The Embrace of
Indoctrinated Preferences
Personality Spectrum
Ensemble
         check to the right icon
Select the section
that interests you.
Main Page ( ← click here for full ConserveLiberty menu access)
Author's Note
Preface
Introduction
    Part 1
    Part 2
The Big Picture
Selective Advantages, Instinctive vs. Rational Decision Making
    Intro
    The Numbers
    Paradox and Irony
Research Articles
     Embrace of Bias - Blue Eyes / Brown Eyes
Summary Essays
     Which Do You Believe, Truth or Libel?
     Implicit Bias. A prerequisite to discrimination?
     When Devoted to Truth, Challenge Absolute Certainty
     ... and others
Commentaries
     Rules for Radicals
     Fake News, Gullible Voters, and the Appetite for a Scapegoat
Multiple Filters in Play   ← You are here
Issues
    Intro
    Indoctrinations - Truthful, Corrupted, Etc.
Moving Forward

Offered by David Apollo

Multiple Filters In Play
multiple filters picture
A few brief mentions are warranted.

Firstly, as with all the other Filters discussed (i.e. the instincts, behavioral preferences, default ways of interpreting our environment and the way we interact with it, etc.), the Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences Personality Spectrum Ensemble, is not at all likely to be revealed as a trait solely via the expression of one gene. Rather, multiple genes, and even in concert with multiple other filters are likely necessary to be understood in order to understand the Indoctrination Ensemble. It is the result of an ensemble of components - their presence and their expressions. And with this one, one of those components will be the environment itself that the individual has been indoctrinated into.

Among those other Filters and components are: Because of the interplay between the ensemble of these components resulting in the particular expression of the Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences for a unique individual, the way this filter presents itself will differ for each individual. In general, however, what seems to be found is that a higher percentage of people present with the tendency to "embrace beliefs or narratives that they will NOT reconsider when facts which are obvious and credible are offered that are in conflict with those beliefs." Those who will comfortably reexamine and reevaluate their narratives and beliefs tend to be a minority within the general population.

<b>innovation together pic</b>
Thus, for any particular population in homeostasis, there are usually many fewer innovators, inventors, optimizers, and scientists than there are folks who consider themselves "practical minded" and "grounded" (a nice narrative) in the real world.

Interestingly, True Innovators and Scientists know who they are and recognize each other as such.

Those who are not true innovators and scientists, however, believe that they can recognize True Innovators and Scientists, but actually can not. For them, the group is much larger than it actually is. This lack of credible recognition is likely due to not having the appropriate filter settings that would resonate with verification, analysis, uncertainty, and an interest in mechanism of action as an essential prerequisite for understanding the truth of a thing.

Yet, all has evolved as it has. And since it has evolved, by definition it has done so for very good selective reasons. (If only we knew, really, what those were.)

→ The section above was last updated 12 Oct 2017 18:40 PDT ←
Issues
Several issues arise with regard to the instinct to adhere to the beliefs or perspectives one is indoctrinated with, the Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences Ensemble. These issues regard the liberty actually available to us to make choices based on how we experience our environment, our relationships, and how we instinctively react to them.

The way that Indoctrination is executed most effectively follows a certain kind of "Math." A "Math" that is consistent with the math that runs through All That Is. Especially All That Is that is Living and competing selectively (whether they know it or not.)

Almost all of us are endowed as humans with the Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences Ensemble, and so this "Math" works consistently among all of us. The extent to which it works depends on our own personal settings that we are built with for this filter.

<b>Baby in certainty pic</b>
Paradoxically, while the advantage of the instinct to embrace externally taught indoctrinations means that we don't have to rediscover or revalidate behaviors and perspectives that are truly helpful for us, it is also true that these same instincts can lead us to accept indoctrinations that work to our disadvantage.

How can we tell the difference? Well that is the irony isn't it? One CAN tell the difference using a rational examination of relevant facts and experiences. And yet a strongly expressing Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences Ensemble leads one to disregard facts and experiences that are in conflict with the narratives that one has been indoctrinated with. The rational re-examination is often trumped. The indoctrinated believe their dismissal of re-examination IS rational, if they even give such an option any thought at all.
Those with a strongly expressing Indoctrination Ensemble will not perceive when their liberties are being restricted, eroded, and lost while they are under the embrace of the narratives that the indoctrinations are packaged with. Rather, feedback and suggestions intended to strengthen and conserve liberties will be dismissed, considered uninformed, perhaps ridiculed or even demonized much like in our earlier example of The Knee.
Think, and you may often Conserve Liberty. Simply follow the perspectives that you have been indoctrinated and become comfortable with, and your Liberty To Be You may be truly eroded.

