problems.
Click to expand...

Of course, but it is a start after all right?

I might limit this aspect to physical invasion, the introduction of a chemical, instrumental or just a restrictive environment upon a person.
Click to expand...

Clearly what you describe qualifies, though I based the term invasive on the term invasive intent that was used.

This is difficult to gauge, certainly it is detectable to some degree by an intent perpetrator, but how would you gauge how much of the thoughts you have are your own thoughts (given the precept that they could be someone else's)?
Click to expand...

This parameter is based around the victim's ability to be aware of him being manipulated. Regardless you make a good point that unless people were aware of a possibility of the fact that they were being manipulated, they probably wouldn't realize what they were detecting -- why they felt weird, why their thinking seemed out of the ordinary; their actions out of character.

This brings up some interesting questions in itself; regardless, if the person was aware that manipulation of this sort could be done but still was unable to be aware that they were being manipulated that would clearly qualify as being undetectable.

Now this may not be difficult to gauge, given that some have problems just resisting their own inclinations. However, given the detectably gauging problem above, how can you gauge what one is resisting, themselves or some external influence?
Click to expand...

Interesting point.

Technically those most susceptible would be lacking in such resistance. So the resistance becomes more a factor of the target rather than the excerted influence.
Click to expand...

Clearly you would have to base this upon a certain degree of resistance most humans possess.
 
INRM said:
The Man



Of course, but it is a start after all right?



Clearly what you describe qualifies, though I based the term invasive on the term invasive intent that was used.



This parameter is based around the victim's ability to be aware of him being manipulated. Regardless you make a good point that unless people were aware of a possibility of the fact that they were being manipulated, they probably wouldn't realize what they were detecting -- why they felt weird, why their thinking seemed out of the ordinary; their actions out of character.

This brings up some interesting questions in itself; regardless, if the person was aware that manipulation of this sort could be done but still was unable to be aware that they were being manipulated that would clearly qualify as being undetectable.



Interesting point.



Clearly you would have to base this upon a certain degree of resistance most humans possess.
Click to expand...

Not really if my goal is to manipulate you then it is specifically you that I need to be concerned with. (not implying that this is in fact you) Your fear of snakes, your allergy to ragweed, your distain for unkempt appearances, your preference for blondes, your interest in sports cars and your habit of an early morning jog (all information I perhaps got from your face book page). Along your normal jogging path I place, a snake, some ragweed and me (un-showered and unshaven for a week) over here and a blonde by a sports car getting ready to go for a jog over there. Direct manipulation is about knowing the target, what they want to resist and what the don't want to resist not just about what they migth want to resist but just can't seem to.
 
Just so you all know the only reason this thread exists is because INRM wants to prove that the PsyOps division of the military is conducting "mind control" so we don't know if crazy mass murderers are actually crazy or just the results of this "mind control" by the military.
 
Not that I know of. They usually do things that are more effective like printing up surrender instruction sheets to air drop on the enemy. They also like to play really loud music to drive the enemy nuts.
 
Steve Hassan is maybe the most successful cult expert and deprogrammer in the world. I highly recommend this summary and this lecture/q&a on his approach.

He has an ideal forumula for determining when "manipulation" is mind control, the BITE model.

I. Behavior Control
II. Information Control
III. Thought Control
IV. Emotional Control

It's just a very straightforward summary of the essential ways it is done. Consider it his response to the OP.

eta: And here's him talking about how he formed it and how it works on youtube
 
Last edited:
Joey McGee,

I'm very happy to see that some work has been done in this area. I, of course, have some additional questions

1.) Does his model cover neuro-stimulation

2.) Can these findings be used to produce a framework of laws to regulate corporate or government practices that may cross the line (For the record: I'm not opposed to all forms of government secrecy, I understand there are certain things which we don't want our enemies knowing; however I do object to our government keeping secrets that are not truly a matter of national security as to keep us in the dark about things) within the bounds of the Constitution without requiring an extensive surveillance network?
 
Last edited:
I think we'll have to make scientific decisions based on the totality of the evidence not a simple framework or a checklist. The basic rule is that you can't do something that will objectively harm someone else. It's like cult deprogramming, you're not allowed to involuntarily commit someone for a week to allow cult deprogrammers a chance to talk to people. They allowed this at one point but it was struck down by the courts. While I agree that there are some ethical problems there, it would be better if parents were still allowed to rescue their adult children from cults sometimes, but how can we allow this and balance people's rights at the same time. There's no easy answer, just a demand for better overall science.
 
Joey McGee

I'm wondering if the basic Invasiveness/Detectability/Resistibility concept be integrated into the BITE model?
 
Last edited:
INRM said:
Joey McGee

I'm wondering if the basic Invasiveness/Detectability/Resistibility concept be integrated into the BITE model?
Click to expand...

Thinking about Invasiveness/Detectability/Resistibility as the qualities of a memetic virus would be most helpful. Actually, the metaphor of a virus is limited, it is more like bacteria in some cases, with some good and some bad effects on the host. We could categorize different kinds of manipulation the same way we classify what is good/bad bacteria. By no means a simple black and white method, but there is at least some clear guidelines.

The bite model is there to highlight what they trying to control. The idea of memes is well integrated into Hassan's approach. For instance, like real viruses, memes tend to affect people with lower defenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom