In my opinion, the war for the mind has been raging since time immemorial. It is older than humanity itself. And because the collective mind is 'shared,' it can either be infected or enlightened as one.
It is true Gavin, but now the tools that are deployed, at scale, globally are more perilous. We just had a Presidential election in Poland, cases about one candidate (the winner) being a gangster (huge Chelsea tattoo on his chest), football hooligan, bodyguard to prostitute's and 'stealing' under false pretences a flat from an elderly man and much more... undermining this was a huge campaign driven by AI and algorithms - how much truth? Many who voted for him thought the truth was distorted and lies from the press, incumbent party... Cognitive Warfare is using these tools to appeal to emotions... we need to educate people to look deeper.
I agree with all that, Colin. As you probably know I am trying to make a concerted effort not to comment further on the subject of AI. I don't think I can add more to the discussion other than to repeat my staple response being that "AI IS THE KILL SWITCH ON THE HUMAN IMAGINATION, SELF DETERMINATION AND SELF-REALIZATION." I don't think I can improve on that as it pretty much covers everything humanity is moving very rapidly towards and will encounter with weaponized technology, and at some point humanity will no longer be aware of these issues because it will be so imbedded in future generations when medical science and computer science merge into a seamless technology where thoughts cannot be contradicted because they won't be allowed to exist. The mass confusion which is being spread through algorithms is very intentional, in my opinion, AND will be answered with a single solution i.e. AI, which will 'help' to streamline one's thoughts. It will be a form of technological Thorazine.
Understood Gavin and share your key point - AI is a kill switch to human imagination, self determination and self-realisation. - my belief is that we must highlight this loud and often - otherwise we will have a society that 90% spend time at gladiator fights, 8% discussing key issues and 2% ruling us!
I take your point, Colin. I now have several people encouraging me to continue writing and commenting on the subject. Whether or not I continue you are more than welcome to quote that phase as you see fit.
As you know Gavin, I am one who has encouraged you to continue for you articulate your thoughts exceedingly well, and have a perspective that is valuable. That said, continuing to comment on it is wearing us all down. I often reread your comments.
Actually, this isn’t just your opinion — it’s a fact. Looking broadly through history, we can see that many great ideas have competed to shape the world. Only a few have ultimately succeeded in securing their place as accepted truths. In my view, the real challenge lies in gaining the privilege of owning the logos — the words we speak that hold the power to guide our thinking.
You're absolutely right Max, the competition of ideas is a constant in history. I like your framing of the core issue as 'gaining the privilege of owning the logos', that's a very potent way to articulate the power of narrative and language in shaping thought, which is central to the concerns I was exploring.
The words we speak, Max, are indeed powerful. Perhaps less so now since we have largely lost those ancient languages like Sanskrit which were vibrational rather than simply a means of communication.
Excellent essay, thank you Colin! There are so many points you made that I highlighted (for myself) --- I think I'll have to read this again a few times to let it all sink in. So I'm only responding here to the bits I think I understand...
It's true what you say, Gavin, the war on the human mind is an ancient one. We are part of collective Consciousness, so our 'individual minds' are not as individual as they may appear (to us)...
At the same time, this 'soft software war' is new (to us in this era and civilisation at least), and on one hand we are dealing with the same old issues, while on the other we are confronted with new and unknown (to us individually) hacks of the mind/ brain/ cognition/ etc.
If we are each a living 'part' of collective Consciousness, then we also have a potential influence on that living organism to which we inherently belong. Therefore, I assume, if we (individually) can figure out ways to understand ~ and in the same vein neutralise ~ the potential dangers and threats that 'cognitive technology' poses to the human mind, can we not protect ourselves (individually and collectively) against those threats?
This 'cognitive warfare' is a product of human minds, developed with a relatively limited understanding of human Consciousness. You say this 'tool' is used (and has been planned to be used) as an aggressor to overpower and control the human mind, and this seems to be effective in relation to humans who are unaware of the powers of their own minds...
It doesn't mean this 'warfare weapon' has the same effect on everyone.
Thank you Veronika. I think you've hit on something crucial regarding the duality of this challenge, a perennial contest, yet now waged with unprecedented technological leverage. Your point about our interconnectedness and collective consiousness, and how that very connection might hold keys to resilience, is an encouraging and important perspective to explore.
