in ,

Face masks make you stupid | Patrick Fagan | The Critic Magazine

Why face masks are a form of dehumanisation

By Patrick Fagan via The Critic

In Joost Meerloo’s analysis of false confessions and totalitarian regimes, The Rape of the Mind, he coins a phrase for the ‘dumbing down’ of critical resistance – menticide. “In the totalitarian regime,” he wrote, “the doubting, inquisitive, and imaginative mind has to be suppressed. The totalitarian slave is only allowed to memorise, to salivate when the bell rings.”

Neolithic man had a similar problem dealing with his livestock. Homo sapiens’ success has relied not insignificantly on cattle – their dairy, meat, leather and manure. Yet the cow’s ancestor, the auroch, was quite a different beast. It was fast, aggressive and dangerous – hardly conducive to be corralled into predictable channels of behaviour. So, about 10,500 years ago, man started to deliberately breed the most docile aurochs for domestication.

The key word here is docile, which comes from the Latin docere, meaning “to teach” (as does, say, ‘doctorate’ and ‘document’). Being docile means being compliant and following commands, which means submitting to a system of thought.

Whereas animals, however, typically need to be bred to have a higher level of reasoning to be taught commands, human beings, already being quite smart, need to be dumbed down. You won’t disobey an order if you lack the cognitive ability to question it. This is particularly pertinent to the smooth running of a modern world system which relies on millions of individual souls, each with their own nuanced life history and perspective, thinking and acting in the same way.

The empirical literature has shown that compliance and suggestibility are negatively related to intelligence (e.g., Gudjonsson, 1991). In consumer psychology, there is even a technique called ‘disrupt-then-reframe’: bamboozle people first and they’ll be more likely to buy what you’re selling (Davis & Knowles, 1999). Ultimately, the common denominator for increasing suggestibility is switching off executive function in the prefrontal cortex – disabling the superego, the conscience, the internal monologue. Without Jiminy Cricket on his shoulder, Pinocchio would never have become a real boy – he would have always remained a puppet. Modern society is shot through with things that make us similarly dumb (literally, unable to speak).

The effect of television, for example, as Meerloo wrote, is to “catch the mind directly, giving people no time for calm, dialectical conversation with their own minds.” The mind-numbing, irrational effect of visual communication has been recognised throughout history. Not for nothing did religions talk about the word of God and forbid graven images. Unsurprisingly, empirical studies showing that watching television makes you stupid in both the short- and long-term (Hoang et al., 2016; Lillard & Peterson, 2011). This is to say nothing of pornography, which is now consumed by 98% of men but known to inhibit the part of the brain dealing with conscience and consciousness, the prefrontal cortex (Kuhn & Gallinat, 2014).

Moving from circuses to bread, alcohol, of course, reduces cognitive function in the short-term (Hindmarch & Sherwood, 1991). Even at moderate levels of consumption, it accelerates cognitive decline in older age (Topiwala et al., 2017). Junk food, likewise, makes it harder to think in the short-term (Barnes & Joyner, 2012) and harms cognitive ability in the long-term (Reichelt & Rank, 2017).

Fluoride has become something of a cliché of conspiracy theorists; being added to the public water supply in multiple countries around the world, ostensibly to reduce tooth decay. However, the evidence supporting the dental benefits of fluoridated water is poor, while many studies have shown it can damage tooth aesthetics via fluorosis (McDonagh et al., 2000). Many more studies have found that fluoridated water lowers the population’s intelligence (e.g., Borman & Fyfe, 2013; Green et al., 2019; Lu et al., 2000; Rocha-Amador et al., 2007; Wang et al., 2008).

Which brings us to face masks.

Face masks can now be added to the list of mandates that make you stupid. As if Piers Morgan feverishly promoting them weren’t evidence enough, here are the facts on why you absolutely, categorically should not wear a face mask. They make you suggestible; they make you more likely to follow someone else’s direction and do things you wouldn’t otherwise do. In short, they switch off your executive function – your conscience.

A great example comes from a study by Mathes and Guest (1976), who asked participants how willing they would be, and how much they would have to be paid, to carry a sign around the university cafeteria reading “masturbation is fun” (this being 1976, doing such a thing would be considered embarrassing; these days it will probably earn you a course credit!). The results showed that when people wore a mask, they were more likely to carry the sign and required less money to do so ($30 compared to $48, on average).

Meanwhile, Miller and Rowold (1979) presented Halloween trick-or-treaters with a bowl of chocolates and told them they were allowed to take only two each. When the children thought they weren’t being watched, they helped themselves. Children without a mask broke the rule, taking more chocolates, 37% of the time, compared to 62% for masked children. The authors concluded that masks “lead to lower restraints on behaviour”.

The effect has similarly been found online: the online disinhibition effect refers to the tendency for people to act antisocially when anonymous online (Suler, 2004). There is even an infamous trolling movement calling itself Anonymous and using a mask as its symbol.

