Aetheric Research, Ltd.

A memetic hazard is a memetic construct or complex that can cause personal, familial, or societal harm through its propagation.

Memetic Rationality is a memetically hazardous construct which can act as an adjunct complex to other memetic complexes and constructs, reinforcing their action and preventing questioning of their structures.

Memetic Rationality is related to the False Standard of Proof complex in that it is a dysfunction of thought processes related to truth-determination.

An individual exhibiting memetic rationality will display certain symptoms which may be difficult to discern from non-memetic rationality.

First, a memetically rational host may have a belief that all situations, things, or behaviors have a rational explanation. They will act with hostility towards any suggestion that a particular anecdote, behavior, situation et al. may not have an empirical, rational explanation. Common flags for this particular symptom include insistence that “love is a chemical phenomenon”, going to extreme lengths to disprove the existence of supernatural phenomenae, and an obsession with finding explanations deemed ‘natural’ or ‘rational’ rather than allowing the possibility of a lack of explanation.

Second, a memetically rational host will insist that they are fully rational and will deny the possibility that they may be holding any irrational beliefs. The host will display perfect certainty in their rationality.

Third, a memetically rational host will display compulsive behavior towards “correcting” the beliefs of others that they deem to be irrational.

Memetically rational hosts may have, at some point in the past, been hosts for other memetic complexes (e.g. religious beliefs such as faith healing, alternative medicine beliefs such as homeopathy); memetic rationality would thus potentially fill the same purpose for the host–that of blocking fear response to unknown situations or concepts, of providing a steady influence for personality basis, or of other similar purposes.

Memetically rational hosts may discount any emotional responses to situations as being entirely irrational, and may thus be perceived as ‘lacking empathy’ by other persons.

A memetically rational host confronted with a diagnosis of memetic rationality for their behavior will likely exhibit fear responses such as vehement denial and anger; they will, as part of their symptoms, rationalize their responses as being entirely reasonable (e.g. because questioning their thought processes is offensive).

While it may appear harmless, Memetic Rationality is somewhat memetically hazardous in that the host’s relationship to other persons may cause stresses to both the host and to others around the host. Additionally, if the host holds other memetic constructs (which is likely, given that it is next to impossible for the human thought processes not to be compromised in that manner) the construct will act to resist any attempts to excise or otherwise modify these other constructs.

Much like the diagnosis and excision procedure for False Standard of Proof, the procedure for the excision of Memetic Rationality involves fully determining the individual’s thought process. In this case, dissociating the thought process from the fear responses is indicated; if the host can be successfully convinced that his reactions are memetic in nature, then the host may be amenable to assistance.

While this memetic construct is somewhat hazardous, the hazard can be mitigated if the host is made aware of the memetic nature of his particular thought processes. As such, excision of this construct may not be entirely necessary.

Some of the terms within the Memetic Hazard Categorization series may require explanation. To explain this, a glossary has been instituted, which will be updated periodically as more precise and accurate definitions are built.

A memetic hazard is a memetic structure that can be reasonably expected to cause some form of personal or societal harm. The False Standard of Proof memetic complex is a memetically hazardous thought process common to a number of hazardous memetic complexes. The False Standard of Proof complex is a primary usurper of Rational thought processes; it is a mechanism of transfer from rational thought to Memetic Thought.

At its core, this particular complex is a dysfunction in understanding of rational thought processes. The host may (and usually does) claim to be thinking ’scientifically’ about whichever beliefs that this construct is adjunct to, but close examination of the logic paths for the thought process will reveal one or more dysfunctions.

One of the primary dysfunctions is the False Occam’s Razor. Where Occam’s Razor states that the simplest explanation for a phenomenon is the most likely, a host for this construct will either misidentify the criteria for determining the simplest explanation or will mistake ‘most likely’ for ‘certainly true’–that is to say, they will not accept the possibility of uncertainty in a conclusion as being a valid conclusion.

