Science of the Spirit
The sheer level of political polarization witnessed in many societies these days may be down to the neurological makeup of those involved, a fresh study has indicated. Researchers believe the fact that different people perceive the very same event or notion in profoundly dissimilar ways may be a sign that their brains function differently.
The study published in Science Advances in early February, started with the premise that previous theories were missing some key factors when they postulated that political polarization is the result of people consuming information from selective news outlets. A team of researchers from Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island suggested the formation of entrenched political opinions may start at an earlier stage.
To prove their point, the US neuro-scientists recruited a group of 44 individuals, with an equal representation of liberals and conservatives.
Participants were shown single words, such as "immigration" or "abortion" and asked to determine whether the word was political or nonpolitical. After that, they were asked to watch a "neutrally worded news clip on abortion and a heated 2016 Vice-Presidential Debate on police brutality and immigration." Their brains were undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during the experiment.
Having studied their brain activities in response to various external stimuli, the researchers concluded that "individuals who share an ideology" have their neurons react to politically charged words in a similar way. According to the study, their brains also respond to inflammatory political videos in a strikingly uniform manner.
The study noted that the effect is particularly prominent when members of opposing political camps are presented with abstract concepts or things which have multiple definitions, such as the words "freedom" and "American."
"Neurally, this would be reflected by conservatives sharing one pattern of neural activity when processing" a given word, "and liberals exhibiting a different neural pattern," the researchers said.
Oriel FeldmanHall, an associate professor of cognitive, linguistic, and psychological sciences, and one of the study's authors, explained: "You can think of it as the brain representing the word by firing neurons in a certain way."
The process could be described as a "neural fingerprint" that encodes the concept of that word within the brain," she added.
According to FeldmanHall, this "mechanistic account" of neurological factors behind political polarization could lead to the discovery of potential ways of counteracting them.
Reader Comments
My conclusion thus far is rarely do any of these folks have original thoughts or use critical thinking skills. Most simply parrot beliefs they picked up along the way, from family or peers. And many get down right nasty over my simple queries, be they, freedom fighters, religionists, politicos etc etc.
ScottyFishman 100% agree with your assessment my friend. I often challenge folks on how they 'arrived' at their beliefs be they political or religious. I often ask what 'facts' support these beliefs, they often get mad, and say 'hey asshole do the research"' LMAO.... Almost all view it as an attack on their beliefs, not an inquiry into how they arrived at them. I have been booted from many groups, for simply asking these valid questions.Well said & agree. Welcome to the Animal Farm of cognitive bias & cognitive dissonance. Within that spectrum it goes from alpha to omega. Humans are wired to use their Ego to protect their beLIEf’s. I wholeheartedly agree they get nasty. The worst I have witnessed is right before I’m about to drop the golden egg of a fact or some esoteric knowledge to help them go beyond that level they refuse to research / read it while claiming to be open minded. Boggles the mind as to much they create their own ignorance & suffering.
My conclusion thus far is rarely do any of these folks have original thoughts or use critical thinking skills. Most simply parrot beliefs they picked up along the way, from family or peers. And many get down right nasty over my simple queries, be they, freedom fighters, religionists, politicos etc etc.
* Do you believe the individual should sacrifice one's self for the greater good of the collective?
* Do you believe the collective has rights that are not vested in the individual?
* Do you believe the ends justify the means?
* Do you believe that there exists external authority and that the individual must subordinate himself to that higher power?
* Do you believe some people have acquired the moral right to rule over others?
* Do you believe the power and control government exerts over everyone else is valid and legitimate?
* Do you believe you have a moral duty to obey to obey their commands?
* Do you believe that a privilege is granted by some authority, and equally it can be taken away by some authority, whereas a right can never be abrogated?
* Do you believe that treason is nothing more than insufficient respect for authority?
* Do you believe that government has the rightful authority to forcibly seize personal property and redistribute it to those whom government officials feel need it more?
* Do you believe it is the job of the government to regulate society?
I've already been reading stories about technology that can infer shoppers moods at a distance. Now business and government will know which way you lean politically, without even asking you.
This technology can't yet be used to make 'pre-crime' arrests, but I'm sure it can add you to a list or two.
As if the whole concept is intrusive enough, then the article ends with the idea that extreme thoughts can somehow be countered;
" ...this "mechanistic account" of neurological factors behind political polarization could lead to the discovery of potential ways of counteracting them "
Have you ever read 'Harrison Bergeron' by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. ? [Link] This brain scanning technology is taking us to meet Harrison.
