Computers are fascinating machines. Their hardware, base programming, operating system, memory and software allows them to mimic if not supersede humans in many tasks. Computers may have arms and legs, they may remember complex systems and draw on these to perform amazing calculations. They even have the ability to adapt their programming, self monitor, self regulate and self repair their operating system if necessary. Of course this requires that they be programmed to do so. One thing a computer can not do is self think. Artificial intelligence has been claimed, but this is only an adaptation based on programming. They are still just following a program. B. F. Skinner raised his own daughter in a box to prove that man was similar in that our brains are like computers and what we consider independent thought is really only the result of programming. In other words, there is no soul, divine spark etc. Much of our pop culture psychology is based on this behaviorist view. This followed after work of Ivan Pavlov who conducted an experiment in which a bell was rung each time a dog was fed. The dog learned or was programmed to associate the sound of the bell with food and would salivate whenever the bell was rung, even if there was no food, thus coining the phrase “conditioned reflex” or response. Long before there were computers and man was enthralled with the prospect of making them human, we were busy about the task of making men machines. The business of mechanizing man is actually very low tech and only requires an operating system and a method to burn it into our memory. Man has always known how to do this very effectively and left us pyramids and sacrificial temples to prove it. Popes have always known this as have kings and presidents. During the cold war the U. S. government was very interested in covert programming (viruses and Trojan horses) and had several projects, MKULTRA for example, attempting to “brain wash” or rather introduce subliminal programming that could be used strategically. This program could either immediately change a persons stored memories, perceptions and beliefs or it could lay dormant, undetected by the persons consciousness, silently working in the background, monitoring for a certain trigger to run its code. The movie “China Syndrome” was based o this.
Religion too has its immediate effects and its sleeper code. Once it is burnt in, it immediately changes a persons natural perceptions. It has been called the opiate of the masses and although a better comparison may be made to other drugs, I agree with the basic idea. This is not necessarily a bad thing any more than any programming is intrinsically bad. MKULTRA could have just been looking for a way to program everyone to get along and pick up the trash on the sidewalk. Strangely, humans never seem to want mind control for a good purpose. Changing perceptions can be a good thing as any hippie can tell you. Jesus changed perceptions, Mohamed changed perceptions, the Buddha changed perceptions as have many other luminaries. Jesus said that unless you are born again you can not even see the kingdom of heaven. In approaching any religion, it is a given that our perceptions will be challenged and most likely changed; hopefully for the better. This is the immediate effect, however there is also a sleeper code that monitors all processes and I/O ports (everything we think, hear, read, see etc.) thereafter. Silently in the background it is working a very dangerous control as it jumps into action whenever something is introduced that challenges the superiority of its own programming. We may be free considerers but we are not free thinkers. As soon as an enemy code (or rather, what it considers an enemy code) is introduced, the sub programming throws up a filter, releases smoke and an array of mirrors so that it cannot penetrate the core. Then it sends out a battalion of riot police to quell any doubts we may encounter over this exchange. The ensuing tear gas, batons and rubber bullets may make our faces flush and our ears ring ever so slightly as we consider the opposing perspective. By now unmarked panel vans are speeding to round up the poets and comedians and scourge any dissenting rabble back to their hovels. Sophist and statisticians collaborate as politicians and any remaining thespians are called forth. The opposing point is given fair and open consideration as a measured response is devised. Once the crisis is over, they all go to the den, order a round of celebratory opiate and congratulate each other for their defense of the faith and the charity they showed. They even speculate over the success of their offensive campaign and consider if a seed was planted. Suddenly an alarm is tripped and everyone goes to panic stations. The enemy has managed to plant their own seed of doubt and an article of faith is threatened. It has broken through the barricades with the rebel rabble behind it. They are throwing rocks at the mirrors and chanting populist slogans. The grand inquisitor steps to the podium, bullhorn in hand, and with undaunted authority, points out the futility of anarchy. He reasons “A country that can't control it's borders isn't really a country anymore”. Our government is based on a complex and cohesive system: precept upon precept. You can not remove one jot or tittle without pulling the whole thing down. Violence to one is violence to all; violence to all is violence to yourself. Heaven will fall and earth will crumble. All is lost and damnation must surely follow. The program is a closed system, a rule unto itself by which all others are judged.
Any truly open dialog requires more than consideration and tolerance. It requires an exchange of humanity, which like divinity, is intangible and can not be systematized! It requires confidence in a basic core which is more than what we believe. If we are to be truly open-minded, we must not only consider other beliefs and perspectives; we must allow ourselves to be vulnerable to them. A Christian can not truly appreciate Islam without first approaching the Koran as sacred and then questioning who is God, who is Jesus and why one would believe the bible. A Muslim can not truly appreciate Judaism without asking, what would I believe if I had been raised in a Jewish family. A Jew can not fully appreciate the words of the Buddha without taking off their yarmulke. We are more than the sum of what we believe and there is more to the journey of the soul than doctrine. If, when we speak with each other, it is in a defensive posture of having already deemed the other a neophyte, heretic or infidel; then we are not really communicating with them or being honest with ourselves. We may as well be running a system check or defragging our hard drive. Such is cyborg love. This may anger some. I too feel my adrenalin rise when I am confronted by someone or something that directly challenges my beliefs. Please consider for a moment if there is truly cause, or if it is just the siren of your own programming and the sound of your own Pavlovian bell.