A second primary dysfunction is Faulty Evidential Weighting. The host will weight personal anecdotal evidence, especially that which supports their conclusion (see also Reverse Conclusive Thinking) as much more reliable than empirical studies (which will often be discounted as ’statistical trickery’ etc.).

A third primary dysfunction is Reverse Conclusive Thinking. Hosts subject to this dysfunction will adopt conclusions based on various beliefs without subjecting them to proper scrutiny, and will afterwards look for supporting evidence, rather than scrutinizing the evidence and logic pertaining to the postulated premise before accepting it as valid.

A fourth primary dysfunction (which is more a hook to a human psychological tendency, but is included in the listing of dysfunctions due to its inordinate strength) is the discrimination in acceptance of knowledge weighted very inordinately towards previously-held information, vastly discounting novel information’s veracity. The key distinction here is a matter of degree: while there is some normal tendency towards regarding information originally imparted as being more true than subsequent corrections, a host subject to this particular dysfunction will weight the previously held information vastly in excess of the normal human tendency.

Secondary dysfunctions of thought may be present; these may be artifacts of other memetic complexes or constructs to which the host is subject. These may manifest as a tendency towards certain logical fallacies (e.g. arguments to authority) or as other assorted illogical processes.

One particular symptom of this complex is the typical demand of the host for proofs of competing axiomatic statements, proofs which are generally rejected as being false or inadequate–no logically-derived or competing memetically-derived statements will be regarded as valid, and the dysfunctions described above will be used to discount their legitimacy.

Excising this particular complex is not an easy proposition. It is generally very deep-seated and self-supporting and self-perpetuating. Attempts to teach rational thought patterns past the time at which the dysfunctions are crystallized (generally during preadolescence?) will run up against and tend to reinforce the dysfunctional thought process; care must be taken to avoid this reinforcement as much as possible.

It may be possible to circumvent this process by careful introduction of cognitive dissonance. After careful mapping of the host’s particular implementation of this memetic complex, counter-memetic postulates can be crafted that use the same processes to generate obviously false conclusions. Combined with careful introduction of rational explanations for the same postulate that produce an obviously correct answer can sometimes induce successful realization of paradigm shift.

A tip jar has been added on the right-hand side. Feel free to pass us a few coins if you find our content to be interesting, insightful, or otherwise useful.

Thank you,
–The Mgt.

A memetic hazard is a memetic structure that can be reasonably expected to cause some form of personal or societal harm.

“Anti-Vaccination” is a description for one particular memetic complex containing a number of beliefs which, in the aggregate, have the potential to cause personal, familial, and societal harm.

The Anti-Vaccination complex has these core beliefs:

First, that there are valid reasons to object to vaccinating one’s children in the absence of specifically diagnosed medical objections such as egg allergies or being immunocompromised, as by HIV or leukemia.

Second, that there is no real harm in refusing vaccination for a child and that there may in fact be a benefit from this activity.

There are a number of adjunct beliefs associated with the Anti-Vaccination complex, some of which are inherited from the Alternative Medicine complex.

One of the primary adjunct constructs that reinforces the Anti-Vaccination complex is that of Distrust of Establishment. The presence of this particular adjunct construct is nearly universal; nearly every host for the Anti-Vaccination complex expresses a severe distrust for conventional medicine’s vaccination recommendation. Different rationales are given for the acceptance of this construct over conventional thought, but the construct itself is universal. Note that this particular implementation of the Distrust of Establishment construct may overlap heavily with Conspiracy Theory complexes of varying severity. This construct works to prevent the influence of arguments cited as “rational” on the central complex through immediately considering any such arguments as false, much like a reverse Appeal to Authority fallacy.

A second primary adjunct construct is that of False Standard of Proof. With the False Standard of Proof construct, the host for the Anti-Vaccination complex rationalizes their beliefs through discounting any and all “conventional” explanations for medical phenomenae. It supports the Distrust of Establishment construct, being used primarily to “find evidence” to support the assertion that the establishment does not have the best interests of the patient as their primary concern. Further, it allows the host to make use of the False Compromise construct.

