Thanks dude. I wrote it in one go. So much to say and all.
When I say “the incredulous” and “deniers of the exogenous of thought control”, I mean this very well reasoned conventional response.
When I say “the incredulous” and “deniers of the exogenous of thought control”, I mean this very well reasoned conventional response.
Classic example of how conspiracy thinking works—anything that challenges the belief is seen as proof of the conspiracy itself.
> It’s best to approach replies like this....
Here the programming instructs to instruct others what they should think and how they should reply. Infinite recursion!
The "conspiracy thinking" is also a funny program. I mean, you wouldn't want the sujets actively investigating how they are being had.
It’s the kind of reasoning that’s impossible to argue with because it’s built to absorb any counterargument as further evidence of its correctness. It’s like playing chess with someone who insists that any piece you take was actually yours all along and that losing is just proof you never understood the real game.
I admire your eye for detail.
Occam's razor: That the dumbest most simplistic explanation is never the right one doesn't mean one can't convince himself it is.
> I mean, you wouldn't want the sujets actively investigating how they are being had.
You are so cool Morpheus.