This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
(Conditioned) Human Nature within the Insane Asylum
(Conditioned) Human Nature within the Insane Asylum
By
Cognitive Dissonance
You will always find original articles by Cognitive Dissonance and other authors first on www.TwoIceFloes.com before they are posted here on ZH. If you wish to subscribe to ‘Dispatches’, a periodic newsletter from Cognitive Dissonance and TwoIceFloes Creations, please click here.
I wish I had a silver dollar for every time I’ve heard the phrase “It is human nature……” or some such derivative or derivation. Alan Greenspan recently popped to the surface of his personal cesspool to proclaim it is human nature to create financial bubbles, thus absolving himself of any blame for a runaway fiat candy machine. His exact words were “Bubbles are functions of unchangeable human nature.”
I will stifle the urge to flush Greenspan back down the commode where he belongs and instead focus upon the mistaken belief we can actually determine exactly what is ‘human nature’ after hundreds if not thousands of years of social conditioning and manipulation.
Our fragile egos, both personally and as a collective, have a difficult enough time accepting “We the People” are effectively influenced by ‘popular culture’, let alone that we would seriously entertain the idea we are thoroughly conditioned humans from birth. But considering we are born the purest of individual humans and spend the rest of our lives attempting to be just like everyone else speaks volumes to the idea we are the sum total not only of our lifelong conditioning, but of multi generational conditioning as well.
Where exactly is the demarcation line between ‘human nature’ and the passively conditioned consumer we have all become to some degree or another? If generation after generation of “We the Consumer” suffer under the influence of cultural, social, institutional, religious and governmental manipulative programming and outright propaganda, how exactly could we ever be fully aware of the sum total of these influences nor what humans would be like if the manipulation were removed or never there in the first place?
Humans are highly adaptive creatures and incredibly ingenious when it comes to modifying our behavior in the face of externally or internally applied pressure and circumstance. ‘Normal’ is a relative term, not some static measurement, and both the body and mind quickly becomes accustomed to the ‘new’ normal when choices appear to be limited and the herd moves to a new grazing field. But this doesn’t mean the results of social pressures and generational conditioning are dictated by human nature or that human nature guides human behavior under these extraordinarily distorted circumstances.
I remember visiting an indoor zoo several decades ago with my young son. At one exhibit there was a young man seated in a chair intently watching the caged animals, in this case squirrels if I remember correctly. A sign posted behind him informed the curious he was conducting a behavioral study and to please do not disturb. At regular intervals he would look down at his clipboard and make a notation, then return his gaze to the animals in front of him. I was fascinated not in the animals he was watching, but in what he was doing and why.
Stealing a look at the clipboard there were several vertical columns for various behaviors such as grooming, feeding, mating etc and horizontal markings indicating 30 second intervals. It appeared he was following one particular squirrel and noting what it was doing at specific points in time. It was then I realized there was a very large clock with a sweeping second hand hanging on the cage in the person’s line of sight. I supposed this data would all be crunched down later into thesis graphs and tables.
Outside the exhibit I found an employee and asked him a few questions about the young man inside. He explained that the local university regularly sent over students to conduct behavioral studies of various animals in the zoo. This data would then be compared to results of studies done in the wild in order to measure the effects of captivity and domestication. I remember saying to him, “Too bad we can’t do this with humans.” He was startled by my comment and clearly at a loss for words. I left him to stew on my thought as my son dragged me on to the next exhibit.

If the only substantial population of squirrels left in the world are all safely caged and on exhibit, with only a smattering of squirrels remaining in the wild, would this ‘condition’ eventually become the basis for a new ‘normal’? Would the caged animals be considered the norm and the few remaining left in the wild considered outliers and abnormal?
Now move this thought experiment forward a thousand years or more and imagine there are only caged squirrels left in the world, and even the institutional memory of their wild origins is lost or severely obscured. How exactly would these animals be perceived when there remained no basis for comparison? I propose that at this point any observed repetitive or predictable ‘behavior’ would be considered ‘squirrel nature’ and just the way it is.
In recent years the publicly promoted illusion of happy, well adjusted zoo animals has slowly dissolved into dust as report after report indicates many animals in captivity exhibit clear and disturbing signs of depression, neurosis and self destructive behavior. Assuming after a thousand years the captive squirrels have not committed ritual collective suicide I suspect their observed behavior would border on the bizarre and nonsensical. Yet with no basis for comparison their aberrant manner would continue to be explained away as simply squirrel nature.
While I suspect I shall assault the sensibilities and egos of many of my readers by immediately switching the squirrel analogy to that of the present day human, the similarities are too striking to ignore. How exactly are we to successfully and correctly examine ourselves when the only ‘normal’ we know is found in the boiling pot of water we presently occupy?