The hazardous memetic construct “MMR causes Autism” was once in wide circulation, supported by a study (which has since been extremely discredited) by a Dr. Andrew Wakefield which allegedly showed a link; most hosts for the Anti-Vaccination complex subscribe to this particular construct as an adjunct to the core beliefs. It is held to be valid mostly because of the Distrust of Establishment construct, in that if the Establishment says it’s not valid, it must be valid.

The False Compromise construct is a semihazardous adjunct replication-oriented memetic construct; it is generally a statement by the host of the complex that they will be happy to accept some form of compromise (whether in the expression of their beliefs or in accepting some portion of others’ beliefs as correct) should “sufficient proof” be shown. Due to a close association of this construct with the False Standard of Proof construct, however, no actual proofs asserting evidence contrary to the core beliefs will be accepted. Further, due to the reasonable-sounding nature of this particular construct, the host may gain sympathy from other potential hosts, thus opening them to memetic infestation by this complex through lowering of skepticism.

The Parental Authority construct is a semihazardous adjunct reinforcement and reproduction construct for this complex, and is generally found in those hosts who are parents or primary caregivers for children who have either had some manner of bad reaction to a vaccine or who have autism. Potential hosts are encouraged to lend credence to the words of the complex host due to the host’s status as a parent or primary caregiver; this is an example of an argument from authority. This particular construct takes advantage of the tendency of humans to respect the words of those in authoritative roles as being inherently authoritative; it is somewhat hazardous in that it can bypass normal skeptical responses, thus providing a vector for memetic transmission.

The host of an Anti-Vaccination memetic complex will frequently also be the host of a number of other “Alternative Medicine” memetic complexes; these may relate to “Curable Autism,” “Evil Gluten,” “Vitamin Curative,” “Detox,” or other similar memetic constructs and complexes.

Excising this particular construct from the host will tend to be extremely difficult due to the very strong action of the False Standard of Proof and the Distrust of Authority constructs. Additionally, the vast majority of hosts for the Anti-Vaccination construct are parents who will regard any attempts to dissuade them from their belief to be a threat to their child’s well-being; care is especially indicated should the host demand to know if a questioner is themselves a parent, as any subsequent input from a questioner will be automatically filtered via False Standard of Proof should the questioner be known to not be a parent–the usual response is that, not being a parent, the questioner lacks access to certain emotional responses critical for understanding the situation.

Some success may be garnered by invoking fear/protective responses in the host alongside proof of harm to their child; materials depicting the suffering of children infected with measles or other preventable diseases may have some effect. The key is to disrupt the normal reinforcement procedures for this complex, which regard any factual “scientific” evidence to be further evidence for Distrust of Establishment; shock and strong emotional response may provide sufficient opportunity to bypass some of the adjunct memetic constructs. If a questioner can claim status as a parent and thus bypass the Parental Authority construct, so much the better.

If a proper standard of proof can be inculcated into the host to replace the False Standard of Proof, this too may prove helpful.

This particular memetic complex is extremely hazardous to personal, familial, and societal health; by refusing vaccination, the host is not only compromising their own and their family’s health, but by providing a breeding ground for preventable biological illness is compromising the herd immunity that immunocompromised individuals rely upon for their own health, as well as potentially providing the opportunity for mutated organisms capable of bypassing existing vaccines to arise.

The Anti-Vaccination complex is -extremely hazardous- and should thus be removed from any hosts found harboring it with extreme prejudice. It is worth noting that none of the claims made by hosts for this complex are able to stand up to any sort of scrutiny, but they are superficially attractive enough to infect uninformed hosts very quickly, especially if those hosts are subject to a False Standard of Proof.

A memetic hazard is a memetic structure that can reasonably be expected to cause some form of personal or societal harm.

“Homeopathy” is a description of one particular memetic complex containing a number of beliefs which, in the aggregate, have the potential to cause personal or societal harm to the host of these constructs or to those who depend upon the host for medical care.

