Author: Gerd Doeben-Henisch

Changelog: April 30, 2024 – May 3, 2024

May 3,24: I added two Epilogs

Email: info@uffmm.org

TRANSLATION: The following text is a translation from a German version into English. For the translation I am using the software @chatGPT4 with manual modifications.

CONTEXT

Originally I wrote, that “this text is not a direct continuation of another text, but that there exist before various articles from the author on similar topics. In this sense, the current text is a kind of ‘further development’ of these ideas”. But, indeed, at least the text “NARRATIVES RULE THE WORLD. CURSE & BLESSING. COMMENTS FROM @CHATGPT4” ( https://www.uffmm.org/2024/02/03/narratives-rule-the-world-curse-blessing-comments-from-chatgpt4/ ) is a text, which can be understood as a kind of precursor.

In everyday life … magical links …

Almost everyone knows someone—or even several people—who send many emails—or other messages—that only contain links, links to various videos, of which the internet provides plenty nowadays, or images with a few keywords.

Since time is often short, one would like to know if it’s worth clicking on this video. But explanatory information is missing.

When asked about it, whether it would not be possible to include a few explanatory words, the sender almost always replies that they cannot formulate it as well as the video itself.

Interesting: Someone sends a link to a video without being able to express their opinion about it in their own words…

Follow-up questions…

When I click on a link and try to form an opinion, one of the first questions naturally is who published the video (or a text). The same set of facts can be narrated quite differently, even in complete contradiction, depending on the observer’s perspective, as evidenced and verifiable in everyday life. And since what we can sensually perceive is always only very fragmentary, is attached to the surfaces and is connected to some moment of time, it does not necessarily allow us to recognize different relationships to other aspects. And this vagueness is offering plenty of room for interpretation with each observation. Without a thorough consideration of the context and the backstory, interpretation is simply not possible … unless someone already has a ‘finished opinion’ that ‘integrates’ the ‘involuntary fragment of observation’ without hesitation.

So questioning and researching is quite ‘normal’, but our ‘quick brain’ first seeks ‘automatic answers’, as it doesn’t require much thought, is faster, requires less energy, and despite everything, this ‘automatic interpretation’ still provides a ‘satisfying feeling’: Yes, one ‘knows exactly what is presented’. So why question?

Immunizing…

As a scientist, I am trained to clarify all framework conditions, including my own assumptions. Of course, this takes effort and time and is anything but error-free. Hence, multiple checks, inquiries with others about their perspectives, etc. are a common practice.

However, when I ask the ‘wordless senders of links’, if something catches my attention, especially when I address a conflict with the reality I know, the reactions vary in the direction that I have misunderstood or that the author did not mean it that way at all. If I then refer to other sources that are considered ‘strongly verified’, they are labeled as ‘lying press’ or the authors are immediately exposed as ‘agents of a dark power’ (there is a whole range of such ‘dark powers’), and if I dare to inquire here as well, where the information comes from, then I quickly become a naive, stupid person for not knowing all this.

So, any attempt to clarify the basics of statements, to trace them back to comprehensible facts, ends in some kind of conflict long before any clarification has been realized.

Truth, Farewell…

Now, the topic of ‘truth’ has become even in philosophy unfortunately no more than a repository of multiple proposals. And even the modern sciences, fundamentally empirical, increasingly entangle themselves in the multitude of their disciplines and methods in a way that ‘integrative perspectives’ are rare and the ‘average citizen’ tends to have a problem of understanding. Not a good starting point to effectively prevent the spread of the ‘cognitive fairy tale virus’.

Democracy and the Internet as a Booster

The bizarre aspect of our current situation is that precisely the two most significant achievements of humanity, the societal form of ‘modern democracy’ (for about 250 years (in a history of about 300,000 years)) and the technology of the ‘internet’ (browser-based since about 1993), which for the first time have made a maximum of freedom and diversity of expression possible, that precisely these two achievements have now created the conditions for the cognitive fairy tale virus to spread so unrestrainedly.

Important: today’s cognitive fairy tale virus occurs in the context of ‘freedom’! In previous millennia, the cognitive fairy tale virus already existed, but it was under the control of the respective authoritarian rulers, who used it to steer the thoughts and feelings of their subjects in their favor. The ‘ambiguities’ of meanings have always allowed almost all interpretations; and if a previous fairy tale wasn’t enough, a new one was quickly invented. As long as control by reality is not really possible, anything can be told.