The disinhibiting effects of wearing a mask are described by psychologists in terms of a suspension of the superego’s control mechanisms, allowing subconscious impulses to take over. Saigre (1989) wrote that masks ‘short-cut’ conscious defence systems and encourage “massive regression” to a more primitive state; Castle (1986) wrote that eighteenth century masquerades allowed mask-wearers to release their repressed hedonistic and sexual impulses; and Caillois (1962) similarly wrote about European masked carnivals involving libidinal activities including “indecencies, jostling, provocative laughter, exposed breasts, mimicking buffoonery, a permanent incitement to riot, feasting and excessive talk, noise and movement”. In the 12th Century, Pope Innocent III banned masks as part of his fight against immorality; and in 1845, New York State made it illegal for more than two people to wear masks in public, after farmers wore masks to attack their landlords.

From a neuroimaging perspective, masks are known to inhibit identity and impulse control – both associated with executive function in the prefrontal cortex (e.g., Glannon, 2005; Tacikowski, Berger & Ehrsson, 2017). In other words, masks silence the Jiminy Cricket in the brain.

It is little wonder that covering our mouths would ‘shut us up’ psychologically. Studies have shown that clothing has a powerful effect on how we think (or not), via a principal known as enclothed cognition: wearing a lab coat enhances cognitive function (Adam & Galinsky, 2012), wearing a nurse’s scrubs increases empathy (López-Pérez et al., 2016), and wearing counterfeit brands increases the likelihood of cheating in a test (Gino, Norton & Ariely, 2010). Similarly, in the world of body language, someone putting their hand over their mouth is a sign that they are listening intently: they are ready to receive information, not to question it.

Continue reading

3 4 votes
Article Rating
Help us grow. Support The Duran on Patreon!

Report

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Duran.

What do you think?

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Problems with authority? Look no further....
Problems with authority? Look no further....
Reply to  Dewey Fernfield
August 29, 2020

So, we’re to believe that in America, a population already behaving as though it’s in a nationwide remake of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, is going to be MORE easily influenced by wearing a mask during a pandemic just because authorities issue a directive? Very strange reasoning in my book.A gordian’s knot of influence battling influence.

I wonder, who IS in fact the more easily influenced here?

Problems with authority? Look no further....
Problems with authority? Look no further....

FYI; I began wearing a mask BEFORE the gal at the pharmacy check out standing a foot from me and babbling away into my face was instructed to wear hers. She was convinced that wiping down the counters with disinfectant was perfectly sufficient, ignoring any news of the prevalence of airborne transmission. To date, no one has hijacked my brain as a consequence.

So, yeah…call me a contrarian by nature, distrusting of a pandemic of extreme stupidity pervading the world at large.

4comment0nly
4comment0nly

contrarian? haha you can’t credit yourself w that.

Problems with authority? Look no further....
Problems with authority? Look no further....
Reply to  4comment0nly
August 30, 2020

By golly, I am. A thinking and analytical one at that. As opposed to the sheeple that just responded to me. 😉

Clarity
Clarity
August 29, 2020

This article is a great example how the media tries to influence you. If you want to know some of the methods modern authors use, I have broken it down paragraph by paragraph: The quote makes no mention of dumbing down, that is the author’s interpretation. The quote does talk about suppression. The author wants you to connect the two subconsciously. It sets the stage and wants you to buy into the author’s message. Man domesticated sheep and goats before cattle, poor example. All domestic animals follow eye cues, something that wolves and primates are not capable of. It is… Read more »

4comment0nly
4comment0nly
Reply to  Clarity
August 29, 2020

the author’s conclusions are mostly correct. abeit his reasoning is weak and he is playing the clickbait game.

instead of castigating him and flaunting your education, why don’t you pursue the truth w constructive criticism and discussion?

obviously he is right about some of his points:

don’t use a skill, you lose it.

bread and games have conditioned docile populations.

masks are disinhibiting.

Clarity
Clarity
Reply to  4comment0nly
August 29, 2020

Your response show how successful the methods used by modern media have become.

That masks are disinhibiting has not been proven in the article. The only point that has been proven to a certain degree is that masks provide a sense of anonymity, which may cause some people to abuse it.

By your very own admission by omission the article does not prove that masks dumb people down. So thank you for proving my point.

Problems with authority? Look no further....
Problems with authority? Look no further....
Reply to  Clarity
August 30, 2020

Some people are already so dumbed down that a mask might actually increase their IQ. Just a suggestion for 4commentonly. 😉

Rhodes
Rhodes
Reply to  Clarity
August 30, 2020

Clarity, it is a fact that NLP/Hypnotism has no effect on approximately 17% of people. IOW, they cannot be hypnotized, regardless of how skillful the hypnotist. So what does that indicate about those individuals, versus those who can be hypnotized? A little known fact. Both Obama and Newt Gingrich took Anthony Robbin’s month long course in NLP, years ago. Well before Obama ran for President. Because I studied NLP techniques in the 80’s when it first started becoming popular, the first time I saw Obama give a speech I immediately knew that he was using NLP techniques. But the vast… Read more »

Lithuania accuses Belarus of non-observance of human rights

How Usury Creates War