Category Archives: gaslighting

The death of facts



Them’s the facts jack. Facts are facts. Or are they. Fact checkers love to write their own checks, but who checks them? Other fact checkers? That’s a tangled web, and at any scale sovereignty, and then authority, begins with you. As always the most important question isn’t who, but how. How we determine what the facts are, determines the quality of our reactions.

Many people care about facts as weapons. A way to zing their enemies. The repugnant selfish theater better known as politics. They don’t contemplate broader risks. Absurdities enable atrocities. The fields of facts are filled with Pyrrhic victories. Battles won at cost of humanity’s common war against risk. The truth and the broad shield it provides us is damaged. What does truth shield us from? Many interim horrors, but ultimately, mistakes we can not come back from.

Inherently, there can be no greater risk than irreconcilable error, should facts go awry. All risk ends there. Facts are important, possibly the most important to a shared social system. The only thing that can correct irreconcilable error is externalities. Waiting for some black swan to save you is inherent failure. Not because saviors don’t exist, but because you learn nothing and therefore accomplish nothing if you strictly wait for them. Trying and failing to understand still often makes progress. You need to act even if the facts do not favor action.

Unknown unknowns

How do you act without or in the face of apparent facts? The temptation may be to vette the facts further. It seems like a positive action, and it could be. But as the earliest politician showed, fact finding can become a fool’s errand. If your premise, or other contributing facts are flawed your result will be skewed, possibly multiplicatively. A trace of poison can ruin the whole water supply. Finding facts objectively, at a glance, seems improbable.

There are a few structures by which to find facts. Only in rationalism can facts be found objectively through strictly logical constructs. Empirical evidence depends to a degree on perspective, and attributes and quality of the senses. A rubber ruler at best. Skepticism can never create a test it can pass, because it’s nature is to doubt everything, including the test itself. You can’t create a useful system of rules, you inherently can’t trust. Determinism can indicate there are immutable facts, but you can’t measure inevitability, only likelihoods approaching inevitability. It may be true, but we can’t measure it completely, so we can’t create a fact with it. So rationalism it is.

Determinism while maddening can be useful. There are no determinists. There are only people who think determinism is the most likely explanation for events and attributes, by a very wide margin. They can’t know every quantum outcome at the sub-atomic level that create the molecules in their brain cells, they can only imagine the parts at that scale working together on an impossible to simulate universal scale. It’s too big for simulation or calculation. Which reveals our final opponent to rationalism, pragmatism.

While many people treat facts as deterministic, they can be, and are pragmatic.  What actually performs and gets good results?  Based in an incalculable world, all things deterministic are in fact an odds game and actually pragmatic. This presents a problem for rationalism. Scope. Just like determinism can only approach the probability that it is true, rationalism can only approach the totality of relevant facts. It may, and mathematically will, miss facts. But don’t just take my word for it, rationalism died with the renaissance man. Once humanities best minds determined the entirety of human knowledge is not knowable to any one person  more than a century ago, it follows that nobody can have or even honestly claim to have, all the facts. The concept of incontrovertible facts died, when the scope of human knowledge exceeded one very smart person.

As this is Civgene, I can’t help but present a second argument. The real way I knew to look for the death of facts. I know all the most intelligent human behavior is partly driven by rationalizing subconscious impulse. Our conscience, indicated by our lack of psychopathy, is a probability engine. Churning out likely answers to puzzles by comparing unlike things in our memories and nudging us. We then in turn rationalize or externally explain these insights. Reason without conscionable  impulse is just rationalism, and that psychopathic fashion of seeking truth is, incomplete at best.

Known unknowns

So we know facts can be false, and can’t be proven completely true, but we have to act. What to do? We should use facts, but we should encourage competing facts. How can they compete? By shrinking the scope of society so that sets of competing facts can play out. Experiments when possible, but predictions when not, can scientifically vette facts. It is healthier to act, than to simply wait for a system of incorrect facts to grow large enough to induce a catastrophic failure. By letting people choose their own results, you prevent moral hazard to truth, or disintegration of the idea of objective truth. Whether it’s distortions originate from gaslighting or subtle errors, top down facts chip away at the viability of approaching objective truth.

