The Science of Communication and Architecture of Belief

by Bobby Garner
November 15, 2005

Developments In Communication
What is belief?
Culture and Individualism
Social Engineering and the destruction of the Individual
Further Research Material:

The human mind is wonderfully equipped to acquire, analyze, prioritize, store and retrieve information. When we are first introduced to unfamiliar words, associations are quickly formed based on previously formed associations and certain fundamental concepts. If these associations develop slowly, or are maintained for long periods of time, they become very entrenched and difficult to uproot. Thus older people who have maintained such associations for a lifetime are said to be "set in their way". Among the very young, these associations change rapidly as new information is processed. Former associations once held as true are immediately relinquished in favor of superior associations. Thus over time, our perceptions of truth continually change.

"Unless you ... become as little children..." (Matthew 18:3)

Some seem to find this to be wearisome at some point and try to find stability by formulating acquired knowledge into a system of beliefs that do not change over time. All secular societies display this tendency to some degree, but it is especially noticeable in religion, and it is codified in much of our law. It amounts to a stagnation of discovery by promoting fear of the unknown, and it has been the hallmark of human domination over fellow humans throughout most of our history.

Words are important then, but they are merely convenient tools representative of ideas which first resulted from cognitive processes, otherwise known as thought. Since thought is the function of an individual mind, all idea/word associations are unique to a single mind. Although they may indeed be replications of similar processes occurring in other minds, they are uniquely different as grains of sand under a microscope.

Developments In Communication

Since the time of ancient Babel, men have sought to develop and improve methods of communication as an effective link between two or more individual minds. It is contended by psychologists that communication occurs through sense perception, and that most of it takes place at subliminal levels just beneath our consciousness. Such a view I think is necessary for the evolutionist who wishes to discount the role of cognitive functions and render us more equal to animals. The purpose of such a claim would be to support their theory that they have found a shortcut to knowledge by direct transfer to the mind from external sources, bypassing the need for cognitive thought.

It seems far more likely that what they claim to be subconscious communication is nothing but evidence of normal cognitive manipulation and processing of the incoming information as the mind forms ideas about that information. The replication of ideas then is the sole function of communication between individual minds regardless of what form the communications may take. The associations formed by the individual mind becomes our knowledge base. All beliefs, opinions, and viewpoints are derived from this knowledge base. It is the natural and normal function of the mind to keep the knowledge base up to date and current. Entrenched beliefs that are passed on from generation to generation run counter to the natural process of continued growth in knowledge throughout a lifetime.

Communication then is perhaps our second most important asset, the first being our inherent mental cognition, the process of thinking. As technology has progressed and especially since the development of the printing press, we have sought to identify ways of improving communication. Current computing technologies enable such things as the Internet, and automated translations between languages. This in addition to radio, television, and the print media, has led some to believe that communications itself is the direct path to knowledge, and they have attempted to bypass the cognitive mental process all together, by the transfer of knowledge directly to the minds of our children.

Along with this development has come the modeling of the human mind according to the function of our digital computers. Neuro-Linguistic Programming is one of the new methods of interacting with the mind in such a fashion as if it were little more than a computer. NLP as defined by it's practitioners is, "the study of the structure of subjective experience", and is predicated upon the assumption that all behaviors have a practically determinable structure. They believe that the things people are aware of internally and externally, can always be described in terms of the five senses. It seeks to circumvent our traditional communications as represented by the words we speak and which occurs at a level of "conscious awareness".

The traditional methods of thinking are claimed to be new discoveries by researchers who have found that: "93% of our communication is accomplished on a nonverbal level and almost all of it is achieved unconsciously." This is reminiscent of Time magazine's late 1980's discovery that men and women are actually different (Rush Limbaugh had a lot of fun with this). Neuro-Linguistic Programming then exploits communications by direct behavioral programming of the mind "the product of an engrams resulting from our sensory perceptions." It's a "monkey see, monkey do" process which seeks to bypass the normal cognitive mental processes, and produce artificial evidence that we behave and act just like animals who do not possess cognitive functions. This is the essence of outcomes based education as it has been implemented in our public schools over the past several years.