The Homeopathy memetic complex is generally found paired with an “Alternative Medicine” construct as an adjunct belief; the “AltMedicine” beliefs are inherited by the “Homeopathy” complex and used as part of the basis for its acceptance by the host.

The Homeopathy complex has these core beliefs:

First, that Homeopathy is a valid method of curing or controlling medical conditions.

Second, that “Like cures Like”: some herb or other plant-derived (usually) product that when ingested or otherwise brought in contact with the body causes symptoms similar to those exhibited by the sufferer of an illness can be used to cure the sufferer of those symptoms.

Third, “Water Memory”: the compounds or mixtures described in “Like cures Like” can produce in water a “memory” of their effects, such that a small portion of this compound or mixture in water, diluted many thousands of parts of water to each part of “active” compound, can still have some effect even when the dilution is to such an extent that no portion of the original active ingredients is likely to remain within the dosage provided to the sufferer of the illness.

This complex can be considered a memetic hazard due to the likelihood of the host to resort to homeopathic remedies rather than seeking “conventional” medical help for any diseases or other conditions they may suffer; this can result in personal harm to the host (should they suffer from a nontrivial disease) or in harm to others (should the host be the authority in charge of another person’s, e.g. a child’s, medical care).

The “Homeopathy” complex would normally be trivial to remove from the host’s mind with basic proofs against its claims (that water “memory” is not long enough to account for any effects, that any alleged cures by Homeopathy can be shown to be the result of the placebo effect) except for the adjunct memetic structures inherited from the AltMedicine complex.

The relevant beliefs that protect the influence of this particular memetic complex from ordinary disproof procedures are generally those of “Distrust of Establishment,” “False Standard of Proof,” and “Perceived Optimal Cost/Benefit Ratio;” all of which are inherited from the generalized Alternative Medicine memetic complex.

Distrust of Establishment is a generalized tendency for those who adhere to this memetic complex to hold beliefs that “conventional medicine” or “the establishment” is either ineffective or actively harmful to the host’s well-being. The more severe implementations of this construct tend to be found in those hosts who hold other conspiracy theory constructs. This acts as an adjunct memetic construct that protects other beliefs from scrutiny or criticism labeled as “scientific” or “rational;” the perception of the host’s beliefs regarding the validity of “scientific” or “rational” inputs is diverted to a default disbelief and rejection state before any evaluation of such claims is made.

False Standard of Proof is an adjunct construct whereby a misstatement of the scientific method is held to be a requirement for belief in any new claims. This construct is common to many “Alternative Medicine” memetic complexes, and is found fairly widely in pseudoscientific memetic complexes in general. It is, in essence, a hijacking of the concept of the scientific method that produces pseudoscientific results, generally by (consciously or unconsciously) lending credence only to those facts that support a position rather than adopting a position in accordance with facts. It generally acts to protect any extant memetic structures through a perception that other’s claims “must be questioned.”

Perceived Optimal Cost/Benefit Ratio is one that particularly applies to homeopathy; it is based upon the perception of a very low risk of side effects from homeopathic preparations as opposed to those from “conventional” medicine (due mostly to the fact that homeopathic preparations are, frankly, almost entirely water, which very very few people have any reaction to) and that any benefit derived from homeopathy would thus be far and above better than any “conventional” drug.

Excising this construct from the host to alleviate the memetic hazard is a difficult task. To do so requires that the adjunct memetic structures–specifically, the False Standard of Proof and, especially if conspiracy-derived, the Distrust of Establishment memetic constructs–be dissolved, preferably in favor of a proper understanding of the scientific method. Distrust of Establishment does not need to be replaced with -trust- in established medical procedures; conventional understanding of the validity of medical expertise will generally follow from any period of introspection after the memetic complex of “Homeopathy” or “Alternative Medicine” being invalidated.

It is worth noting that belief in homeopathy is not necessarily an indication for a memetic hazard; the indication for a memetic hazard is belief in homeopathy to the exclusion of conventional medicine. Keep in mind that the standard of a memetic hazard is the potential for harm to the host of the memetic construct or to those for whom the host makes decisions.