An idea oriented fact finding process should be encouraged, not a blame based one. Since all people with imagination have ideas, consensus facts should be shared. Consensus is when the vast majority of people see a fact as true, not only people whom you agree with. Some ideas may conflict. To progress materially or spiritually, you may need to limit the scope of people who are considered for your consensus. People outside this technocracy’s scope should not be considered when achieving a local consensus, but also should not be indoctrinated by the technocracy. Attempting to achieve broader consensus through ideas can expand your scope, but if blame encourages a faux consensus, it damages the viability of objective truth. Smashing anyone, much less your political enemies, in the face with truths they can’t understand hurts the viability of future consensus, and creates castes or classes, the quick road to oppression, oligarchy, and massive inefficiency.

Again as this is Civgene, I must point out civgene had predicted this. Behavioral pairs (consionable humans compared to the animal kingdom) indicate that human rights originate from the differences between humans and all (possibly most) other animals and psychopaths. Primarily adding a time component, future, present, and past to current animal social structures. Property, investment, freedom, friendship, currency and their derivatives, money, markets, specialization, and economy of scale all indicate a right to fork. Allowing hierarchies, like oligarchy and technocracy to interfere with these rights, denies people the opportunity to act naturally human, and benefit maximally from it. Faulty (or false) facts compete with and even eliminate these behaviors. Bringing us closer to psychopathic simple animal behaviors as cumulative distortions grow.

Known knowns

If faced with opponents to your facts, approach them with ideas of process for resolution (ideally scientific), or don’t approach them at all. If a fact is rejected, the blame lay with the explainers understanding of the fact, not the challenger. Many things can be, and have been wrong with specialized and local consensus facts. Deception or defection for power or political gain, scope errors or missing information, empirical errors, or simply low intelligence actors may have forced superficial consensus before a broader population could be brought in through understanding. The highest orders of industry, government, science, and other hierarchies have been disastrously wrong about facts for centuries, before. Destroying public trust. Pushing a fact you can’t explain can have subversive results on our very ability to agree on anything, and possibly our health and safety. An obscure fact is safer for the social fabric than a profound distortion. An obeyed dictate, posing as fact, is possible, but comes at difficult to reverse cost. Destruction of trust.

Much good has been done by small groups of technocrats using a common base of facts to discover new truths. Find like minds. Mankind’s greatest discoveries languished for decades in obscurity, even when in common use, or while enjoying tremendous financial success. All based on facts that still to this day do not share a public consensus. Who, what, when, why, and especially how, can all be wildly changed by the tiniest change in the underlying facts. The truth does not suffer from a lack of attention. Only you do. You can not conquer this problem alone, so seek like minds to build on your facts and compare your performance to other societies technocrats, with different assumptions, I mean ‘facts.’ The public mind is a contest of ideas, and the only sure way lose it is to attack the contest itself.

Who gets the benefits from the doubts?

self-mutilation(tasteful self mutilation)

If faith is rationalized knowledge you can’t prove, and forgiveness emotional resolution to avoid manipulation, who are you really doubting?

Truth telling is a regular affair. If empathy is the engine, spoken truth is the grease of civilization. Most of the time, the benefit of the doubt is not only implicit, but entirely unvisited. Analysis of every statement, every gesture, every promise would undo civilization. Investment would be exhausting and a terrible trade.

When a flash of insight presents a doubt, the temptation is to ignore it. Civilization is a big machine, and the wise human knows the gears must turn to perpetuate the economy of scale. Down time for repairs will have a non linear cost, but the conscience is first and foremost is a risk engine. The dilemma is usually treated as such, ‘is your conscience groaning more loudly about the risk of a lie, or the risk of addressing it’. This can work but introduces a new risk, gaslighting.

Gaslighting seems silly at first but can be the flat edge to a long wedge. First the lies are subtle and inconsequential to the operation of your society, with one exception, you. You learn to NOT trust your gut and ignore insight.

If a high EQ empath is faced with a single dishonest threat, the dishonest actor eventually becomes silhouetted against their more honest context. Your risk engine retunes itself with it’s flow of higher quality data, and they stand out. The problem is addressed and civilization’s machine chugs on.