What is belief?

Is it true that "Whatever we believe, we prove to ourselves 100% of the time"?

Suppose I believe that people are generally deceived and in a state of denial of that fact. Can that also be proven? Well of course it can, and I have done so, but only to my own satisfaction. Other's may or may not agree, largely depending upon their own closely held beliefs plus the degree to which I present a persuasive argument. All beliefs may be proven in this manner.

So, the question naturally arises, How valid can the proofs be if any belief may be proven? The proofs are totally invalid because they only prove the belief to the person holding the belief. The standing challenge on this Website is; Show that ignorance can be acquired, or induced by any means other than by birth or by deception. Belief is the goal of deception, so belief is closely associated with ignorance, not knowledge as most people believe. see The Tools of the Trade

We do not normally seek new knowledge in order to establish belief (although many do), but rather to dispell an existing belief that has proven to be deficient. The assertion that any belief can be proven is therefore valid only within the perspective from which the belief is held. That perspective is properly formed through the cognative functions of the mind, but they must be validated experimentally, before we can say that it is knowledge and not mere belief. Perspectives gained in this way require hard work and dedication. More commonly perspectives are presented through persuasive argument, and as I have shown in other articles, the audience within the confines of the presentation, has no effective means of evaluating the argument except by the persuasion itself. Beliefs acquired through persuasive argument bypass the thought processes, and is a replica of a belief held by the communicator. Belief based on persuasion is the product of deception.

The facts of the Second World War are one thing in this year 1948, in the brains of the Culture-bearing stratum of Europe, and something totally different in the minds of the newspaper-reading herds. By 2000 the view of the present Culture-bearing stratum will have become also the view of the many, and by that time, more facts will be known to the independent thinkers about the same War than are now known to the few. For one of the characteristics of Life-facts is that distance — particularly temporal distance — shows up their lineaments more clearly. We know more of Imperial history than Tacitus knew, more of Napoleonic history than Napoleon knew, vastly more of the First World War than its creators and participants knew, and Western men in 2050 will know our times in a way that we can never know them. To Brutus his mythological ancestry was a fact, but to us a more important fact is that he believed it. ~ Francis Parker Yockey from his book Imperium.

Normal growth in knowledge progresses along a circular path where the same processes are repeated over and over again, with each repetition resulting in a knowledge which is superior to all that came before. Belief is a proper state of mind to be held repeatedly, but temporarily in the transition between knowledge and doubt. The natural progression from ignorance to knowledge therefore follows a circuitous pattern of:

Belief - Contradiction - Doubt - Search - Resolution - Knowledge - Belief

In ignorance, all things are believed and nothing is doubted. Or we could say, belief is the absence of doubt, or until there is doubt, all is believed. This describes the state of our mind as we first experience life. Belief is interrupted by contradiction. Doubt initiates the search for knowledge. Once the satisfactory knowledge is found, belief is once more established, but it now includes the new knowledge. Since the perfect knowledge has not yet been found, we are eventually confronted by yet another contradiction and doubt returns which requires a new search for a superior knowledge. The contradiction ALWAYS represents a problem with the belief or paradigm which produces it. In other words, the contradiction exists only because of a flaw in the perspective or frame of reference which holds the belief. Therefore it needs to be recognized that the belief is defective. The contradiction is resolved by the discovery of new knowledge which can happen only when we do the search.

This results in a growth in knowledge with improved understanding, and a superior belief within a new frame of reference. Our search for knowledge then amounts to a search for a better frame of reference from which everything comes into sharper focus. The easier and more frequent response is to cling to the belief by seeking ways to justify the existence of the contradiction, and attempting to explain it in a way that protects the belief which produced it. The result is that we become stuck between belief and doubt, and the revolving knowledge wheel stops turning, making further growth in knowledge an impossibility.