With the emergence of democracy, the authoritarian power structures disappeared, but the people who were allowed and supposed to vote were ultimately the same as before in authoritarian regimes. Who really has the time and desire to deal with the complicated questions of the real world, especially if it doesn’t directly affect oneself? That’s what our elected representatives are supposed to do…

In the (seemingly) quiet years since World War II, the division of tasks seemed to work well: here the citizens delegating everything, and there the elected representatives who do everything right. ‘Control’ of power was supposed to be guaranteed through constitution, judiciary, and through a functioning public…

But what was not foreseen were such trifles as:

1. The increase in population and the advancement of technologies induced ever more complex processes with equally complex interactions that could no longer be adequately managed with the usual methods from the past. Errors and conflicts were inevitable.
2. Delegating to a few elected representatives with ‘normal abilities’ can only work if these few representatives operate within contexts that provide them with all the necessary competencies their office requires. This task seems to be increasingly poorly addressed.
3. The important ‘functioning public’ has been increasingly fragmented by the tremendous possibilities of the internet: there is no longer ‘the’ public, but many publics. This is not inherently bad, but when the available channels are attracting the ‘quick and convenient brain’ like light attracts mosquitoes, then heads increasingly fall into the realm of ‘cognitive viruses’ that, after only short ‘incubation periods,’ take possession of a head and control it from there.

The effects of these three factors have been clearly observable for several years now: the unresolved problems of society, which are increasingly poorly addressed by the existing democratic-political system, make individual people in the everyday situation to interpret their dissatisfaction and fears more and more exclusively under the influence of the cognitive fairy tale virus and to act accordingly. This gradually worsens the situation, as the constructive capacities for problem analysis and the collective strength for problem-solving diminish more and more..

No remedies available?

Looking back over the thousands of years of human history, it’s evident that ‘opinions’, ‘views of the world’, have always only harmonized with the real world in limited areas, where it was important to survive. But even in these small areas, for millennia, there were many beliefs that were later found to be ‘wrong’.

Very early on, we humans mastered the art of telling ourselves stories about how everything is connected. These were eagerly listened to, they were believed, and only much later could one sometimes recognize what was entirely or partially wrong about the earlier stories. But in their lifetimes, for those who grew up with these stories, these tales were ‘true’, made ‘sense’, people even went to their deaths for them.

Only at the very end of humanity’s previous development (the life form of Homo sapiens), so — with 300,000 years as 24 hours — after about 23 hours and 59 minutes, did humans discover with empirical sciences a method of obtaining ‘true knowledge’ that not only works for the moment but allows us to look millions, even billions of years ‘back in time’, and for many factors, billions of years into the future. With this, science can delve into the deepest depths of matter and increasingly understand the complex interplay of all the wonderful factors.

And just at this moment of humanity’s first great triumphs on the planet Earth, the cognitive fairy tale virus breaks out unchecked and threatens even to completely extinguish modern sciences!

Which people on this planet can resist this cognitive fairy tale virus?

Here’s a recent message from the Uppsala University [1,2], reporting on an experiment by Swedish scientists with students, showing that it was possible to measurably sharpen students’ awareness of ‘fake news’ (here: the cognitive fairy tale virus).

Yes, we know that young people can shape their awareness to be better equipped against the cognitive fairy tale virus through appropriate education. But what happens when official educational institutions aren’t able to provide the necessary eduaction because either the teachers cannot conduct such knowledge therapy or the teachers themselves could do it, but the institutions do not allow it? The latter cases are known, even in so-called democracies!

Epilog 1

The following working hypotheses are emerging:

1. The fairy tale virus, the unrestrained inclination to tell stories (uncontrolled), is genetically ingrained in humans.
2. Neither intelligence nor so-called ‘academic education’ automatically protect against it.
3. ‘Critical thinking’ and ’empirical science’ are special qualities that people can only acquire with their own great commitment. Minimal conditions must exist in a society for these qualities, without which it is not possible.
4. Active democracies seem to be able to contain the fairy tale virus to about 15-20% of societal practice (although it is always present in people). As soon as the percentage of active storytellers perceptibly increases, it must be assumed that the concept of ‘democracy’ is increasingly weakening in societal practice — for various reasons.

Epilog 2

Anyone actively affected by the fairy tale virus has a view of the world, of themselves, and of others, that has so little to do with the real world ‘out there’, beyond their own thinking, that real events no longer influence their own thinking. They live in their own ‘thought bubble’. Those who have learned to think ‘critically and scientifically’ have acquired techniques and apply them that repeatedly subject their thinking within their own bubble to a ‘reality check’. This check is not limited to specific events or statements… and that’s where it gets difficult.

References

[1] Here’s the website of Uppsala University, Sweden, where the researchers come from: https://www.uu.se/en/press/press-releases/2024/2024-04-24-computer-game-in-school-made-students-better-at-detecting-fake-news

[2] And here’s the full scientific article with open access: “Bad News in the civics classroom: How serious gameplay fosters teenagers’ ability to discern misinformation techniques.” Carl-Anton Werner Axelsson, Thomas Nygren, Jon Roozenbeek & Sander van der Linden, Received 26 Sep 2023, Accepted 29 Mar 2024, Published online: 19 Apr 2024: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2024.2338451