Manipulations – why and how we crave it

Definitions:

Lies

A lie is the intentional act of conveying information assumed to be false, regardless of whether the information is actually true or false. The key element is the speaker’s perception of its falsity.

Facts/Actualities

Objective information or events that have occurred. Facts exist independently of interpretation, perception, or perspective – they are what actually happened, not someone’s account, observation, recall, or description.

Manipulation/Disinformation

The intentional act of influencing someone’s decisions or actions without their full awareness or understanding of the manipulator’s intent. It’s a deliberately false or misleading information that is spread in order to achieve a goal.

Propaganda

The deliberate effort to shape people’s thoughts or actions to align with specific goals, often without their full awareness of the intended consequences. It may involve truths, “half-truths”, or outright lies to persuade individuals toward a particular outcome.

Truthful information

Information can be broadly categorized into two types: information you provide yourself and information received from external sources. For example, if you say, “I dropped the stone,” and you actually did, that is truthful information. However, if someone else says, “He dropped the stone,” it becomes a statement referring to an event that may or may not have occurred. Even if they witnessed the event, their perception could be flawed due – our minds can ignore sensory details, misinterpret what we observe due to the lack of complete information, or fill in gaps with visualized elements.

As a result, nearly all information exists on a spectrum of truthfulness rather than being completely true or entirely false. The validity of a statement can increase with supporting evidence and logical arguments, but reaching an absolute truth requires an extraordinary amount of corroborating data. In most cases, achieving a definitive, unquestionable truth is an impractical goal when assessing the validity of any information or claim, so each proof or additional piece of information can only serve as making the statements/conclusions more or less true.

Agenda

An underlying plan, set of goals, or motives that shape how information is selected, framed, or presented. While the information used may be factual (but mostly it is not), an agenda often involves strategic omission or emphasis to guide perceptions, decisions, or actions toward a specific, often unstated, objective. It’s about controlling the narrative to achieve a particular end.

Misinformation

False or inaccurate information that is spread, most often as a results of others trying to manipulate or push an agenda. So the people spreading the misinformation are mostly unaware of its actual validity or that it’s purpose is to achieve some form of an agenda.

Why people crave to be manipulated

As explained in this article about sensory recall people increasingly avoid logical thinking and instead rely on “direct” access to the information. This behavior favors repeated or highly interconnected data, which the brain, based on how it works, can reach more easily. This tendency pushes logic – evaluating information based on what you already know – aside. Over thousands of years, this trend has led to the widespread acceptance and an abundance of flawed information being all around us. Even if we attempt to analyze it logically, we often fail because it’s almost impossible to reach a correct conclusion based on flawed initial data, leaving people to seek alternative ways to assess and assign validity to the information they receive. Common approaches include:

• Trusting sources with perceived authority (e.g., TV reporters, influencers, teachers, or public figures)
• Interpreting superficial signs (e.g., body language) as proof of honesty or dishonesty (even if these are signs of something completely different in actuality)
• Relying on someone’s confidence/believes as a proxy for credibility
• Using repeated exposure to information as a substitute for validation

Regardless of the source, the information is either accurate or inaccurate, in whole or in part. The origin of the information does not determine its validity, but can only aid in its assessment.

So in effort to optimize the “energy/work” needed to assess and reach a conclusion, people rely on the sources above to do it for them. Through evolutions and/or minimal effort goals, people will want and are trying to use this approach, even when it’s incredibly easy to realize the information may be flawed, but until it’s pointed out/publicly known that they are being manipulated, they will insist on it.
For instance, when someone looks up to their left (a sign of visualizing something, in most cases), it is often interpreted as indication of truthfulness. However, visualizing – even when attempting to recall a past event – does not confirm the accuracy of the memory, the validity of the information or the person’s intent, whether they aim to share accurate information, actual conclusion based or their relevant knowledge or to deliberately deceive.

[TODO] A basic example of this – someone with confidence tells you something – are you more or less likely to assume the things he says are factual? (also, people can’t distinguish between correctness and truthfulness)

So, in a world where people are unable to draw conclusions from the information they possess – due to the avoidance of logical thinking and reliance on flawed data – they turn to alternatives, non-logical forms of validation to assess the credibility of that information.

Some of the approaches to achieve manipulation

Fear/negativity

Creating fear or emphasizing negative outcomes encourages emotional responses over rational thinking. Fear bypasses logic, making people more likely to accept proposed solutions or information, regardless of its validity. This is due to how life evolved – in order for something to survive (being it a single cell organism or multicellular like animals and humans) – it needs to avoid anything that can cause it harm or impede its survival, thus any such source is a powerful stimuli to do something else.

Validation by the numbers

if a lot of people are saying/believing something people tend to follow and accept it as true. This “sheep”-like behavior, though rooted in the evolution with a lot of benefits, they are not suited for society full of individuals that don’t mind exploiting or harming anyone else if it’ll be in their own benefit

List statement after statement

Seeking a “common ground” (confirmation bias) by presenting a list of statements until you can reach one to agree upon – often without any proof or evidence – is a common tactic to build a sense of trust. This approach discourages skepticism and logical thinking, as people tend to accept the entire list without scrutinizing each point. This happens not because logical thinking is inherently more taxing but because people have grown accustomed to relying on sensory recall and familiar patterns of thought. Additionally, genuine logical conclusions often conflict with widely accepted ideas, making people more inclined to bypass deeper analysis.

