Who is at risk
Obviously, there is a risk group in society - they are pathologically inclined towards indoctrination, and there is another pole - people to it are almost unwilling. The largest number of people is in the middle position. In general, this picture can be described by a curve of the normal Gauss-Laplace distribution.
To simplify the solution of practical issues, one can agree to some conventionality, expressed by the following percentages resulting from the mentioned mathematical law: 15-20% of the population are people who are pathologically inclined to indoctrination, 60-70% are the norm and 15-20% people in the thinking and behavior of which it is weakly expressed, or not expressed at all.
However, the practice of combating the activities of destructive, religious cults shows that people are most exposed to indoctrinating influence when they find themselves in difficult life situations. Loss of relatives and friends, a serious illness can reduce the resistance to attempts to establish control of consciousness. Such people often become the prey of various "agents of influence".
Consciousness Control Mechanisms
Journalist Edward Hunter back in the early 1950s. suggested the term "brainwashing". He went into everyday psychology and even sometimes used in scientific psychology as an analog of the term "mind control". Despite this, there is a difference between these concepts. The term brainwashing it involves violence, it is connected with open coercion. On the contrary, the term mind control assumes that the "agents of influence" are seen as friends, mentors, legitimate leaders. Their task, lulling vigilance, to achieve the maximum reduction of individual personal protection, thereby making a person fit for manipulation.
Under the control of consciousness should be understood a set of methods and techniques that affect how people think, feel, act. Like most of the knowledge available to man, the fact of having the ability to control consciousness can not be evaluated in the categories "good/bad". Control of consciousness becomes dangerous when a person is deprived of freedom of choice, the opportunity to independently manage his own life, act independently. Thus, one can speak of the "constructive control of consciousness" and "destructive control of consciousness".
So, for example, any religion, any ideology (including a democratic one) pursues the goal - to control consciousness and thus influence the thinking and behavior of the individual, but this society is not inclined to consider this control as destructive. For most people, it is necessary, because it brings order and meaning into their lives. Constructive, benevolent control of consciousness is necessary when it is required to reprogram human thinking and behavior.
Using indoctrination for positive purposes, one should constantly remember that it challenges the identity and provokes a number of general psychological states that push a person to blind worship of other people's ideas, to identify with a leader or group. Often this process is accompanied by intense feelings of fear, guilt, loneliness and is achieved through intimidation or depression. All this is bizarrely intertwined with the state of dependence on the mentor.
As a result, a person is pushed to an affiliate link with one or more representatives of an indoctrinating group. It is this connection that sharply increases the likelihood of a new identity and manifestation of instilled feelings of loyalty. It is usually achieved through the recognition of the authority of the mentor, as well as by special changes in the physiological or psychological state. The behavior, emotions, feelings, attitudes that awakens indoctrination are specific to man and are innate universals.
The universality of the action of the mechanism of indoctrination confirms the assumption that the means of indoctrination are dictated by the necessity of selecting the keys, first of all, to the sensory and behavioral apparatus of man. These keys, as social practice testifies, proved equally effective in uniting small tribal groups in antiquity, they rallied members of agricultural communities and inhabitants of medieval city-states. They also provided and provide solidarity of modern ethnoses, nations, and states consisting of hundreds of millions of citizens.
The above analysis allows us to give more detailed descriptions of the action of the mechanism of inoculation. Based on the criteria proposed below, it is possible to determine whether a particular structure of a person intentionally endorses inoculation. If several of these points are inherent in many groups, then the alignment of the organization's actions to all points is evidence that it is focused on controlling the consciousness of its members.
Control of the external environment is characterized by the following factors:
- restriction of freedom of movement;
- control of communication;
- impracticable standards of behavior - the establishment of externally real, but in practice almost impracticable standards of conduct;
- a strict restriction or total denial of private property.
The destruction of the boundaries of the internal space of the individual implies:
- the cult of confession (necessarily share and confess in any thought, feeling or action, which can be suspected of being inconsistent with group rules);
- rejection of the past - "Ivan, not remembering kinship";
- a special language - the use of special means of communication (gestures, signs, etc.) and verbal resources in order to limit the thinking of members of the group. The replacement of traditional verbal conversions with conditional, thought-interrupting The cliché, understood only for the initiated;
- the planting of faith in the absolute truth of group dogma - scientific and moral. There should not be room for any doubts, questions or alternative points of view;
- the primacy of doctrine over personality - the imposition of group beliefs as opposed to experience, consciousness and integrity of personality;
- the division of others around their and foreign - the assertion of the belief that members of the group have the right to exist, and critics, dissidents and "rasstrigi" - do not have.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay