# Mapping Semantic Space in the Brain



## CaptainWayward (Jun 8, 2012)

RobynC said:


> @_CaptainWayward_
> 
> The issue is not so much advertising -- it's the degree of manipulativeness, there should be some kind of limits on what you can do. Some restrictions of this sort do exist -- You're not allowed to false advertise for example.
> 
> I don't want to be unreasonable of course, I just don't think it's right to manipulate people


It's going to happen whether we like it or not; it's a moral issue that's really out of our hands because this is how we make sense of the world and how humans communicate. This research doesn't really seem like anything new, they're just quantifying an old phenomenon. 

It's not like we don't have defensive mechanism against directed manipulation; the most common over-use of this is attaching the idea of happiness to an object. Happiness is highly subjective, but I don't think anyone would say Mc donald's is going to make them happy in the long run; we can rationalize against such a correlation.

We also have brain structures that correlate with skepticism, which most likely stop some correlations, such as happiness and mc donald's, from being reinforced.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@_CaptainWayward_



> It's going to happen whether we like it or not


Maybe it is, but would you rather have it happen in six months or six years?



> it's a moral issue that's really out of our hands


People don't realize they have a lot more control over their lives than they think -- sometimes they feel powerless when they're not, sometimes they're afraid and so on. Admittedly there are things we're powerless over.



> because this is how we make sense of the world and how humans communicate. This research doesn't really seem like anything new, they're just quantifying an old phenomenon.


Yeah but if you can manipulate the process it can substantially improve the ability to manipulate people. You don't think advertisers realize we have various defense mechanisms against their advertising? Do you think if they could they'd love to be able to bypass them?

Governments would


BTW: For those who don't want to receive updates, please send me a PM and I'll stop

Members such as @_Ace Face_ @_alecross_ @_Arclight_ @_Alpengeist19_ @_Beyond_B_ @_Brainfreeze_237_ @_Cover3_ @_DarkWarrior_ @_Feral sheep_ @_gestalt_ @_gammagon_ @_Holgrave_ @_JungyesMBTIno_ @_KINGoftheAMAZONS_ @_mariogreymist_ @_NotSoRighteousRob_ @_Persephone_ @_Psychosmurf_ @_Paradox1987_ @_Promethea_ @_pretty.Odd_ @_Razare_ @_Robopop_ @_sly_ @_Swordsman of Mana_ @_Svensenberg_ @_The Proof_ @_timeless_ @_Waiting_ might wish to read this message


----------



## CaptainWayward (Jun 8, 2012)

RobynC said:


> @_CaptainWayward_
> 
> Maybe it is, but would you rather have it happen in six months or six years?


IDK, I think you're assuming they've discovered some amazing way to target a specific brain area and meld it with another to produce correlations that don't exist. They're simply brain mapping. 



> People don't realize they have a lot more control over their lives than they think -- sometimes they feel powerless when they're not, sometimes they're afraid and so on. Admittedly there are things we're powerless over.


Sorry, I'm not sure where this applies :S



> Yeah but if you can manipulate the process it can substantially improve the ability to manipulate people. You don't think advertisers realize we have various defense mechanisms against their advertising? Do you think if they could they'd love to be able to bypass them?


 Unless they're drilling into your head or figured out some conspiracy theory - esque way to neuorplastize the brain using HAARP, I doubt it's going to happen. They have a techniques already, they all involved bombarding us with stimulation. 



> Don't you think a government would?


IDK, I think you're tying a lot more implications into this than actually exist. The government would love to I'm sure, but it doesn't mean it's going to happen. The only thing they could do is see how we correlated one class of an object with another, which really doesn't say anything for motive. It'll be much more effective to collect all our cellphone and internet data to discern biases then use those biases to tailor information that seems credible to us, which they can sway our opinions. Well, I guess they could destroy the part of our brains responsible for skepticism. OMFG MAYBE YOU'RE ONTO SOMETHING.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@CaptainWayward



> IDK, I think you're assuming they've discovered some amazing way to target a specific brain area and meld it with another to produce correlations that don't exist. They're simply brain mapping.


I didn't say they had the ability yet -- I'm just saying if you know the workings of the brain well enough, you can use that knowledge to manipulate people



> Sorry, I'm not sure where this applies :S


You said the moral issue is out of our hands. We as a people, aren't just passengers on a boat going down a river, we have some ability to steer the boat and have some control as to where it goes



> neuorplastize the brain using HAARP


I didn't say HAARP was going to be use, but when you say neuroplastize the brain what exactly do you mean?



