Our brains are not constructed to have their characteristics replaced. The explanation lies in the cross-section of evolution and conflicting goals. What is best for one person does not have to be the best for another. Naturally they can overlap but this can’t be taken for granted. The one who too easily let him- or herself be manipulated would do the best of the manipulator. Oftentimes it would moreover be done on his or her own cost. Which at the end leads to someone else’s genes being passed on. So every time there is a conflicting goal natural selection favours the one who acts egoistically. For this reason there is normally a limit to what people can be manipulated to. However, this varies individually.
Some would object that mind control is only possible high-tech. The trouble is one of the methods in fact occurs naturally. There are geographical areas where the groundwater naturally contains fluoride. If it were so passivating these would never had been populated. People drinking the groundwater would not have reacted properly to acute and tangible threats. They would quickly have died from accidents. Say the effect would be lacking in a small number of individuals. How would these be able to know it was caused by the groundwater? Some don’t spend a thought at how they would know something.
Neither does schooling require any kind of high technology. Present-day schools are lit by electric light. But they don’t have to be. Daylight works fine as do some oil lamps. In the same way children can learn using paper, pens and similar. Learning different skills trains different brain functions. Other than that the content of the education does not matter. If public schools work better it is only a matter of the teachers being more skilled. Educating is a skill in and of itself which can’t be taken for granted.
In the same way mental characteristics are believed to be replaced by mainstream mass-media. I have already explained here why they are not centrally controlled. Moreover, one decides for oneself which parts one consumes. Just because one subscribes one does not have to consume everything. Moving images with sound easily attracts attention. However, this is not the same as characteristics being replaced. We still need brain functions to understand what it is our senses are conveying. The belief that sensory impressions replace them does not take this into consideration.
The worst conspiracy talkers may believe radio waves in themselves to remote control people. As a rule they are believed to be experienced as voices inside one’s head. There is only a small part of humanity experiencing this on a regular basis. Such individuals don’t always do as the voices tell them. This depends on how threatening the voices are perceived. If they sound more threatening the person is less prone to do as the voices tell. This in turn is due to the person’s past experiences. In addition different individuals hear them saying different things. Pretty big egotism is required to believe them to be directed at oneself. Instead I think such experiences are caused by acquired mental problems. Such arise spontaneously in single individuals.
No-one of the imagined effects seems to materialise. Would it not be good for employers if we could cope with constant stress? Any such mental capacity does not seem to exist. We can’t get rid of our stress hormones. At least not nearly to the degree which would be required. Too much stress instead leads to our health being destroyed. This applies both physically and mentally.
Of cause there are individuals perceiving their situation as hopeless. However, people then tend to resort to alcohol and drugs themselves. How widespread they are in a group can be viewed as a measure on how unhappy the group is. Which substances it is about depends on local availability. Moreover, people vary in their ability to metabolise them. The combination makes them variously common among such in different countries.
I have already explained the preposterous in that chips would control people. Injecting such in an entire population would still not be worth the effort. In particular if something is cost-efficient many don’t think about. Something which neither would is drugging an entire population. We are not legally required to take certain substances. To the opposite it is a problem that some don’t take medication ordinated by physicians. There are many different reasons for people not to take their medications. Everything from not being able to afford it to misunderstandings around its effects.
Some modern behaviours are claimed to be “unnatural”. If they really are unnatural varies from case to case. Just because oneself dislikes something that does not make it unnatural. For sure there are bad habits being widespread in in certain cultures. To the opposite this does not mean they were deliberately created to harm that culture’s members. Rather it is only members with highest social status benefiting. Or it is matter of strife doomed to fail.
There are those making a short-term profit from selling harmful products. Still there is an upper limit to how much harm one can earn from. Do the ones you harm become less useful you indirectly harms yourself. Why would an imagined elite want their own people to be supposedly destroyed? Humans don’t do things because they are evil. That myth comes from ignorance of other points of view even existing.
Another type of evidence against mind-control existing is statistical outliers existing. 25‒30% of humanity has at least one inborn mental aberration. Usually they are unnoticeable. But to the extent they are noticeable some have tried to replace them. Oftentimes based on pure speculation on their condition being acquired. At best such attempts have been entirely useless. More common are those attempts creating other mental problems. Additional problems arise without the previous being affected. If the method involves blaming it may even lead to suicide.
All this does not mean humans being incorrigible. We can always get better on specific skills. However, we can only learn what is already humanly possible. It is possible to learn to find one’s way in the maze which is London’s inner city. In contrast it is not possible to make people behave as some sort of imaginary robots. We are not programmable machines but living organisms. This means every person has his or her own mental processes. That they would be possible to standardise is based on an oversimplified view of humanity.
Uploaded on the 17th of July 2026.
Commercial rights reserved by Lena Synnerholm if nothing else is stated.
This site was last changed on the 3rd of August 2026.