With no basis for comparison and any cultural or institutional memory long since lost to time or never established in the first place, combined with the deliberate and malicious distortion or outright falsification of the history of the human race in order to muddy the waters and control “We the Conditioned”, how is a person or any “author-ity” able to say with any degree of confidence that a particular observed human behavior is solely and exclusively ‘human nature’? The single minded arrogance displayed by such certainty of knowledge of the ‘self’ approaches pathological self deception.
That caged gorilla obsessively pacing inside his cage is seen as abnormal simply because we can view other gorillas in the wild and not witness comparable behavior. Similarly the obese obsessive compulsive eater shopping at Sam’s Club for a bigger bang for their food buck is seen as abnormal solely because there are other non obese humans available for comparison. As well, this specific abnormal self destructive human behavior is so relatively new that institutional memory of what is ‘normal’ has not been lost or deliberately obscured. Yet we hurry to blame the individual person for their apparent suicidal behavior and rarely look beyond the trees to see the cultural forest.
For thousands of years psychopaths have ruled the human race utilizing various psychologically damaging methods and techniques, all with the ultimate purpose of control and exploitation. The very institutions and governments we allow to exist are there solely to herd and control the masses for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many. In so many ways caged from birth, is it any wonder we exhibit clear and disturbing signs of depression, neurosis and self destructive behavior?
I suspect if it weren’t for our flexible intellect and protective ego, combined with a monumental arrogance, long ago we would have participated in ritual collective suicide. It could be argued our near constant state of war is designed to ‘play’ at or ‘practice’ mass suicide in order to act as a safety valve and relieve some of the socially self destructive pressures.
While there are certainly many ‘benefits’ of war enjoyed by the minority psychopath controllers, such as economic enrichment, power enhancement and more social control, a seriously dysfunctional and neurotic population must be managed in the same way unstable chemical compounds are. Occasionally dangerous pressures must be carefully vented away or burned off lest the volatile concoction self destruct and take the psychopaths with it.
For those among us who claim that humans who are removed from these pressures still exhibit the same behavior, thus confirming the presence of human nature, I simply respond that deep conditioning can last a lifetime even after it is recognized as conditioning. It takes generational change to effectively begin the removal and rebalancing process and many generations for it to be removed completely. Ironically the psychopaths claim this very fact justifies their continued intervention and control since a domesticated animal let loose in the wild cannot fend for itself, a self serving point of view if ever I heard one.
Induced insanity is the perfect mental/spiritual illness from a social control point of view because it is self perpetuating, self affirming and can exist in isolation since it is its own energy source. The social/cultural control systems used by the psychopaths encourages mass mental illness in order to divide and conquer. It is the most effective method by which the few may dominate the many.
If this is the case, and I suspect this to be so, how exactly are “We the Insane” able to perceive anything about ourselves with any semblance of balance and objectivity. How are we able to determine what is ‘human nature’ and not just run-of-the-mill insanity? The insane nearly always believe themselves to be sane and healthy, and all others to be off their rockers. How apropos then that nearly every one of us believes we can clearly see the insanity and it is they, those, and them over there who are the problem, not me, myself or I.
Welcome to the Insane Asylum…..or as we like to say these days the ‘new’ normal.
08-10-2014
Cognitive Dissonance

- advertisements -


Who was it that said "History is a set of lies that people have agreed upon."?
Supposedly Napoleon Bonaparte.
Very well written. You can articulate the thoughts that I cannot.
Thank you. It can be difficult and time consuming writing these articles. I simply cannot sit down and bang out an article such as this in a few hours and I am never able to meet a self imposed deadline. If I am to publish it must be logically consistent, clearly articulated and not sound like a ten year old with some word processor software typing out a stream of consciousness......which is what the first drafts usually read like. :)
Unlike so many others who begin an article knowing where they will end up and how they will get there I start out with an idea and work my way through the mine field. Rarely do I know how my piece is going to end until I get there. At least a third of my articles are left to rot on the side of the road because my idea didn't make sense after it saw the light of day. Others, such a Krugman, never let that stop them from finishing their piece. :)
The article was excellent. Don't be too much of a perfectionist. There is merit in slightly ugly productivity, as you hone your craft. The pen is mightier than the sword.
Language is full of sticks of dynamite. This is intentionally done by the programmers and controllers. Often I am attempting to be coherent while discussing subjects many people don't invest much time on.
I find the entire process fraught with dangers and misconceptions, which is sometimes pretty apparent when reading the comment section under my pieces. Often people will read until they are emotionally triggered, then they rush down to the comment section to light off a stick without reading the rest of the piece.
One man's inert dynamite is another man's lit fuse.
I very much appreciate your stance on communication methods CD. I value precise and specific language that prevents ambiguity and speaks directly to the topic with insight and especially where it distills the mater down to its essance.
I value that you do spend the time to make a piece of work stand out as a well thought-out piece. In today's age of bloggers spewing out volume to have new content for page-hitting stats, having some work that you re-refer back to time and again stands out as a valuable gem that can be enjoyed into the future.
