It’s difficult to be a dissenter

like this

Fakeologists take note.

It’s difficult to be a dissenter. We often feel the need to go along with what others in our group think, and neuroscience shows that this desire for conformity isn’t just the result of peer pressure. It is wired into our brains.

Source: How having power is like having brain damage: a new book explains why systems fail | Toronto Star

No tags for this post.

7 thoughts on “It’s difficult to be a dissenter

  1. simonshack

    I wonder what would happen if, one bright day, some “Mr Nobody” with no academic credentials to his name would disprove beyond reasonable doubt some major, sacred cow of science such as, say, that Earth orbits around the Sun.

    Would Mr Nobody be swiftly contacted by academic circles and/or mainstream media outlets to put forth his case so as to assess and review his findings in earnest?

    More interestingly perhaps, would critical thinkers around the world, eager to challenge “established truths and science”, be all over Mr. Nobody’s findings – trying to verify to their best capacities whether there is any substance to the same?

    Oh wait… I think that I can answer these questions. Sorry for sharing these pointless musings of mine. 😛

  2. xileffilex

    From the article…
    Since the 1970s, a series of fatal accidents have forced changes in the airline industry.
    I think the writer means fake

  3. ricky

    Well we all have to co-exist in society more or less, therein lies the conundrum of flowing among our loved ones, neighbors, clients, friends, so called professionals, etc. in all sorts of social settings. There is an old adage among veteran traders in financial markets, “don’t fight the fed.” Meaning, when trying to go against the grain against a power that can create money out of nothing, you can’t win. I see that as analogous to the media monolith that creates the culture we inhabit. I don’t disagree with the idea of an “ESP’ among groups of people being a legitimate idea, however today I would suggest it’s almost entirely media induced, and for a long time, I was hooked in. When you’re in nature as a group, there’s can be an unspoken communication that can occur when weather or ocean conditions change unexpectedly, especially if it means big trouble. So I agree with JLB and his concept of ESP, although I also agree with unreal that it’s induced through our culture creators through media, and our natural inclinations if they weren’t so altered by media saturation would be much more free thinking and creative.

  4. John le Bon

    Interesting post, Ab. Thanks for sharing it.

    For some time now I have been firming in my position that humans behave as though there is an ESP-like effect which occurs when they interact with one another in groups. I am not saying that there IS an ESP going on, I am saying that humans behave as though there is. And this effect brings us down to the lowest common denominator, and keeps us from ‘stepping out of line’, not just in action but in thought.

    This is of course similar to what Gustave le Bon was writing more than 100 years ago. Allegedly.…

    It seems to me that the more interaction we have with people whose respect/admiration we crave, the more we yield to the general/popular opinion of that group of people. Only those who spend significant time away from the crowd can think for themselves. The problem is that most intelligent people spend inordinate amounts of time among the crowd, because they have careers and social lives and families to tend to on a daily basis.

    This is why the typical conspiracy theorist tends to be closer to the stereotype than many people are willing to admit: alone, unsuccessful financially and/or socially, and oftentimes bitter/jaded as a result. It is these people who are sufficiently distanced from the crowd to avoid/mitigate the ESP-like effects of being around the herd. The problem is that these people also tend to be horrible communicators of ideas (which correlates with their lack of success in career/social circles).

    Rare is the man who is distanced enough from the crowd to genuinely deprogram, and yet intelligent/capable enough to communicate his ideas to those still in regular contact with the crowd. Rarer still is the man who understands that, perhaps, the ‘truth’ is not for all people: it may be the case that the masses are truly happier believing the same myths as their fellow lemmings, than they would be ‘thinking for themselves’.

    People tell me that they want the truth, that they deserve the truth, but watch how many of them attack me like rabid dogs when the truth is presented. Only a tiny, tiny minority are truly prepared. Remember that ‘apocalypse’ simply means ‘unveiling’, etymologically speaking.

    Welcome to the apocalypse. Are you ready?

  5. UNreal


    It might help to know that these two researchers received this prize hosted by ‘The Financial Times” more than two years ahead of the release of their book. It would suggest these are authors meant to succeed – not promoted by any popular acclaim. Meaning they are in the limelight out of pure interest of the Elite themselves (anagram : Te Lie).

    Regarding Clearfield, he did of course discover a long-searched-for pulsar in the remnants of an exploded star while studying physics and biology at North Carolina School of Science and Math. Looking that far into space might surely be a good indication he would apply the very same rigour as he help inform us ‘commonors’ on the inner wirings of our very own brains…(article)

    And “Meltdown” co-author Andras Tilcsik was also prized for another research paper he wrote in 2016 entitled “Class Advantage, Commitment Penalty: The Gendered Effect of Social Class Signals in an Elite Labor Market”. This award was given by American Sociological Association’s section for ‘Sex and Gender’… (see below)

    Tilcsik – Clit Sik (or ‘Clit Kis – both direct anagrams)

  6. UNreal

    It is always curious how we as ‘commoners’ seem eager to easily adopt memes that Elite PHD researchers feed us. The TED talk type of authors seem to have an uncanny tendency to hit emotional triggers that makes us stop and listen to their message and ingest their propositions as gospel.

    It seems unlikely on the surface that an informative book such as “Meltdown” would be written out of any other motivation than to openly study the mind of man. Just as genetecist andnuclear scientist strive to do their best for largest number of the population.

    Before we stop and take it for given that it is in any way “natural” for humans to blindly follow a group such as this book indirectly suggest and ascertain, we might do well to be cautious of any new study made by young up and coming “genious” researchers, emeritus higher education stars and hedge fund managers.

    It turns out that everyday meltdowns—failed projects, bad hiring decisions, and even disastrous dinner parties—have a lot in common with oil spills and mountaineering accidents.
    – Tilcsik and Clearfield (article)

    Indeed – what oil spills and mountaineering accidents have in comming is that they are false, staged events and that they hurt our wellbeing when we choose to believe in them.

    As we know the Elite are in fact continuously facing a challenge in leading a population that is much larger in number than the lucky few who profit the most from the sociatal model we live in today. It should thereby be evident that it is in the Elite’s very crucial interest to make the largest part of the population self-police and accept it as normal to obey the commands from our betters.

    By nature humans are not followers nor designed to execute absurd commands – this is a condition the Elite wish to establish trough careful nurture against – our nature.

    The sorry fact is that the ability to think for ourselves and make our own decision based on humane ethics and moral is bred out of us by Elite (anagram : Te Lie) design. The Elite depend on our obediance and moral submission in order to prevail. Studies that insinuate we are naturally “followers” and and born feeble minded as in this article are not in any way harmless information nor mediated in our best interest.

    Suggesting humans do not naturally dissent is rather a subtile and powerful attack on our wellbeing by using the nocebo effective predictive programming into our minds unbeknowst to most. The result is that we auto-censure and supress our inate natural human condition, falsely assuming it is more natural to follow our masters commands despite the fact it penalise our own interest as well as our loved ones.
    2015 Bracken Bower Prize Acceptance Speech for “Meltdown” (Tilcsik and Clearfield)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.