And yes, the developers of these methods may not grasp the full spectrum of human consciousness, which perhaps underscores where true strength and defense can be found?
Your observation about the potential limitations in understanding on the part of those crafting these tools, versus the variable impact on individuals, really gets to the heart of both the threat and the potential for agency, this is why we must be more vocal about this threat and help others understand the 'power of their own minds.' I will explore examples in future posts, your reflections have given me much to think about.
As you probably know by now, I always approach these topics from the 'opposite end', partly no doubt because I never had a career in any public capacity, always working 'behind the scenes'. This position has produced my work (all explained on my Synchronosophy substack) where I have developed a theory and practice for making such vital changes within our own individual Consciousness.
The reasoning behind this is that as individual 'cells' of collective Consciousness we are both influenced by the collective and can in turn have an influence on it. Therefore, 'inner transformational work' becomes crucial! But it is never done in a manipulative way.
In other words, I can help others understand the 'power of their own minds' not by 'telling' them, not even by 'showing' them, but by turning inward and exploring the question: 'where or in what way am I doing the very same thing that I lament in others?'
As soon as I identify that 'mental flaw' or 'blind spot' in myself, I can transform it. My own transformation has 'miraculous' effects, on others too, but it's not manipulation, because I can never know what's the right thing for them to do at the opportune moment...
I believe that this principle, which I have experienced in interrelational contexts, must apply to the collective too.
I always appreciate you bringing your unique vantage point to these discussions, especially the way you champion the 'behind the scenes' work on individual consciousness. Your Synchronosophy framework, focusing on self-awareness and transforming personal 'mental flaws' non-manipulatively, offers a compelling counter-narrative to the external and often coercive methods of cognitive warfare. I believe you that such personal shifts can create ripple effects, influencing the collective without direct intervention, overall this a really hopeful and empowering suggestion.
“It doesn't mean this 'warfare weapon' has the same effect on everyone.” Your comment is quite correct, Veronika, but as long as there are those who remain in the dark, infected, there will be a need for those others to return again and again to whisper in their ears. So in that sense we may not be effected by it, but we are all effected because of it.
True, that's how I understand it as well. The whispering in their ears, however, may not work in a literal sense, because humans are rarely persuaded by words to 'see the light' as long as they have some unknown incentive to remain in the dark...
I am wondering what we can do to render this 'cognitive warfare' ineffective, no matter how many people are adversely affected by it...
Excellent question Veronika, and one I asked as well. No doubt, it will be addressed in further article. Personally, I have attempted to address the cognitive warfare on a one to one level with others, but , as you say, addressing that unknown incentive for them to remain in the dark is frequently illusive. Even IF it is known, it often takes years of conversation, time we do not have have.
True Wendy, that is an excellent question by Veronika. The challenge is the wide variety of 'tricks', techniques and technologies available. I really believe we need more transparency from our governments and then a major eduction program on reflective thinking.
Great article, thank you. It makes me think that never has it been more important to "Know Thyself". It is the bedrock against 'cognitive warfare'. However, I don't think such warfare is new. Religions have been at it for thousands of years as a means of controlling people. The power of discernment and self-determination still lies within us, but one has to plumb deep. And in the current times, ever deeper.
Thank you Joshua, and yes it is true... I wrote about the origination of the word propaganda and religion. We need to seriously rethink how we educate young people and help 'know thy self' - so often discernment and self-determination are 'learned' late in life. When people could benefit from understanding themselves much younger and being able to discern the truth from mis and dis-information.
We have lost our 'wise elders' who, in the past, would have guided the young. At least, I like to believe it was like that and I'm not viewing the past through rose-tinted spectacles.
Wow. Another post that strikes me right in the middle of my brain. Thanks, Colin. You are doing important work in sharing your thinking in such an articulate way - thank you.
Cognitive warfare sounds horrifically subversive. As I was reading this post, I couldn't help but think about how InYourFaceBook has been waging precisely this variety of mind hijacking even before the advent of LLM's. I understand that Zuck is now supplementing his already subversive "engagement" algorithms with AI.
The only defense I can think of, besides a healthy dose of skepticism is hard evidence, whenever and wherever it can be found.
In my opinion, the war for the mind has been raging since time immemorial. It is older than humanity itself. And because the collective mind is 'shared,' it can either be infected or enlightened as one.