While this section will focus in part on the abuses and degradations that can be mediated through strategies that employ indoctrination, it is important to be aware that indoctrination also has its advantages. As noted in our example above, indoctrination can be used to confer selectively advantageous behaviors quickly and broadly. Especially when the behaviors are not endowed organically through genetic mechanisms. Oftentimes, productive behaviors and perspectives that are distinctly positive, even life saving, can be counterintuitive. They would not be commonly practiced if they were not taught and emphasized. Hundreds of examples of these positive indoctrinations could be given, and we know many through our own experiences.

Thus, indoctrination is a utility that is advantageous to have. It is simply important to understand that indoctrination can also be abused, and is used all the time for reasons that have nothing to do with improving harmony in our lives. It is also important to understand that the very best corrupting indoctrinations are embraced so broadly precisely because they are deployed and paired with narratives that proclaim to advance good natured objectives.

Positives: Negatives:
→ The section above was last updated 20 Sep 2016 12:10 PST ←
Indoctrinations showing positive outcomes that may represent The Actual Truth
These examples are advocated by Leadership with the intention of representing The Truth so that additional truths may be uncovered going forward. They are sincerely believed to be fully representative of factual reality, and are therefore taught AS factual reality. The above are just a few of hundreds.

→ The section above was last updated 20 Sep 2016 12:20 PST ←
Indoctrinations showing positive or neutral outcomes that may NOT represent The Actual Truth
<b>time-ish dilation pic</b>
These examples, like those above, are advocated by Leadership with the intention of representing The Truth so that additional truths may be uncovered going forward. They are sincerely believed to be fully representative of factual reality. Because they may be either counterintuitive or not instinctively obvious they are taught because of their perceived selective, compassionate, technical, or educationally advanced value. However, in reality, they may not represent The Actual Truth. The above are simply a few of hundreds in this class. There are often observations or phenomena that are observed which have been interpreted as supportive of the teachings above. However, in every case the assertions have not been vetted at a level or rigor that could be considered complete.

Take for example: At this point, several generations of physicists have been indoctrinated with the notion that the progression of Actual Time changes under relativistically compared conditions, and that this change of actual Time Progression is real. And yet, while the alternative way of thinking about the reality of the Progression of Time that was presented above is not an unusual consideration that a nominally and productively skeptical physicist might make, it is also true that most of the indoctrinated will naturally dismiss it without giving it any consideration at all. Instinctively. Naturally. Such is the extraordinary potency of indoctrination to alter our approach to something we would be naturally curious about (if one was a True Innovator Scientist.) And there are hundreds of True Innovator physicists. Indoctrinated. One will slip through, eventually.

→ The section above was last updated 20 Sep 2016 12:30 PST ←
Non-fact-based Indoctrinations Showing Negative Outcomes
ConserveLiberty defines Corrupted Indoctrinations as either indoctrinations that: Why would anyone want to take the effort to mislead the gullible?

In order to answer this question, I will first re-ask it with a civilized, well-balanced, fair-minded, and good-natured bias. It's a tone that the gullible would regard as "approachable." And, it may be accurate. Now and then.

Repeating our question in its "approachable" form, "Why would anyone who is for the most part well intentioned take the effort to mislead the gullible?" Answers: Use of indoctrination coupled with false or "not really applicable (although it sounds like it if not considered with much thought)" narratives can have positive outcomes, and selectively positive outcomes occasionally. However, indoctrination and the Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences Ensemble can also be exploited by others who may not be as well intentioned as we would like. And it is. Indoctrination follows the same "Math" regardless of the intentions for its use. And, depending on our own filter settings, we are as equally susceptible to indoctrinations that enable our liberties truthfully as we are to indoctrinations that degrade our ability to be what we are meant to be. These indoctrinations that degrade our liberties, and thus our ability to be who we are built to be, utilize: So, we can show examples wherein Corrupted Indoctrinations may either be able to deliver positive results (enabling for the believers), or negative results (disabling for the believers.)

And in each case, when the Math is executed correctly, both indoctrinations that are positive for us and indoctrinations that degrade us are judged by the indoctrinated as precisely the way we ought to go.