There is systemic risk, the risk the conscience is poor at managing a flurry of lies. The intelligent and psychopathic defector WILL notice this golden opportunity. Instead of identifying a narrow pattern of doubt, the conscience is too noisy to be useful. Doubt is aimed inward. ‘I must be the problem.’ Without warnings of risk the conscience becomes a liability.

If you are untrained in proposing and rationalizing conspiracies, you can be taught to throw away your conscience or even program it against your own interests. Not just you. Everyone. Flooding people with enough lies to disable their conscience requires a conspiracy. Those that discourage conspiracy theory are likely in the institutional gaslighting business, better known as propaganda.

Who benefits from the doubts? The institutions people are directly involved in. The hierarchies that are riskiest to fork or otherwise defect from. Today that is their governments, their schools, their employers. Those wise to history know finding a criminal conspiracy can be as simple as asking who benefits? Cui Bono.

Doubts are yours, and no good comes from throwing them away. Rationalize them. Not because the conscience is never wrong, but if you don’t use your risk manager, you lose it. Researching, fact checking, and setting traps for the unscrupulous benefits you. Detect reality. Accept no lies, not even the small ones. Painful honesty keeps your conscience active, well tuned, and in a position to defend the economies of scale that afford us the luxury of leisure, and it’s prosperous civilization.

Your empathy, and it’s outrage, IS the machine. The top priority must be keeping the context honest. Demand people with high EQs. Always observant, tough as nails, and a zest for learning. Test their empathy. Protect the machine with vigorous curation. Reject the benefit of the doubt. Doubt people. Doubt systems. Doubt away.

Civgene: Why multitasking lowers IQ/EQ


Interesting brain study.

This seemed tangential to civgene until i read this part.

“Talentsmart has tested more than a million people and found that 90% of top performers have high EQs. If multitasking does indeed damage the anterior cingulate cortex (a key brain region for EQ) as current research suggests, doing so will lower your EQ while it alienates your coworkers.”

There is a simple explanation for this in the metamind model of the conscience/subconcious.  Rationalization, the process of logically assessing our subconscious emotional risk signals, is interrupted, or worse conflated with other signals (the core tool of propaganda and gaslighting).  Many people (rightly) feel uncomfortable following un-rationalized intuition, so they ignore it.  Becoming no better than a psychopath at assessing the immediate and current risks.

Further if lower effective intelligence results from frequent interruptions this strongly supports the idea that human intelligence is more than just a strong memory and fast logic processing.  Very specifically it indicates that some part of subconscious thought management process(civgene says the metamind) is not only part of intelligence, but makes sense if it has it’s OWN memory structure(civgene indicates this is emotional metadata).

The metamind model could have predicted the outcome of this study.  It explains it succinctly.  Always a good sign.

Prediction:  If this study is replicated and the metamind is accepted as the explanation, then some time in topical psychotherapy (talk therapy) should be able to restore previously tested IQ and EQ scores.  The damage isn’t permanent.

Is conspiracy theory useful?


What is conspiracy theory?  It is a theory about two or more people conspiring against at least a third.  There have been have many proven theories throughout history.  The evidence that people do sometimes conspire against each other is so enormous, it indicates that people who disparage it have had a fully alien set of life experiences, or more likely, are attempting to distort a basic truth.  That conspiracy theories can be correct and lower personal risk if acted upon.  As a simple thought experiment, team sports are inherently conspiratorial.  Every competitive game played coherently by more than three players with any strategy or tactics whatsoever has been to some degree conspiratorial.

If it is clearly useful even to the simplest decision making, where does disdain for it come from?  Conspiracy theory is feared because excessive theory creation is a symptom of paranoid schizophrenia.  Where the person suffering from it, will attach a malicious intent to most and sometimes even all actions of others.  This level of mistrust makes it impossible to participate in the inherent trusts of society (like freedom or friendship.)  Since the metamind’s alerts are so over-active, the rational mind never develops properly.  Trapped in desperate race to rationalize a flood of emotional warnings.  The worst cases of paranoid schizophrenia are a form of insanity, and may end in injuries and deaths.    Fears of an extreme paranoid, while often casually or even satirically misdiagnosed, are justified when one does actually occur.

Schizophrenia, the over-active conscience.