> The government would love to I'm sure, but it doesn't mean it's going to happen.


Tools of oppression always get massive research -- ones that could actually benefit the ordinary Joe do not. Ask @Epherion about this...


----------



## CaptainWayward (Jun 8, 2012)

RobynC said:


> @_CaptainWayward_
> I didn't say they had the ability yet -- I'm just saying if you know the workings of the brain well enough, you can use that knowledge to manipulate people


Oh sorry, I thought you were referring to the context of the research done; well, this conversation is useless. Although, I disagree that there will ever be a better way to manipulate the psyche of individual, pertaining to non-physical means, than directed advertising towards biases. 



> I didn't say HAARP was going to be use, but when you say neuroplastize the brain what exactly do you mean?


Sorry, I was... mocking the tone of conspiracy-theory. Neuroplasticity is word to describe how neuron structure changes overtime. Like.. say if you get beat in the head and the brain structure responsible for mathematics is damaged, your brain can rearrange another portion of the brain to take up this function. 



> Tools of oppression always get massive research -- ones that could actually benefit the ordinary Joe do not. Ask @_Epherion_ about this...


Meh, I guess you can say this, but you can also see the average joe as too lazy to research things that would benefit himself let alone his fellow man. They're not necessarily tools of oppression, that's such an unrealistic values-based assessment of where resources are allocated; a large majority of research is based around what is profitable, not necessarily what can oppress people, which then aids the fellow man. I mean, I don't see the population donating large sums of cash towards research that would benefit their lives; they don't want to take such risks.

I don't really get why people fault the government wanting to know as much information as possible to foresee the future. It's a logic based structure, highly grounded on intelligence. People want all the benefits of large security infrastructure and resource allocations without any of the hazards. Beyond this point, why does everyone act like the government is going to have a reason to bust down your doors and arrest you. Seriously, stop interacting with the world through various services that society offers if you're so upset for being 'oppressed' by your government. How else would you expect it to be with societies current standing of 'blind faith' in the moral integrity of these entities.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@CaptainWayward



> I don't really get why people fault the government wanting to know as much information as possible to foresee the future.


Because doing so often is at odds with the liberty of the people -- governments do this to protect themselves not from enemies but their people.


----------



## CaptainWayward (Jun 8, 2012)

RobynC said:


> @_CaptainWayward_
> 
> 
> Because doing so often is at odds with the liberty of the people -- governments do this to protect themselves not from enemies but their people.


I'm sorry, I still don't see how that matters if we take into account what type of data is being collected. The only negative impact this could possibly have is that corporations can more effectively market to you, thus keeping you more content, thus reducing the chance you'll be set in a motion towards a scenario where they hold less clout. If people don't want to act, they're not uncomfortable with the situation outside of principle.

If anything, we should embracing the concept of data collection, it can serve as an effective method to persecute corrupt individuals and protect other individuals from false accusations. 

Our lives are going to be recorded whether or like it or not, we might as well have a hand in it so the correct intention develops around it.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@_Captain_Wayward



> I'm sorry, I still don't see how that matters


Read your history -- all oppressive regimes employ all sorts of means of manipulating people. Force is only part of it, propaganda, psychological warfare and so on is big.



> The only negative impact this could possibly have is that corporations can more effectively market to you


The same skill involved in marketing and advertising by corporations is used in propaganda by governments.



> Our lives are going to be recorded whether or like it or not, we might as well have a hand in it



That attitude is like saying "hey, we're going to die no matter what, so let's blow our brains out now"


BTW: For those who don't want to receive updates, please send me a PM and I'll stop

Members such as @_Ace Face_ @_alecross_ @_Arclight_ @_Alpengeist19_ @_Beyond_B_ @_Cover3_ @_Feral sheep_ @_gestalt_ @_gammagon_ @_Holgrave_ @_JungyesMBTIno_ @_KINGoftheAMAZONS_ @_mariogreymist_ @_Persephone_ @_Paradox1987_ @_Promethea_ @_pretty.Odd_ @_Razare_ @_Swordsman of Mana_ @_The Proof_ @_timeless_ @_Waiting_ might wish to read this message


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

RobynC said:


> @_tanstaafl28_
> 
> If you could shape what people saw and heard by manipulating their brains you'd be more effective in manipulating the public than the media alone.



Control the memes?


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@tanstaafl28

It would be far more effective no?


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

RobynC said:


> @_tanstaafl28_
> 
> It would be far more effective no?


One would presume. Tis hard to tell without any hard data. We're looking at the system from the inside. It interferes with objectivity.


----------