It is true Gavin, but now the tools that are deployed, at scale, globally are more perilous. We just had a Presidential election in Poland, cases about one candidate (the winner) being a gangster (huge Chelsea tattoo on his chest), football hooligan, bodyguard to prostitute's and 'stealing' under false pretences a flat from an elderly man and much more... undermining this was a huge campaign driven by AI and algorithms - how much truth? Many who voted for him thought the truth was distorted and lies from the press, incumbent party... Cognitive Warfare is using these tools to appeal to emotions... we need to educate people to look deeper.
I agree with all that, Colin. As you probably know I am trying to make a concerted effort not to comment further on the subject of AI. I don't think I can add more to the discussion other than to repeat my staple response being that "AI IS THE KILL SWITCH ON THE HUMAN IMAGINATION, SELF DETERMINATION AND SELF-REALIZATION." I don't think I can improve on that as it pretty much covers everything humanity is moving very rapidly towards and will encounter with weaponized technology, and at some point humanity will no longer be aware of these issues because it will be so imbedded in future generations when medical science and computer science merge into a seamless technology where thoughts cannot be contradicted because they won't be allowed to exist. The mass confusion which is being spread through algorithms is very intentional, in my opinion, AND will be answered with a single solution i.e. AI, which will 'help' to streamline one's thoughts. It will be a form of technological Thorazine.
Understood Gavin and share your key point - AI is a kill switch to human imagination, self determination and self-realisation. - my belief is that we must highlight this loud and often - otherwise we will have a society that 90% spend time at gladiator fights, 8% discussing key issues and 2% ruling us!
I take your point, Colin. I now have several people encouraging me to continue writing and commenting on the subject. Whether or not I continue you are more than welcome to quote that phase as you see fit.
As you know Gavin, I am one who has encouraged you to continue for you articulate your thoughts exceedingly well, and have a perspective that is valuable. That said, continuing to comment on it is wearing us all down. I often reread your comments.
I appreciate your encouragement. Than you.
We're already precariously close to that. Just witness how many buy into "QAnon". Scary times.
Actually, this isn’t just your opinion — it’s a fact. Looking broadly through history, we can see that many great ideas have competed to shape the world. Only a few have ultimately succeeded in securing their place as accepted truths. In my view, the real challenge lies in gaining the privilege of owning the logos — the words we speak that hold the power to guide our thinking.
You're absolutely right Max, the competition of ideas is a constant in history. I like your framing of the core issue as 'gaining the privilege of owning the logos', that's a very potent way to articulate the power of narrative and language in shaping thought, which is central to the concerns I was exploring.
The words we speak, Max, are indeed powerful. Perhaps less so now since we have largely lost those ancient languages like Sanskrit which were vibrational rather than simply a means of communication.
Excellent essay, thank you Colin! There are so many points you made that I highlighted (for myself) --- I think I'll have to read this again a few times to let it all sink in. So I'm only responding here to the bits I think I understand...
It's true what you say, Gavin, the war on the human mind is an ancient one. We are part of collective Consciousness, so our 'individual minds' are not as individual as they may appear (to us)...
At the same time, this 'soft software war' is new (to us in this era and civilisation at least), and on one hand we are dealing with the same old issues, while on the other we are confronted with new and unknown (to us individually) hacks of the mind/ brain/ cognition/ etc.
If we are each a living 'part' of collective Consciousness, then we also have a potential influence on that living organism to which we inherently belong. Therefore, I assume, if we (individually) can figure out ways to understand ~ and in the same vein neutralise ~ the potential dangers and threats that 'cognitive technology' poses to the human mind, can we not protect ourselves (individually and collectively) against those threats?
This 'cognitive warfare' is a product of human minds, developed with a relatively limited understanding of human Consciousness. You say this 'tool' is used (and has been planned to be used) as an aggressor to overpower and control the human mind, and this seems to be effective in relation to humans who are unaware of the powers of their own minds...
It doesn't mean this 'warfare weapon' has the same effect on everyone.
Thank you Veronika. I think you've hit on something crucial regarding the duality of this challenge, a perennial contest, yet now waged with unprecedented technological leverage. Your point about our interconnectedness and collective consiousness, and how that very connection might hold keys to resilience, is an encouraging and important perspective to explore.
And yes, the developers of these methods may not grasp the full spectrum of human consciousness, which perhaps underscores where true strength and defense can be found?
