A strange idea occurred to me today while thinking about human thought processes, namely about the fact that many humans, either consciously or unconsciously, do "mental gymnastics" to either ignore information directly against what they believe in, inflate their own egos, enable "group think," or to justify their own actions because it's "easier" than seeing and dealing with the truth (This is often seen in the case of cult victims, extremists, supremacists, and other deliberately ignorant or "blind" individuals)(I.E. a man believes that he is better at everything than everyone else, even though he has been beaten in a number of contests in areas that he has specifically claimed to be superior at):
What if there was a way to literally FORCE someone to acknowledge the truth or make it impossible for them to ignore or dismiss a superior argument or irrefutable evidence (I.E. the aforementioned man would find himself unable to deny that he had lost due to someone else having a superior level of skill, and that his opponent hadn't just "gotten lucky" or convince himself that he hadn't "really been trying").
For the sake of argument, lets assume the process would work something like the classic electric-chair-esk setup of the helmet and manacles: Strap someone in, throw the switch, and in 5 to 10 seconds, with no physical pain or damage of any kind, the person would be unable to deliberately remain ignorant through mental exercise, become drawn into a "group think" situation, or be indoctrinated by an ideology to the point of being unable or unwilling to disregard it when glaring, damning flaws in it are pointed out.
Initially, I thought of what an incredible world it would be if the technology were applied to everyone (No more cults, No more group think, No more bigotry, etc.) but I then thought of the human rights and free will concerns. Does someone have the right to be a bigot? An idiot? A figurative sheep? Which brings me to the questions of the poll: If this technology existed, should it be applied to the masses? Why or Why not?
Note: The technology does not and cannot target individual ideologies, or any mental processes that aren't specifically mentioned above.
Edit: As clarification, the device does not tell people what to think. It forces people to think, period. With no specific arguments, beliefs, opinions, or facts imprinted into the person's brain. Rather, it forces them to continually (even after exposure) examine their own beliefs and the beliefs of others objectively ( with no pre-conceived notions interfering with their judgment).
What if there was a way to literally FORCE someone to acknowledge the truth or make it impossible for them to ignore or dismiss a superior argument or irrefutable evidence (I.E. the aforementioned man would find himself unable to deny that he had lost due to someone else having a superior level of skill, and that his opponent hadn't just "gotten lucky" or convince himself that he hadn't "really been trying").
For the sake of argument, lets assume the process would work something like the classic electric-chair-esk setup of the helmet and manacles: Strap someone in, throw the switch, and in 5 to 10 seconds, with no physical pain or damage of any kind, the person would be unable to deliberately remain ignorant through mental exercise, become drawn into a "group think" situation, or be indoctrinated by an ideology to the point of being unable or unwilling to disregard it when glaring, damning flaws in it are pointed out.
Initially, I thought of what an incredible world it would be if the technology were applied to everyone (No more cults, No more group think, No more bigotry, etc.) but I then thought of the human rights and free will concerns. Does someone have the right to be a bigot? An idiot? A figurative sheep? Which brings me to the questions of the poll: If this technology existed, should it be applied to the masses? Why or Why not?
Note: The technology does not and cannot target individual ideologies, or any mental processes that aren't specifically mentioned above.
Edit: As clarification, the device does not tell people what to think. It forces people to think, period. With no specific arguments, beliefs, opinions, or facts imprinted into the person's brain. Rather, it forces them to continually (even after exposure) examine their own beliefs and the beliefs of others objectively ( with no pre-conceived notions interfering with their judgment).
