Weapons of the Invisible War
How do you get someone to do something?
You could yell, threaten, bribe.
But at the end of the day, you need to somehow convince them into action. What is this somehow and how does the convincing work?
We’re continuously engaged in dialogue—whether it be a conversation with a friend, listening to a video, podcast or an inner dialogue with yourself. A dialogue is essentially a written or spoken exchange between one or more people.
If we want to add some formality, it’s a sequence—so order matters—of statements composed of compound phrases, where its root elements are words. Order matters. The structural order of a phrase changes its emphasis and conjugation—such as passive voice and active voice: “The dog was walked by John,” vs. “John walked the dog.” So the question is, are there structual methods of organizing dialogue to be more convincing?
That’s the role of a dialectic. A dialectic is not a logical proof—most people don’t understand logic anyway—but a structured prose that alters perception and belief. It works like a spell on the mind—needing only a few incantations.
The Hegelian Dialectic is dialectic method that uses thesis, antithesis and synthesis to alter perspective. Problem. Reaction. Solution. This is much more sophisticated than it sounds.
A problem is a perception created through cognitive dissonance. Beliefs are pre-conditioned through classical and operant conditioning, e.g., media “programs,” as modal statements of necessity and possibility. e.g., “We need to be safe,” “you could become sick,” “toys are fun,” etc. Note “are” is a substitute for “not possible not,” which is a modal equivalent to, “have to,” in the domain of belief. Modalities are more effective when using emotional socially learned words that invoke fear or desire, which are types of rhetorical devices.
Let’s walk through a case-study. (N is used for necessity and P for possibility.)
The example is simple:
Problem — Use contradictory beliefs of safety and danger.
Reaction — Allow associated emotional states to come into opposition.
Solution — Offer an means to remove the source of opposition.
Thesis.
“I need to be safe,” is a necessity.
(N safe(me))
“safe” is associated a positive emotion.
Antithesis.
“Bob is a terrorist,” is a necessity.
(N terrorist(Bob))
“terrorist” is associated to a negative emotion.
That negative emotion implies, “may not be safe”
(N terrorist(Bob) → P ~safe(me))
Synthesis.
The first modal is rewritten as, “not possible to not be safe.”
(N safe(me)) = (~P ~safe(m))
This comes into conflict with “possible not to be safe,” producing mental stress or punishment.
(~P ~safe(m) & P ~safe(me))
A reward can offer to remove the contradictory belief.
“If we eliminate Bob then you will be safe.”
(N eliminate(Bob) → N safe(me))
Therefore, the belief that Bob has to be eliminated is sewn in the minds of the fearful by playing on their cognitive dissonance. This may seem like a silly and trivial example, but I’m going to show you how it fits together when wrapped with more rhetorical devices in a speech.
“We the people of Johnsville love this town and love this community. It’s that love which makes Johnsville the safest place to live, raise a family and call home for generations.
But there’s a threat to our town. An outsider. And that outsider’s name—is Bob. Bob isn’t like you and me. He doesn’t love this town and he hates everyone here. He wants to hurt your children. He wants to hurt you.
Why? Because Bob is a known terrorist. How long are we going to sit by and wait until one of our kids doesn’t come home after school. Are we going to wait until he’s in your house at night? We can’t wait for him to do the right thing. If we ask him to leave, he’ll only return—more dangerous than before.
Instead, we need to do the right thing. We need to make a decision for the greater good. Bob needs to be eliminated.” — Example Speech
We have to protect ourselves from believing and reacting to absurdities during dialogue. It’s a trick. Like a black magic spell. There are dialectics all around us. They’re the armoured vehicles of the Invisible War. Don’t be tricked by words that sound nice, incite fear, offer a reward or assert truth.
Always ask questions. Never accept censorship. These weapons are subtle, but not less sharp—and will pierce into the hearts and minds of its victims.
The victims of the Invisible War.