So what is Schizophrenia?  Like most disease it is a spectrum.  The metamind (the conscience) as a risk engine makes this easier to understand.  If the metamind is too active, it’s owner struggles.  Preparing against enemies with no purchase or little impact.  Suffering from various levels of paranoia.  In the most extreme case preparing against enemies that don’t exist.

What advantage in natural selection does a spectrum have?  Civgene helps put this in perspective.  Psychopaths pre-date non psychopath humans.  The number of psychopaths and their subsequent influence on societies barbarism, is highly variable.  Their population grows until they collapse a society and it’s economy.  A highly active metamind is paranoid in times of few psychopaths, and highly useful at psychopath saturation.  An individual with mild schizophrenia (a more active metamind), has natural resistance to psychopathy in others.


Since the utility of conspiracy theory is subject to an external factor, the reverse is true as well.  A person with a least active conscience lands at the other end of spectrum.  The mental risk manger is less active than it needs to be or in the worst case entirely absent.  It fails to warn the rational mind about clear and present dangers.  The level of warning that would be a good fit in a society with few psychopaths, fails to detect conspiracies in a the corrupt one.

Why is abphrenia a disorder at all?   Trust can be a positive attribute in a trustworthy environment, but puts us at risk of protopsychopathy outside of one.  Emotional manipulation can reprogram the conscience that doesn’t protect itself.  Marketing, propaganda, and gaslighting are just a few common ways this can happen.  An underactive metamind puts it’s owner at risk of membership in cult, be it political or religious.


Once someone is a protopsychopath, their conscience is owned and controlled by a person or organization of people outside themself.  So long as this control remains, they can be made to act perpetually against their own self interest.  In this light it is easy to see how a mildly paranoid metamind is a genetic advantage.  Conspiracy theories, in moderation or mild excess, protect you from emotional control.  Avoiding this situation entirely.

While paranoid schizophrenics are obvious, clashing with reality with strange views and actions, abphreniacs are usually passive and subtle.  How do you detect their condition?  If they have been captured as protopsychopaths, which is likely in corrupted society, it should be fairly easy.  Protopsychoapthy captures the entire metamind.  Not only ensnaring the risk manager and reprogramming it with false risks, but capturing the imagination as well.  Lack of ability to cite personal (unpopular) conspiracy theories, or the ability to contrive one on demand, indicates their subconscious is not their own.  If they can not it is likely that a psychopath or cult lurks in their past or present, controlling their ideas of risk.

Repair and progress

Not only can conspiracy theories be constructive, but their complete absence indicates emotional mind control.  The good news is that the metamind is to varying strengths anti-fragile.  When exposed to new emotional data, all but the strongest cases of protopsychopathy will fade or collapse.  The protopsychopath’s subconscious mind is not a two way radio.  If you are fighting a protopsychoapths programming head on, you are fighting a ghost.  Their program, if clever enough, was told in advance to look out for all new sources of information as defectors.  They will attack the people that try to help them most.  Rather than confront a protopsychopath directly, introduce them to information sources you trust.  Use inverse gaslighting techniques not to program them but to break their spell.  Subtly introducing small doses of truth and letting their subconscious fold them into their entire calculation.  A matchbook from an old neighborhood.  An open window on a holiday.  A memory of a success.  A night on the town with family.  Well timed humor.  A kind word.  A ‘forgotten’ magazine turned to the right page.  Any kindness in view.  Subtle repetition.

One day, with luck, the scales will be tipped, and their metamind will once again be open to new ideas, outside of others control.  If their abphrenia is not too severe, their freedom will be permanent.


The burden of faith


Civgene is the theory that humans with a metamind (more or less the conscience) evolved from psychopaths.  That animals the world over lack the properties of metamind (at least friendship, property, freedom, currency, and investment) and need not just intelligence, but also trust to accomplish civilization.  That civilization and it’s wonders (money, markets, specialization, economy of scale, and multi-tiered technology) is the logic of compassion.

This, like all evolution, stems from a genetic accident with an advantage.  The ability to assess risk in a split second.  A precognitive sense of long term consequences.   The metamind,  the source of civilizing levels of trust is a risk engine.  How does it work?  How does it signal to us that it’s risk calculation is complete?  Through sudden subconsciously driven emotion.  Therein lies the burden.