That condition is most easily recognized as codified belief systems and/or dogma whether religious or secular. See also Cognitive Anthropology Whenever someone says, "I have found the truth", know that he has committed everything he has acquired to a fixed belief that will linger as long as he lives. Absolute truth exists, but we do not find it in a normal lifetime. We must continually keep searching, testing and proving our knowledge. The statement that we can prove our beliefs to ourselves 100% of the time is a leveling argument designed to equalize the intellectual field. Of course it is technically true, but it justifies all beliefs by discrediting all of them equally. This is a necessity of the collective mindset.

Culture and Individualism

Cultures tend to form naturally, and they usually have some very good and desirable features but we should be very suspicous of the fact that our history reflects that they are the source of much strife and conflict. Further there does not appear to be a single culture which might be acceptable to everyone. So, the present trend is to accept cultural diversity, and this is expected to be accomplished through equality enforced by peer pressure within a collective community.

I'm not at all certain that culture harbors any real wealth which might be worthy of protection. Culture is readily divisible between east and west with numerous points in between. Therefore it may be seen as more of a divisive mechanism used to justify perceived differences whether real or imagined. The popular theme of cultural diversity seems to accomplish that. I find it highly competitive with another equally popular theme of "equality". I don't believe equality and cultural diversity are compatible, and to insist on both is to insure neither. I find it interesting that neither diversity nor equality is guaranteed by the US Constitution, yet both are allowed at the discretion of the individual. The collective has a high distrust of the individual and seeks to overthrow not only his discretionary choices, but also the authority upon which they are founded. That authority is embodied in our constitution, but it is of divine origin, and said to be unalienable. We are separated from those liberties and freedoms through the destruction of the individual.

There is a concerted global effort which has been apparent for some decades to completely destroy religion which is the traditional core of all cultures. Most of the information available on the subject appears to be oriented toward the establishment of a viable alternative to religion. Culture and ancient philosophies seem to be the most favored substitutes. Consequently there is a high priority placed on the rediscovery of ancient or lost knowledge. The problem with such knowledge (if indeed it ever existed) is that like our constitution, it was powerless to prevent whatever happened to it, and we would prefer to not replay that history.

the first head of the World Health Organization, Dr. Brock Chisholm, referred to religious traditions as "poisonous certainties". Some writers see the Communitarian movement as an attempt to blend all religious beliefs and create a different society where the individual is de-emphasized in favor of the community or state. "That agenda," she [Berit Kjos] contends, "is being implemented through this curriculum." ~ Jim Brown Author Warns Believers Against New 'Communitarian' Bible Curriculum

Religions seem to be either devoted to separating good and evil, or proving that evil doesn't exist. I think it may be fair to say that all dualities stem from the concept of good vs evil, but in practice, things become much more complicated, and attempting to analysis it in those binary terms is to grossly oversimplify and distort the reality.

If evil really exists, and I believe it does though not as a direct opposite of good as is usually implied, then we necessarily have to deal with a binary quality for "what sharing does light have with darkness"? Shades of gray are merely evidence of the light. On the other hand, evil has no power over good, and may triumph only when the light of the good is covered over. The lights have been going out everywhere and we appear about to enter a new dark age. Satan is said to masquerade as an "angle of light", and Illuminist' and other occultist' as well as religions worship that Prince of Darkness as their "Source" but it operates only under cover of darkness and ignorance, so materially speaking, it more closely resembles a black hole than a source of light.

Good has no tolerance of pollution, and becomes evil if it is contaminated. Evil therefore, is not the complete absence of good, nor it's opposite, but the contamination of it, and it has an infinite number of possibilities. Probably all of the dualities that may be easily identified are simply manifestations of evil. They are false dualities which allow a choice only between the evils they represent.

Objective realities of the creation such as the human brain and it's cognitive functions cannot be analyzed in binary terms of good and evil. However, many who would argue otherwise don't believe in objective reality, so for them everything is subjective and has existence only as specified by them. Such ones create their own reality, and envelope themselves in an Alice In Wonderland world of imagination and make-believe. Sometimes their Sun rises in the west, or sets in the north. At least that is what some of them have told me.