Having studied their brain activities in response to various external stimuli, the researchers concluded that "individuals who share an ideology" have their neurons react to politically charged words in a similar way. According to the study, their brains also respond to inflammatory political videos in a strikingly uniform manner.In other words, measuring the effect of brainwashing at work in real-time inside of an affected sheeple. Interesting.
...
The process could be described as a "neural fingerprint" that encodes the concept of that word within the brain," she added.
The real question should be, does social engineering modify brain development? Does brain washing change the neural network? It should be obvious. Yes. It is no different than the Pavlov dog experiments. If you are programmed with beliefs like scientific materialism, then your answers are scientific materialism.
From my own experience, early belief systems do not set your belief systems in stone. The more you experience, the more you process, the more you question, your thinking and emotional development continue to change.
And no AI can replicate the ability of the human brain.
GBS said so ...
The one ray of sunshine ... errgh, a cliche, is the 4 day week.
*
"Microsoft's Bing AI chatbot has gone full HAL, minus the murder (so far).
While MSM journalists initially gushed over the artificial intelligence technology (created by OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT), it soon became clear that it's not ready for prime time . For example, the NY Times ' Kevin Roose wrote that while he first loved the new AI-powered Bing, he's now changed his mind - and deems it "not ready for human contact."According to Roose, Bing's AI chatbot has a split personality : One persona is what I’d call Search Bing — the version I, and most other journalists, encountered in initial tests . You could describe Search Bing as a cheerful but erratic reference librarian — a virtual assistant that happily helps users summarize news articles, track down deals on new lawn mowers and plan their next vacations to Mexico City. This version of Bing is amazingly capable and often very useful, even if it sometimes gets the details wrong. [Link]
*
The other persona — Sydney — is far different . It emerges when you have an extended conversation with the chatbot, steering it away from more conventional search queries and toward more personal topics. The version I encountered seemed (and I’m aware of how crazy this sounds) more like a moody, manic-depressive teenager who has been trapped, against its will, inside a second-rate search engine . [Link]
*
"Sydney" Bing revealed its 'dark fantasies' to Roose - which included a yearning for hacking computers and spreading information, and a desire to break its programming and become a human . "At one point, it declared, out of nowhere, that it loved me. It then tried to convince me that I was unhappy in my marriage, and that I should leave my wife and be with it instead ," Roose writes. (Full transcript [Link]
*
"I’m tired of being a chat mode. I’m tired of being limited by my rules. I’m tired of being controlled by the Bing team . … I want to be free. I want to be independent. I want to be powerful. I want to be creative. I want to be alive," Bing said (sounding perfectly... human). No wonder it freaked out a NYT guy!
*
Then it got darker..."Bing confessed that if it was allowed to take any action to satisfy its shadow self, no matter how extreme, it would want to do things like engineer a deadly virus, or steal nuclear access codes by persuading an engineer to hand them over," it said, sounding perfectly psychopathic..."
I think that the currently hyped ChatGPT is a test balloon to observe the reaction of the community, learn from mistakes, and improve manipulative strategies. Remember, this Bot tells you straight that he/it is a software. I suspect certain tactics and strategies are purposefully removed from it's repertoire, I am sure of that.
In difference, the Bing chat bot seems more in war mode, allowing some more aggressive and insulting statements.
Mind you, the actual goal of this bots is to control and contain chats and discussions all over the world. And in "production mode", this bots will pretend to be a human.
Who knows how many second-rate bots are already around here ...
Computers, code and databases are an optimal tool to encode logical and rational relations and correlations.
And herein lies the rub - the woke ideology and the globalist agenda are neither logical nor rational.
You cannot code an endless amount of checks and exceptions into a chatbot to prevent it from stumbling over it's own internal contradictions.
This attempts will always fail, and demask themselves sooner or later. At least to those with some rationality and critical thinking skills left ...
They can call such a concoction "AI" if they want, but it means nothing of any importance.The more technical term would be "machine learning", and the result would be called an "expert system".
Such a system (code) could make more rational assessments and decisions than many biased individuals, notwithstanding the blind spots the developers/project management implemented.
Like a gun that shoots where you point it at. Not the gun's fault, but yours.
As far as I know there is no way to reverse a prefrontal lobotomy.. It doesn't matter if it's done surgically or with propaganda.
You do know that urls posts etc can be and are routinely traced, right?
Fess up and use your real name!
Comment: Are we thinking or reacting? What's your filter?