It should be apparent to most thoughtful persons that, if one seeks to study memetic hazards, it may be wise to take precautions against becoming subject to the memetic concepts and structures represented therein.

One such desirable precaution to take is to inculcate within one’s own mind a sort of anti-meme–a vaccination against future hazards, as it were.

Taking up the practice of meditation, and learning how to quickly clear one’s mind of all thought, is perhaps the best method of producing this effect. Meditation is useful in other ways than merely purging active memetic structures from the mind and can have some desirable effects upon the psyche, but it is difficult for some people to enter the contemplative state that it demands in order to work properly.

I therefore propose a method of conditioning one’s own mind, taking advantage of certain naturally-occurring tendencies of the human mind in order to build for oneself a trigger for interrupting potentially hazardous thought processes–a sort of mind bleach, as it were.

Much like a biological vaccine, this entails introducing a slightly hazardous memetic structure into one’s own mind in a carefully controlled situation in order to bring about a certain immunoresponse.

The equipment required for this technique is reasonably easy to acquire, though one ingredient does require fairly careful consideration–that of the controlled hazard that will be used for the purging trigger.

Selection of an antimemetic agent should be approached with care. Ideally, this agent should be a short, viciously catchy song or jingle that the user is already familiar with from past exposure, and which the user will not mind having played over and over again. This author has had some success with Dschinghis Khan’s “Moskau” and with certain versions of “Cruel Angel’s Thesis” in the past.

The procedure for building the trigger is to use this agent as a wake-up alarm; it is generally possible to set one’s music-playing programs to begin playing a given song at a given time with some small investigation into the particulars of the program that the user has available.

By using this agent as a means of provoking a wakeful state, a Pavlovian response will be instilled into the user’s mind. Upon waking, the brain naturally “resets” to some degree–hence why it is difficult to remember dreams upon waking unless specific effort is made. Associating a memetic trigger with this waking state will, with care, provide a useful method for producing this state of mild forgetfulness upon demand; this state is useful for purging unwanted memetic constructs (e.g. songs stuck in one’s head; unwelcome images; nonsensical and illogical proposals) from the mind and creating a blank slate.

The unfortunate side-effect of this particular method is that the agent used to induce this state will tend to be a fairly constant presence in one’s mind during the inculcation process–hence why the choice of this agent must be approached with care, as a poor choice will result in significant mental stress during the adaptation process. As it may take several weeks for the proper triggering responses to be produced, avoiding the possibility this stress is preeminently important.

Use of this technique may be necessary for anyone seeking to studying memetic hazards, especially “in the wild,” lest they become subject to the potential dangers of such studies.

In the previous entry, a symbol for cautioning against the presence of memetic hazards was proposed. In this entry, the types of hazards that this warning would apply to are defined.

A memetic hazard is defined as information with three main attributes. The first attribute is that it spreads from person to person, whether through personal contact or some form of recording. The second attribute is that this information causes some form of distress, whether as benign as mental stress to the individual or as dangerous as societal dysfunction. The third attribute is that it must cause preoccupation–that is to say, it maintains sufficient presence in the host’s mind that either a significant portion of his attention remains focused on it, or it plays a significant part in his decision-making process.

A relatively benign example of a memetic hazard would be the well-known melody entitled “It’s a Small World.” This melody is well-known for becoming “stuck” in listener’s heads, oftentimes causing mental distress to the listener as the tune is replayed over and over in his mind. The harm caused by this particular construct is relatively small–some slight stress to the person affected is really the limit of it, though if the person resorts to drastic measures to purge this construct from their mind, substantial harm may result to their health–e.g. consuming intoxicants to excess.