The cognitive function of the human brain is the very essence of our uniqueness as a separate creation apart from the animals. The denial of that fact has given us animal rights which take precedence over constitutional rights of the individual. It reduces us to the status of animals, and this is the gross immorality from which perspective it is argued that we evolved from apes with binary brains. It's the collectivists fraudulent argument that the group, tribe, race, or state (culture?) is to be the primary unit of reality and the standard of social values. Thus "cultural diversity" and "equality" represents a dualistic, irreconcilable method of controlling large masses of people. It is division under the guise of unity. Whereas religion functioned effectively as a control structure in the passing age of national groups, our cultural diversity (which is not a bad thing but it evolved in a bad system), is used as a tool to enforce the need for equality within the collective.

Free Culture is Lessig’s third book on the theme of how Congress and the courts have shifted the body of law intended to protect the new, twisting it to protect the old. It focuses on Copyright law and how the very fiber of our culture is being appropriated. The core claim of this book is “While the Internet has produced something wonderful and new, our government, pushed by big media to respond to this ‘something new,’ is destroying something very old.” ~ review by John D. Trudel, www.trudelgroup.com , of Lawrence Lessig's book on "Free Culture" v.s. the increasingly "Permissive Culture" which is already squeezing the life out of any initiative that might oppose it.

Neither the ancient cultural diversity nor the post modern collective is the answer, but only another dual representation of the evil.

Social Engineering and the destruction of the Individual

If you want to destroy the individual, you must first destroy his morality, for an individual separated from morality is not fully human, and assumes the behaviour of a lower animal. A man or women will not become so debauched except through deception. The entire art and practice of deception, because it has no substance, is to tamper with the frame of reference. No valid analysis of truth is possible within a false frame of reference. Yet, virtually everyone is attempting to do just that. "Amoral psychology" is too generous a term to describe what has been crammed down the public throat, because it suggests that it is neither moral nor immoral. This false frame of reference allows the New Age moral relativism position that there is no "truth value" to be attributed to any moral argument. see Responding to New Age Relativism

Ayn Rand characterized morality as "rational self-interest", and contrasted it with altruism, and "irrational egoism". The contemporary use of the word "selfishness" relates to egoism, not self-interest, but it is used to discredit "rational self-interest". The purpose is to foster the fraud of the immoral altruistic collective and the total and complete destruction of the moral, rational, self-reliant individual. Therefore, it is an evil purpose, and no good can come from an analysis of it's precepts such as a binary human brain which alone has no useful function in society and must therefore, give way to the collective.

The Core Knowledge Foundation is a non-profit organization founded by Hirsch in 1986. It is based on the idea that children need to share a common core of knowledge, which “makes up the common ground for communication and cooperation in society.” This “core knowledge” was arrived at through the process of “consensus” with “diverse groups and interests,” according to a Core Knowledge Foundation paper. (Some readers will recognize the managed consensus dialectic process in this description.) Hirsch’s “common knowledge” philosophy is based upon a communitarian ideal that “all” children should drink from one democratic cistern, and that without this inculcation of universal “truths” and “values” children will not be prepared for the global workforce community of the future. ~ The Choice Charade

Social engineering has as it's undeclared goal, the total destruction of the individual as an entity of society. The U.S. Constitution applies first and foremost to the federal government, and severely limits it's ability to directly affect the lives of the people of the several states. The Bill of Rights, more than specifying what the rights of the people are, specifically forbids any government action within those specific areas of human activity. Those constitutional protections apply specifically to individuals, or groups of individuals. They do not in any way apply to a "collective", or the "masses". The false notion that we are a democracy is a direct product of social engineering. The constitution demands a republican form of government run by elected statesmen. The people have constitutional representation only through their states representatives. The senate was at first elected by the states as representatives of the interests of the state. The people never were and are still not involved in electing the president. The ballots cast for president by the people are not binding and the president is elected constitutionally by electors appointed by the states, and they are not bound by the popular vote. The direct election of Senators weakened the power of the states and transfered it to the federal government.