It's good work, and I appreciate that you do it; it affects me and causes introspection and growth.
Cheers to you sir.
Nage.
The ultimate in compliments. Thank you.
Why do half assed when a little better is just a few steps away? I still don't know what I'm doing, but I do try to improve with each piece. Progress, not perfection is my motto.
So apt. Rob Brezny once wrote that for every 5 pages an author writes, 4 get thrown away. Just have to accept that going in. I remember a series of two page ads back when magazines were a thing, on being a writer; Kurt Vonnegut Jr. did one and his message was, edit, Edit, EDIT! and be merciless.
Thanks for another thoughtful essay. Desmond Morris covered some of this ground way back when in his book, "The Human Zoo," which I highly recommend.
“under normal conditions, in their natural habitats, wild animals do not mutilate themselves, masturbate, attack their offspring, develop stomach ulcers, become fetishists, suffer from obesity, form homosexual pair-bonds, or commit murder. Among human city dwellers, needless to say, all of these things occur.
. . . . . .
Other animals do behave in these ways under certain circumstances, namely when they are confined in the unnatural conditions of captivity. The zoo animal in a cage exhibits all these abnormalities that we know so well from our human companions. Clearly, then, the city is not a concrete jungle, it is a human zoo.”
For you: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/k/kurt_vonnegut.html
Thanks again.
+1, yup - nice one Cog....
huxley model in action for the social conditioning.... orwell for the control structure,...
gotta see those myth-based organised religions as part of that conditioning too, sometimes with their foot in the social control stucture as well.
throw-in NLP, propaganda, & circus maximus of our times, & bring to the boil........
huxley model in action for the social conditioning.... orwell for the control structure,...
That's temporary. Orwell's control model takes incredible resources to maintain... Huxley's is much cheaper and is dramatically more inline with our rudimentary wants and desires, thus less prone to upheaval. In the end, Huxley's control structure will win, it'll just take a bit more time.
Then you should like my next article "Control the Language and You Control the Mind" exclusively (for now) at TwoIceFloes.com
yup, agreed. This is the premis for the Eu Referendums - he who phrases the question guides the answer. If the Q is 'do you agree with Eu policy and want us to control your life ?' most would answer negative. When the Q is re-phrased ' would you like extra protection from an international organisation ?' most would hesitate to reply no. ... hence Ireland had 3 referendums, each one re-phrased to be more acceptable , yet the net result was always going to be the same.... in fact Eu was so persistant that it got called the Neverendum instead.... funny that the 1st 2 'No's were disregarded, yet the only 'yes' was then final. So, yeah - there it is in action [and consequence]. Good post.
what bullshit.
blaming anything or anyone for problems is a Loser's Game.
If early 21st century America has any problem at all, it is that very few know how to take responsibility for their actions.
oh and btw.. there IS such a thing as a Stupid Question, for those who were persuaded otherwise.
There is no incentive to take responsibility, only disincentive. The only human nature that exists is the nature to adapt to one's environment. Change the environment, change the person. It doesn't work the other way around.
The only human nature that exists is the nature to adapt to one's environment. Change the environment, change the person.
But what are you trying to protect or advance by adapting to the environment? The answer to that question is human nature. Changing behavior is a mechanism of our underlying nature to please ourselves. Human nature does not change as a result of changes in the environment; behaviors change as a result of changes in the environment in order to try to satisfy the human nature.
Exactly. I'll add that despite conditioning being a huge impact on a material portion of our thoughts (and thus actions), there are some aspects that generations of conditioning has not likely managed to prohibit... this is human nature. Further, if we accept that there are people in charge of controlling the collective conditioning, then I would have to think they would be operating on human nature too, no? At the very least it would be a more pure insight...
excuses are like assholes - everyone has got one, and they all stink.....
I agree. I seen it first hand.
Excellent article CD.
A few weeks ago I scratched the surface of a similar theme on a previous thread.
"The US intelligence leviathan is a conduit for those powers behind the curtain who seek keep the people enslaved in a state controlled environment designed to maintain the status quo. A good analogy would be a modern zoo. No cages, regular feedings (via SNAP cards) in a monitored, finite habitat, with the captive animals being granted the illusion of freedom."
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-12/merkel-slams-obamas-cold-war-es...
In Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, the Controllers believed social conditioning was essential to stability within the Caste system. People were trained, by Neo-Pavlovian methods, to never desire a life different than the one they were born into. Thus order was maintained and the people passively enslaved.
You should consider submitting an article to be posted on TwoIceFloes. You do not need to be a member in order to do so and the article, if accepted, is open to the general public to read. A few submitted articles have even made it to ZH as a guest post of mine.
There are some rules and not everything that is submitted is posted. But....most who do submit a piece find it personally rewarding and wonderfully clarifying for their thought process. And difficult since there is a world of difference between a few paragraphs and an article.
Why not give it a try. What do you have to lose?