Your observation about the potential limitations in understanding on the part of those crafting these tools, versus the variable impact on individuals, really gets to the heart of both the threat and the potential for agency, this is why we must be more vocal about this threat and help others understand the 'power of their own minds.' I will explore examples in future posts, your reflections have given me much to think about.
As you probably know by now, I always approach these topics from the 'opposite end', partly no doubt because I never had a career in any public capacity, always working 'behind the scenes'. This position has produced my work (all explained on my Synchronosophy substack) where I have developed a theory and practice for making such vital changes within our own individual Consciousness.
The reasoning behind this is that as individual 'cells' of collective Consciousness we are both influenced by the collective and can in turn have an influence on it. Therefore, 'inner transformational work' becomes crucial! But it is never done in a manipulative way.
In other words, I can help others understand the 'power of their own minds' not by 'telling' them, not even by 'showing' them, but by turning inward and exploring the question: 'where or in what way am I doing the very same thing that I lament in others?'
As soon as I identify that 'mental flaw' or 'blind spot' in myself, I can transform it. My own transformation has 'miraculous' effects, on others too, but it's not manipulation, because I can never know what's the right thing for them to do at the opportune moment...
I believe that this principle, which I have experienced in interrelational contexts, must apply to the collective too.
I always appreciate you bringing your unique vantage point to these discussions, especially the way you champion the 'behind the scenes' work on individual consciousness. Your Synchronosophy framework, focusing on self-awareness and transforming personal 'mental flaws' non-manipulatively, offers a compelling counter-narrative to the external and often coercive methods of cognitive warfare. I believe you that such personal shifts can create ripple effects, influencing the collective without direct intervention, overall this a really hopeful and empowering suggestion.
“It doesn't mean this 'warfare weapon' has the same effect on everyone.” Your comment is quite correct, Veronika, but as long as there are those who remain in the dark, infected, there will be a need for those others to return again and again to whisper in their ears. So in that sense we may not be effected by it, but we are all effected because of it.
True, that's how I understand it as well. The whispering in their ears, however, may not work in a literal sense, because humans are rarely persuaded by words to 'see the light' as long as they have some unknown incentive to remain in the dark...
I am wondering what we can do to render this 'cognitive warfare' ineffective, no matter how many people are adversely affected by it...
Excellent question Veronika, and one I asked as well. No doubt, it will be addressed in further article. Personally, I have attempted to address the cognitive warfare on a one to one level with others, but , as you say, addressing that unknown incentive for them to remain in the dark is frequently illusive. Even IF it is known, it often takes years of conversation, time we do not have have.
True Wendy, that is an excellent question by Veronika. The challenge is the wide variety of 'tricks', techniques and technologies available. I really believe we need more transparency from our governments and then a major eduction program on reflective thinking.
that would be great. Alas, 'governments' are run by fallible humans, and so are education programs...
It's in great part in the face of this apparent powerlessness that I have started and continue to develop my work on Synchronosophy....
Great article, thank you. It makes me think that never has it been more important to "Know Thyself". It is the bedrock against 'cognitive warfare'. However, I don't think such warfare is new. Religions have been at it for thousands of years as a means of controlling people. The power of discernment and self-determination still lies within us, but one has to plumb deep. And in the current times, ever deeper.
Thank you Joshua, and yes it is true... I wrote about the origination of the word propaganda and religion. We need to seriously rethink how we educate young people and help 'know thy self' - so often discernment and self-determination are 'learned' late in life. When people could benefit from understanding themselves much younger and being able to discern the truth from mis and dis-information.
We have lost our 'wise elders' who, in the past, would have guided the young. At least, I like to believe it was like that and I'm not viewing the past through rose-tinted spectacles.
Yes, I agree with that fully. The 'not so' wise elders seem to be causing all of the problems these days!
Wow. Another post that strikes me right in the middle of my brain. Thanks, Colin. You are doing important work in sharing your thinking in such an articulate way - thank you.
Thank you so much Ross. I appreciate that a lot. Colin
Cognitive warfare sounds horrifically subversive. As I was reading this post, I couldn't help but think about how InYourFaceBook has been waging precisely this variety of mind hijacking even before the advent of LLM's. I understand that Zuck is now supplementing his already subversive "engagement" algorithms with AI.
The only defense I can think of, besides a healthy dose of skepticism is hard evidence, whenever and wherever it can be found.
Yes, that hard evidence is essential - more in future posts.