Which is why, since many or most of us are built with a strongly executing Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences Ensemble, our liberties are usually just one generation away from being lost. → And, they are generally lost with the cooperation of those who are loosing their liberties. ←

<b>certainty pic</b>
Why? Usually because the narratives presented with Corrupted Indoctrinations are believed and aspired to. They are easily imagined. No more difficult to imagine than any other fiction that we enjoy reading or watching, so powerful is our ability to suspend disbelief via our Imagination Facility. Especially when they are narratives that we naturally would support when believing ourselves to be good people.
ConserveLiberty definition:
The Perfect Mark (the kind every con man looks for) - Someone who desperately wants the con to be true.
As with most beliefs, once indoctrinated, the relationship of the actions advocated to the narratives that are presented to support them are NOT personally verified by the Followers as actually Real and Truthful. The results flowing from these actions are not evaluated with regard to whether they are actually delivering what they were stated to deliver in support of the narratives they were paired with. Remember, the indoctrinated typically dismiss information conflicting with their beliefs. "Dismiss" meaning ... they do not even consider it, except to take long enough to decide not to consider it. Why take the time to validate, when you are going to ignore any information that would conflict with what you have become certain is true? Generally, that is viewed by the indoctrinated as a "waste of time." And, the indoctrination is usually also coupled with the belief that those who do not "believe and accept" are a(n) "stereotype that one would generally avoid being."

When indoctrination occurs independent of the presentation of actual credible facts and rational logic supported by both relevant experience and those facts ... then the foundation upon which the belief and commitment to that belief is built upon is Imagination and Intention.

What happens should an indoctrination be challenged with credible facts and experience after its embrace? Consider the example of The Knee. Anything presented that conflicts or contradicts the narrative is dismissed. Not even considered. Anything supportive will be accepted and used to justify the indoctrination further. The only thing The Indoctrinated is waiting for is for the source of the conflicting facts to stop giving them. And, when ignoring the source doesn't stop those conflicting facts from coming, censorship of one kind or another is attempted until the source stops.

You will have seen this happen thousands of times in all sorts of scenarios in your lifetime and through any stretch of human history in any area of the globe of your choosing.

Many are insignificant. Many are tremendously significant.

Several examples of mass indoctrination, based on Imagination and Intention rather than on Credible Facts and Rational Logic during the last hundred years are listed below. Some have been resolved. Many have not. They all are recognizable as Non-fact-based Indoctrinations, are known as such by the Leadership that advocates them, are paired with narratives that the Indoctrinations will not factually deliver, and are thus intended for other objectives that are not communicated to the Followers. They generally have the same features:
<b>certainty pic</b>
Now, what are some examples of indoctrinated programs that have been "instigated" in order to deal with issues of perceived importance? What has been their result, factually? ConserveLiberty will leave the facts and results up to you to unearth.

For fact seekers, → you will be amazed.

For those who just don't have the time or interest in digging up credible facts on any of these topics or others that aren't listed in these examples ... → you embrace your indoctrination nicely. ConserveLiberty is sure that you believe all is working out as you intend it to. Since finding facts won't change that, why find them?

A Random Dozen Examples of Non-fact-based Corrupted Indoctrinations: Remember, while the narratives associated with the example indoctrinations given above may seem agreeable, the actual results of the actions or perspectives advocated by them are not positive, and in fact are contrary to the narratives they are paired with. And the indoctrinated will generally dismiss any information supporting the negative findings.

All of these examples have been analyzed and written about for years. Examples of recent analysis follow: The reason that we embrace perspectives that promote the opposite of the examples above is, quite simply, "Indoctrination". Many of us tend to believe what we are told if it is told well. Especially if a positive narrative is woven around it. And, once indoctrinated, we dismiss information that contradicts it. And, more often than not, if indoctrinated, we believe those contradicting what we believe are not credible, or worse.

While it would be helpful if ConserveLiberty were to elaborate on the actual Truth regarding the outcomes of adopting each of the indoctrinations above ... ConserveLiberty will not. Instead, what will be said is that each turns out to be False for a variety of verifiable and rationally understood reasons. And, it turns out that the Leadership responsible for supporting and advocating the indoctrinations above KNOWS that each are false. However, the indoctrinated Followers ... generally dismiss any information that conflicts with the indoctrinations above.

If the Leadership advocating these indoctrinations knows that they are false, then why do they continue advocating them?