The process of rational determination of the origin and meaning of sudden out of context emotion, or rationalizing, is difficult.  It benefits from intimate knowledge of the subconscious self, and needs tireless practice.  The key to operation of a metamind is faith.  Faith is knowing something you can’t prove.  A perfect match for a human in the position of receiving  an emotional warning they can’t immediately rationally quantify.  Faith is how people practice defending the urge to act in a conscionable but unexplainable way.

Is it any wonder that people flock to faiths of all shapes and sizes?  How else would they practice using their own minds risk engine.  It’s good for them too.  Arguing a conclusion you trust by testing logic until something fits is the direct consequence of civgene mutation.  So is cooperation in groups larger than the largest troop of monkeys.  Society is the de facto faith based organization of civilization.

It is natural that people with a common faith would organize in tighter groups.  The benefits of community rationalization are simply too great to ignore.  Hashing out the correct (or sometimes wrong) rational response to emotional signals that are triggered by the risks they face.  Successful accurate rationalization repels critics with incorrect rationalization, flawed risk assessment, and self interested opportunists at risk of exposure of defections from societies at all scales.  Religion and politics are groups of empathic humans exploring their faith.  Groups working together at tuning their waking minds to understand the signals from their guts (so to speak.)

Society and therefore civilization become undermined and eventually destroyed when religion or politics are subverted.  People invest in a flawed model of group rationalization and at best errors occur.  At worst peoples very metamind can be rewritten by the group they sought out to help understand it.  People who are interested in manipulating others for their own benefit, can create rewards for failed assessments.  The metamind is retrained to respond to ghost risks, and the conscience becomes controlled externally.   Marketing, propaganda, dogma, and gaslighting among others fill this role.

How can this happen?  Shouldn’t the metamind detect the threat to itself?  Over time, thousands of bad inputs and decisions slowly reshape it to reflect a programmed risk without a basis in the individuals personal experience.   The metamind likely does warn that it’s accuracy is declining, but it’s a system of subtle signals that can be drowned out by acute fear.  Fear that can be activated reliably by a few specific signals.

  • You can’t leave our faith without serious consequences.
  • You can’t criticize our faith without serious consequences.
  • You must join our faith or there will be serious consequences.

The consequences can be real or imagined, but the fear blocking internal warnings is real.  These signals are repeated over and over again by those who would replace civilization with a pack behavior (territory, treaty, alliance, assignment, and favour.)  They are a message of fear designed specifically to deter the forking of religions and political groups as conscionable people are reprogrammed into proto-psychopaths.  This is why forking any hierarchy must be a protected human right, not just in rhetoric, but in practice.  These signals differentiate between a faith based religion or political party and a cult or political ideology.

Protect your conscience, protect all faith.  Discern cult from religion.  Discern political ideology from politics.  Reject conceptual fanaticism.  Promote and protect forking even if you don’t understand every instance, and societal progress will be made.

Edit:  more apt image…

Childhood love and EQ

Love-and-EQJust click on the image for the big version.

I recently realized a very simple way to describe the difference between a protopsychopath and metapsychopath.  Both are when an empath (not a psychopath) suspends their conscience temporally, allowing them to act like a psychopath.

The difference is, who is in control of the change.

A protopsychopath is captured by outside forces.  A person or persons uses emotional manipulation to negate the useful warnings of the target’s conscience.  Careful control of nearly every experience (it can take an entire childhood or lifetime for example.) can result in a protopsychopath, an empath who not only respects the master/slave model, but lives by it.  In the diagram the most likely candidate would be a person with a low EQ and little parental love.

A metapsychopath is an empath in control of their emotions.  Not that they don’t have them but that they can temporally suspend them in order to interact with psychopaths and psychopathic societies with minimal personal influence.   It is a defense against emotional mind control, and can be a way to initiate and function in a psychopathic alliance.  Great empathic leaders must visit and use these powers to varying degrees.

It is important to remember that both states are temporary and induced by a rational intelligence.  The conscience is both self healing and anti-fragile.  In other words, simply removing a protopsychopath from external influence, can completely break control given enough experiences.   Likewise metapsychopaths will fall out of practice if not exposed to psychopathic behaviour for a period of time.  This is why empaths with high EQs and a difficult background (possibly post childhood) make great leaders.   They are driven to condition themselves against selfish binary behaviour and may seek it out simply for practice with their metapsychopath skills.