The fact that the foregoing sounds so strange to Americans is due to the fact that we presently live in a socially engineered society that has come to disregard the constitution's basic principles. We became a defacto democracy following the Civil War. President Lincoln announced a "government of the people, by the people and for the people" to rousing applause at Gettysburg following the war. This describes a democracy, and the nation has lived the role ever since. The salient point is: our beloved constitution does not apply to a democratic government! (Article 4 section 4, US Constitution) This democracy which really took root and grew into the monster it has become, was able to establish itself with the consent of the people, through social engineering.

Social engineering by any name is simply the application of methods of control. The social application of "Control Theory ". You cannot teach subjects like social behavior and crowd control without imparting the knowledge of how control methods may be applied more broadly to society generally. Example: Collective Behavior - Syllabus

Everyone knows how the human mind works, because we all have one, and they all work the same way by design. The knowledge comes from first hand experience. Perhaps the reason it isn't better understood is that it happens with such efficiency that we don't generally notice the effort. Some would call this a subconscious process, but it need not be if we just take the time to reflect on our own actions. With certain exceptions mostly due to irregularities in our reproductive system, we all have a creative capacity. It isn't always realized, and may easily be denied, but it is always present. Those of us who are least aware of our creativity are more prone to being manipulated and controlled. Not surprisingly then, those who would control other people are usually found among the more creative. Simply being fluently creative does not mean that others need to be controlled, but unfortunately that's the way a lot of creative people see the matter, and they succumb to the leadership roles they perceive to be their destiny. Though often popular, they lead not by their ability, but by their power to control. For control purposes, perception is everything.

William T. Powers, in his book, Behavior: The Control of Perception, observes that behavior is the process of controlling input perceptual variables (see Perceptual Control Theory (PCT)). Such concepts once recognized, and even though they may not be well understood, give enormous power to those processing the desire to control. While the intent may have been a noble one of understanding the function of the mind, practicers of magic and most leaders, recognize that perceptions function as a control mechanism. People may be indirectly controlled by manipulating their perceptions of reality.

Perceptions are manipulated by playing with frames of reference. Thus "framing processes", especially as they relate to "collective action frames", is another relatively new field of study.

The recent proliferation of scholarship on collective action frames and framing processes in relation to social movements indicates that framing processes have come to be regarded, alongside resource mobilization and political opportunity processes, as a central dynamic in understanding the character and course of social movements. This review examines the analytic utility of the framing literature for understanding social movement dynamics. ~ FRAMING PROCESSES AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: An Overview and Assessment
Frame Development and Alignment
Historical Examples
Social Movements

Perceptions are communicated normally through our senses, but it is the cognitive processes which constructs them, and if we are not aware of how this construction is done, there is no defense from having those constructs manipulated externally. The fact is that through effective use of our cognitive functions, we are not limited to sense perception. Sense perception being taught as the method of acquiring knowledge, must be seen as a precursor to direct transfer of knowledge through new mind control technologies beginning at an early age which bypass our cognitive function, and discourage it's development. People "programmed" in such a fashion are not capable of genuine thought, because the thought processes were never allowed to develop. They are fit only for a low skill labor force completely dependent upon control stimuli, and prone to violence due to unrecognized outlets for whatever residual creativity they may possess.They have no place in a free sdociety. They are totally unfit for a family environment and fall easily into the collective trap.

Do we recognize that most of this control apparatus is already in place, and in evidence as passive low resistance to, or eager acceptance of rapid social change, dysfunctional families, sky rocketing crime, drug use, bazaar lifestyles, habits of living beyond our means, economic crises, threats of war, and the general exploitation of fear? Have you noticed that it is all going under the rubric of "freedom" and defiance of all authority? The only freedom in evidence is a free pass on the road to total, and abject slavery. It is only a truly immoral society that will travel such a road. A society lacking the moral fitness to survive, and one that is already in the process of self destruction.