ConserveLiberty actually does not know the answer to that question. THERE IS an actual purpose that the widespread embrace of these indoctrinations serve, even though the narratives underpinning and paired with them are not actually relevant AND the Truths regarding and the Results achieved by the indoctrinations contradict the statements themselves.

What is known, however, is the following:
Each of these indoctrinations erodes either the fiscal health, social cohesion, personal self control and independence, or the previously trusted alliances and agreements that we have established with other allied nations.

We also know that the Leadership advocating these indoctrinations are often actually quite intelligent. That these indoctrinations are advocated is not because the Leadership is not bright, and it is not because they have not heard and considered the debates and presentations that challenge or contradict them. They have considered all the opinions presented, understand the outcomes that have resulted, and continue their advocacy to the Followers.

The Leadership is also doing quite well for themselves.

→ The section above was last updated 12 Oct 2017 20:40 PDT ←
Finishing The Full Circle on Non-fact-based (Corrupted) Indoctrinations
Consider for the purpose of clarity that one whose intention is to mislead us, obscuring Truth, and thus preventing true Harmony, is our "enemy." And consider, again for the purpose of clarity, that disagreement with the enemy, especially when their Leadership's intention is to take from us what we would not want to give if we were aware of their goal, is "war."

(The choice of the words "enemy" and "war" are perhaps a bit exaggerated depending on the specific example contemplated. In the abstract sense, you could also use the words "opponent" and "contest".)

In war, the enemy's best defense is quite often achieved with the appearance that the enemy is not a threat, and in fact is likeable, a "friend." A friend will be tolerated despite perceived mistakes that harm. If the enemy can enlist others in the fraud, especially in a way that the others are helping in the misleading but are not aware of it, then all the better. It is perhaps most true that one's worst enemy is the one that shows up as likeable and well intentioned, is actually truly likeable and truly well intentioned, and is not purposefully creating the negative results that they are in fact enabling through their support of perspectives that bring about the negative results.

The paragraph above is a very difficult one for all lovers of people who embrace the positive impact of and requirement for tolerance. Tolerance of individual differences (within limits, rather broad limits) can lead us to much more enabling and positive results. Since we are all built differently, the embrace of tolerance enables harmony with The Real. But there IS a limit to that. For example, the tolerance of those who want to kill us or forcibly harm us does not lead to more enabling and positive results. Thus, tolerance is not an absolutely positive perspective. It is only positive under finite, relative circumstances.

[ <b>full circle pic</b> ]
So with respect to Corrupted Indoctrinations, meaning those that will not support in actual results the positive narratives that they are marketed with ... the intentional enemy engages truly likeable and well intentioned others, through indoctrination, to be the unintentional enemy. And ironically, the likeable and well intentioned unintentional enemy, who we may regard as a friend, is in fact our worst enemy.

Why? Because we tolerate their mistakes that harm. Because we compromise to try to keep peace through tolerance. But the harm is intentional, orchestrated by the intentional enemy who has indoctrinated those we consider our "friends." And those "compromises" are not actually compromises at all when considering the progression to the end result. The "compromises" given, when considered as a serial progression, are actually simply a slow, unceasing, erosion, again orchestrated by the intentional enemy who has made the incremental steps seem reasonable to our indoctrinated "friends." And they to us.

The Indoctrinated lose something. The Leadership advocating the Indoctrination gains something. Quite often, what is lost is our Liberty to Be Fully Who We Really Are Built to Be.

We put up far less resistance when our worst enemy is our unintentional enemy, our friend, than we ever would to a much more visible and apparent intentional enemy. And the Leadership advocating the Corrupted Indoctrinations know that. Oh yes, they very much understand "The Math" governing successful indoctrination.

And thus we actually allow the erosion of our Liberty when it is mediated through our duped friends that we want to be tolerant with. And yet, the erosion of our Liberty is exactly counter to everything in Harmony with All That Is.


And so we have a paradox.
We can use the Embrace of Indoctrinated Preferences Ensemble to more quickly nurture more of us to a state of harmony by embracing truthfully that which Conserves Liberty.

And the Indoctrination Ensemble can be used against us to reduce our Liberty so that we may be exploited by those who want power over us for their own goals.
What to do?

→ The section above was last updated 12 Oct 2017 20:50 PDT ←

← Previous - Selective Advantages of Indoctrination    conserveliberty    Summary Essays    conserveliberty    Next - Moving Forward →



freedom to be pic Consider thoughtfully.