A more severe memetic hazard would be the doctrine of Holocaust Denial. This particular construct (defined loosely as “a belief that the events of the Holocaust were either exaggerated or were invented from whole cloth”) has the potential to catalyze other related beliefs and potentially contribute to a societal dysfunction; those who do not believe that this well-known genocide occurred may be vulnerable to memetic complexes denying other potential or actual genocides; additionally, related memetic constructs relating to conspiracies by Jewish peoples may find footholds.

Assessing a memetic construct as “hazardous” requires fulfilling both parts of the definition. Adjudicating transmissibility is relatively trivial; the fact that the adjudicator has learned of this construct is, in and of itself, reasonable evidence to that condition being fulfilled. The second condition is more difficult; adjudging “harm” is, at least partially, a matter of opinion, and memetic constructs within the judge’s own mind may color this perception–for instance, a neo-nazi would hardly consider the doctrine of Holocaust Denial, mentioned earlier, to be a memetic hazard, as he would consider it to be truthful, having been infected with that memetic construct.

The third condition is the most important to determine. The host’s mental state as regards the memetic construct must be assessed–if the construct holds no sway in his thoughts and plays no part in the decision-making process (e.g. the urban legend about the elephant that mistook a Volkswagen for a performance stool; most persons infected by that construct will not use it as a criterion for choosing an automobile) then it does not qualify as a hazard, as such. Only those constructs that retain preeminence for a significant duration or that significantly factor into the host’s decisions will qualify as memetic hazards.

There are steps that may be taken to avoid becoming infected with a memetic hazard; future posts will discuss these methods, as well as methods for removing memetic infections.

The Memetic Hazard Image

Please feel free to use, distribute, modify, or otherwise do what you will with this image, provided it is not for monetary gain.

There have been several recent stories in the news about the Republican party’s relationship with its spokespersons. Of special note to this writer today was a story about a somewhat disturbing anecdote concerning one Limbaugh, a well-known host who regularly dispenses what he claims to be a conservative viewpoint.

This viewpoint in this case was one that, apparently, indicated that one could not be a conservative unless one espoused a doctrine that torture was permissible in order to keep the United States safe.

As Limbaugh has no official standing with the Republican party (being, at least ostensibly, the more conservative of the two well-known parties in American politics) this commentary should have little to no effect on the political climate.

However, Limbaugh has, over the course of his career, amassed sufficient following that his influence is widely felt throughout the conservative arena. Whether or not it was intended, he has, to some small extent, become a voice of leadership for the Republican party–or at least gives the appearance thereof; appearances are often as important as reality in these cases.

It is also a current strategy of the Democratic party to encourage these appearances of leadership on Mr. Limbaugh’s part, as it is politically convenient for them to encourage the appearance of buffoonery and unreasonableness that his comments foment. The more that the Republican party is shown to be allied with Limbaugh–even going to the point of publically apologizing to him–the more they are shown to be politically obstructionist and unable to work within the paradigm of a Democratically-controlled government. This in turn leads to a lessened influence of the Republican party as people see that they have little use, and an enlarged influence for the Democratic party.

This is ultimately harmful to the nation.

An effective opposition party is required for the continued health of any political system. When only one party has a say in the process, without any checks on their proposals nor balancing commentary to prevent ill-advised ideas from becoming policy, the government becomes less of a democracy and more of a dictatorship.

The conservatives of this country are a valuable and necessary resource to prevent excesses by the liberal movement. The concepts traditionally espoused by the conservatives–those of family values, smaller government, and accountability–are absolutely essential to the proper functioning of the nation. Without them, the government grows to an unmanageable behemoth.

This trope of Limbaugh’s relevancy to the Republican party is hazardous to the continued health of the political process as it stands today. Further, those ideas put forth by the conservative media as mainstream conservative opinions (while, in truth, being fringe opinions given currency by charismatic hosts) are hazardous as well.

Conservative America needs to dissociate itself from the fringe elements who are still stuck in the corrupted, heady, intoxicated fervor of the last presidency, and create for themselves a proper identity, freed of the toxic ideology that is currently passed off as conservative. Only then can they form the Loyal Opposition that is so desperately needed by our current government.