We are not waiting for the control methods of the "New World Order" to kick in, rather, we can only hope that they will be recognized in daily operation. Those who may have the capacity to recognize it are dwindling in number, and growing elderly and detached. We are already being controlled by new technologies in communications which exhibit the capability of direct transfer of knowledge, having it perceived as knowledge, but functioning as belief in crippled, unquestioning minds.

Errors corrected 22 Nov. (ed)

Further Research Material:

In people who are creatively fluent, especially fictional authors, the social/associative model of descriptive language is still available to introspection, consequently the translation from inner to outer speech is fascile. These people often experience spontaneous flashbacks to early childhood that are so vivid as to constitute an active reliving. As such, by providing a route back to the feeling Self, these are peak experiences leading to a greater integration of the mind and body. ~ Explorations: The Semantic Differential

William James (1842-1910), was one of the first to recognize that humans seem to be guided by a control system "With the [metal] filings the path is fixed; whether it reaches the end depends on accidents. With the lover it is the end which is fixed, the path may be modified indefinitely." But it was American educator John Dewey (1859-1952) who gave us the technical description of it. "What we have is a circuit, not an arc or broken segment of a circle. This circuit is more truly termed organic than reflex, because the motor response determines the stimulus, just as truly as sensory stimulus determines movement. Indeed, the movement is only for the sake of determining the stimulus, of fixing what kind of a stimulus it is, of interpreting it." -- Adapted Behavior as the Control of Perception

Cybernetics is a theory of the communication and control of regulatory feedback. ...the discipline that studies communication and control in living beings or machines. ~ Wikipedia

Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) "the study of the structure of subjective experience", and is predicated upon the assumption that all behaviors have a practically determinable structure. ... adheres to the notion that the things people are aware of internally and externally, can always be described in terms of the five senses. ... Any behavioral program rests on a neuronal basis; the product of an engrams resulting from our sensory perceptions. ~ wikipedia

Design Thinking - "Most people believe that the words we speak are the primary source of our interaction. Based on clinical studies done over the past 30 years, 93% of our communication is accomplished on a nonverbal level and almost all of it is achieved unconsciously. Yet, for the most part, we still only communicate to others and ourselves at a conscious awareness." ~ designedthinking.com

Half the Battle: Cultural Resonance, Framing Processes, and Ethnic Affectations in Contemporary White Separatist Rhetoric, Berbrier, Mitch 1998. Abstract
Purposeful Behavior: The Control Theory Approach. Special issue of American Behavioral Scientist, Marken, Richard S. (Ed.). 1990. Control Systems Group
Behavior: The Control of Perception. Powers, William T. 1973 Powers' basic observation is that behavior is the process of controlling input perceptual variables. reproduction of the original book jacket
Making Sense of Behavior (The Meaning of Control), by William T. Powers. Review
The International Association of Psychosocial Rehabilitation Services (IAPSRS)
Communitarianism is the documented socio-cultural rulebook that defines the new conduct rules and ethics for global citizenship. In other words, it is the human being's official notice of enforced behaviors and beliefs. World-Speak: The Making of the Communitarian Creature
The responsibility for charting the necessary changes in human behavior rests clearly on the sciences working in that fields. Psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, economists, and politicians must face this responsibility. The Re-establishment of Peacetime Society
Accelerated-Human-Change-Technology
Neuro-Dynamics +change-technology
Belief By Persuasion
The Deception of Belief
Belief and Other Dogma

Bobby Garner is a researcher on the phenomenon of One-Worldism with an emphasis on the methods and techniques employed in it's attendant deception without which the New World Order cannot happen. He may be reached via E-mail from http://www.congregator.net/pages/contact.html. He welcomes your comments. Visit his website www.congregator.net This article may be posted in it's entirety on any website provided this statement remains attached.