What is the conscience?


The fast version is: Psychopaths were the last human breed pre-civilization. A mutation occurred, forcing a human (and eventually most of them) into mandatory emotional recall. Not only can your rational mind remember your emotions, but you must feel them as you remember things. Now you have two pathways to every memory, the logical (conscious) mind, AND the emotional (subconscious) metamind. The metamind is a more specific name for both the subconscious and the conscience. They are the same thing.

So now when I say ‘basketball’ or show you a picture of a tree, you mind can access memories relating to this two ways. The logical conscious pathways or the emotions associated with that tree (which you immediately feel to a small degree) This forms a passively driven risk engine. Lets say you broke your arm in that type of tree (or playing basketball), or that’s a memory from the day your parents were divorced, when you remember that thing you also logically reference that important memory. The negative emotion from the tree (danger) now activates ALL memories (via the subconscious) with the same negative emotion.

Via MRI psychopaths do not have this secondary mind. That’s why they don’t feel guilt.

That’s how someone can have a panic attack, that’s how propaganda can be used to manipulate you, that’s how gaslighting can drive you mad, that’s how you can feel an outpouring of emotion for someone you have never met simply because they look like someone else, etc, etc.

The conscience is specifically, mandatory emotional recall. Caused by the civgene mutation.

Why is this PITA a genetic advantage? Cause logic doesn’t scale, and the conscience is REALLY fast. Effectively instantaneous. That ‘oh ****’ moment you feel in a local bar, or hunting a mammoth, can save your life.

The key is managing it’s side effects (uncontrollable, unexplainable, perhaps destructive emotions) is reason. Reason is the process of using logical mind to rationalize and eventually personally normalize and tune the messages from the conscience.

The best part though is the side effect. We all trust each other more. We strive for normalcy and feed off each others emotions. Without that, currency, investment and the economy of scale would not be possible. Why plant seeds (and be stuck in one spot) and tend to them when a psychopath can walk right into your hut rape you, kill you (even worse keep and enslave you), eat all your food and then move on to the next hut. You trust that the men (and women) in your village will hear the ruckus and protect you. They recognize the risks of failed investments effect the whole village.

Kinda funny since lots of guilt is about money. Heh.

Forgiveness is a weapon

Warrior Monks Of Shaolin Temple

The dangers of propaganda and to less of an extent marketing have long been established.  But how do they work?   Either by rearranging your emotions or generating brand new ones people can change your behavior without your consent.  When being blitzed by these techniques you really only have two options.  You can either remove yourself from the outside influence, or you can recognize and actively ignore the external messages.

The emotional maps that can be used to manipulate you can be derived from broader societal trends, or can extracted from you personally using psychoanalysis techniques.  Scale effects the technique, but not the result.  If  I can trigger and emotional reaction in you, I can change your mood and to some degree your behavior.  Even if you are aware of the attempt and actively trying to stop me.

As mentioned simply removing yourself from the environment is effective.  For example turning off the television or more personally shunning a psychopath.  Once they can no longer communicate with you, you will not form further emotional connections and they can not interfere with the metamind’s predictive abilities.

But we know that the real world is rarely so simple.  You may need to endure many sources of emotional manipulation during any day.  Further, being self aware can help you to block emotions, but the very act of blocking intruding emotions can make you angry or depressed.  Now upset that you have been toyed with, you may still change your behavior, perhaps drastically, providing a wanted response.  This two layer manipulation is insidious, but hardly unstoppable.

Contrary to popular belief, forgiveness is a wholly personal affair.  While it may play an important role in your particular faith, it serves the health of your mind directly.  Another popular belief is that forgiven is forgotten.  It is critical that you separate these two things.  Forgiveness is your best method to completely stop external manipulation of your emotions without changing your behavior.  Forgetting is opening up yourself to further manipulation attempts by people and organizations that you may have already identified as a psychopath or psychopathic.

Consider forgiving the psychopathic cultures and psychopaths in your life.  Not as a benevolent act of compassion, but as an act of self defense.  Recognize psychopathic behavior for what it really is, the selfish whims of the mentally limited.  Show them pity and you , not them, will be saved from the torment of a distorted conscience