Let's be blunt: crowd psychology is as old as civilization. As soon as people could attain and hold power without sheer force, there has been incentive not only to be the best at whatever competition produces those gains, but to weaken the population in a more abstract sense outside of the specific competition. Overall population weakening could come through physical weakening (modifying the water supply, encouraging people to drink nothing but beer, slipping drugs into their communion at church, etc etc). It could also come through informational campaigns (religion and law, dialectics, rituals and performance art, etc). In the end, capturing the cognitive system of the population is most of the goal, and stupefying them is what you do with that control.You know that you don't need any medical equipment to do a lobotomy? They could have done it thousands of years ago, and given the knowledge they had of the body, I'd be shocked if they weren't aware of what it would do. Of course, if your whole population is lobotomized, then they're vulnerable to invasion, but suppose that you did this to anyone who became a problem for you.Also, suppose that the whole "worm in the eye" thing is essentially just parasitic lobotomization. In the show The 100, people get these parasitic chips placed in their brains. One is a "special" parasite that is what determines who rules a group of people, even though it's a stupid coincidence based on one human with advanced tech who crashlanded somewhere. That's the "flame" and the "flamekeeper". To contrast, a bunch of christian-like cult members take these parasites as though it is communion, which really makes you wonder.I think the mushroom vs worm thing isn't discussed enough. I bet the ancients thought that the mushroom was connected to the worms because they appear at the same time on decaying matter.I have no way to end this post. Just dabbling in a bunch of related thoughts.
>>18651300Lobotomization example. It's simple. I figure if you put a worm behind the eye, this is also the first thing it would eat. I don't know how you'd control it though, or if that part matters to the people who thing worms in the brain are a good idea.I can see how some of this might sound profound and cool to ancient civilization, so people would slip into doing bad things without knowing better. Sacrificing babies for no reason and taking eye worm parasitic lobotomies are ironically on the same axis there.So, my point is, if such a historical thing happened, we'd see a pattern of these ideas being labeled bad or repressed, and there would be an archetype of a traveling teacher who tries to get people to stop being objectively bad things, and then the traditions would vary on what happens because of this person (generally things get better, some people are 'redeemed', but maybe some people are too far gone and have to disappear before the 'next version of the world').
>>18651300So my views on mushrooms are clear....I think the mushroom is a very powerful mind altering technology that lacks an absolute valence. I think it's definitely usable for good, though also usable for bad. The "bad" side generally requires companion technology that programs the person while under the influence; mushrooms taken by isolated individuals who reprogram their own mind aren't negatively affected if good choices are made.That being said, ironically I have to admit that the effects of a brain parasite and mushrooms might be superficially similar. The parasite severs connections, which can cause a range of things, but most primarily it reduces metacognitive activity. Metacognitively requires parts of the brain to be aware of each other and react to each other. Less connections means the "bicameral mind" can become exaggerated (I don't think it is a binary; it's a spectrum). It might also make people much easier to influence.Speaking of which... what is the implication of genuine "bicameral" activity in ancient history? Could it relate to the stupefying technology rather than "default" human setting? Though again, I grant this is a spectrum and the average person today, while being relatively "integrated" compared to past people (thanks to increased language and analytical skills), they still act relatively "allistic" (opposite of autistic; allism = normie-ism).Anyway, the mushroom doesn't permanently sever connections in the way the parasite does. The mushroom simultaneously destroys and creates, so I think you can easily walk around with more brain connections after mushrooms rather than being in a continuously declining state as a result of the parasites.
Bump