Sounds good, but means nothing

Using vague, feel-good language or slogans appeals to emotions while lacking substantive meaning. Phrases like “We need change” or “For the greater good” sound agreeable but are open to interpretation, enabling the manipulator to steer the narrative as desired as this achieve a sense of “common ground” and eases or removes the need of proof of the next information and conclusions.

Overloading with information

Bombarding someone with excessive data creates cognitive fatigue, reducing their ability to analyze all the new information. This makes them more likely to accept the manipulator’s conclusions without question. This is mainly due to the reliance on the habit of sensory recall, as without it, each piece of information is logically connected with everything you know so far, and if a conflict arises – it’s obvious right away and does causes almost no additional fatigue.

Appealing to authority

Citing experts or authority figures, regardless of the relevance, accuracy or correctness of their opinions, theories or conclusions, lends perceived credibility. People are less likely to question information if it appears to have institutional or expert backing. Again, due to the habit of reliance upon received information instead of logical evaluation of it.

Make them invest in you

Requesting even minimal assistance or a small favor (like asking someone to pass you a napkin). When people do something for you, no matter how small, they subconsciously feel you now owe them something in return, making them more likely to help you again or agree with you later. This works because life evolved cooperative behaviors to ensure group and offspring survival. Once someone has invested in you, they become more committed to your success due to both the reciprocity principle and the desire to justify their initial investment. This can be exploited through gradually increasing requests – starting with tiny favors that build a pattern of compliance, then progressing to larger requests.

Give you a purpose/meaning

[TODO]

Beliefs

The word “believe” is widely used, but its meaning and implications are often ambiguous. Anyone can claim to “believe” something, regardless of whether it is true, probable, or supported by evidence. This flexibility allows the term to be used in contexts ranging from scientific discussion to personal preference, often blurring the line between fact, reasoned conclusion, and unfounded assertion.

In scientific discourse, researchers may say, “I believe the results indicate…” or “I believe this interpretation aligns with the data.” Here, “believe” is intended to convey a high degree of confidence based on empirical evidence and logical analysis. However, each time the term is used in conjunction with evidence or proof, it inadvertently lends credibility to its use in other contexts – such as when someone uses “believe” without any supporting evidence, or simply to express personal preferences or desires.

In everyday language, “believe” is most often used to express personal wishes, preferences, or hopes – such as wanting a particular outcome – without any requirement for justification. It is also used to assert certainty about events or facts, even though no individual can possess all the data necessary to justify such certainty. In these cases, “believe” does not necessarily reflect logical reasoning or empirical support, but rather a subjective stance that may be entirely disconnected from reality.

The repeated use of “believe” to assert certainty, whether in scientific or everyday contexts, can thus legitimize its use by others to justify claims that are unsupported, manipulative, or false. This widespread and uncritical application of the term makes it increasingly difficult to distinguish between well-founded conclusions and mere opinion

Why people use the term “believe”

• Habit and mimicry: The use of “believe” is often automatic, as humans are evolutionarily inclined to imitate the behaviors and language of others.
• Difficulty in predicting outcomes: People tend to view situations in binary terms – true or false, possible or impossible—without – considering the full range of probabilities. In reality, outcomes are rarely absolute. As complexity increases (from fundamental forces to living systems), the likelihood of a 0% or 100% outcome becomes extremely low, since no one can access all the necessary data to reach such definitive conclusions. For more detail, see these examples of perspective and probabilities.
• Limited analytical skills: Most individuals avoid logically assessing information, which results in adopting beliefs through imitation and uncritical acceptance of others’ stated views (as things people say may not be what the actually think).
• Emotional comfort and security: Beliefs can offer psychological relief by simplifying complex issues, reducing anxiety about uncertainty, and providing a sense of meaning or control. Importantly, this often shifts responsibility away from the individual and onto external factors.
• Cognitive ease: Accepting a belief can feel easier and less mentally demanding than engaging in thinking or seeking evidence.
• Social identity and group cohesion: Shared beliefs play a central role in forming and maintaining group identity and social bonds, such as within cultural, political, or religious communities. Expressing these beliefs signals loyalty and belonging, and group cohesion is often prioritized over empirical evidence, logic, or factual accuracy.
• Trust in authority or tradition: People often adopt beliefs based on authority figures (such as parents, leaders, influencers, or experts) or longstanding traditions, rather than through independent verification or logical analysis.

Opinions

Anybody who has the ability to communicate (verbal or nonverbal) can say exactly anything. Our biology does not limit our ability to speak, write or gesture certain words or ideas and thus when people usually say “everyone has a right to an opinion” is practically meaningless. An opinion by definition is not an argumented or reasoned conclusion, it’s not a statement of fact, it’s not a valid theory – in most cases an opinion is the way a person wants/feels something is or isn’t, usually based on limited information that is most often biased or based on nothing at all.

Opinions

By definition, an opinion is not a reasoned or evidence-based conclusion, nor is it a statement of fact or a scientifically valid theory. In most cases, an opinion simply reflects how a person wants or feels things to be, typically based on limited, incomplete, or biased information – and sometimes on no information at all. For a statement to move beyond mere opinion, it must be accompanied by explanation, proof, or logical arguments that support its validity. Furthermore, a genuine commitment to reason requires that a person be willing to reconsider or withdraw their claim if presented with counterarguments or evidence they cannot refute.

It is important to note that even a reasoned or well-argued conclusion does not guarantee truth; rather, it offers a position that is more justified or reliable than what was previously known, a position that is more true, based on the available information.

Each time the term “opinion” is used to justify or legitimize a claim, it inadvertently grants credibility to others who use the term without any logical or evidential basis.

Why and how are we predisposed to manipulations and addictions

[TODO]

[TODO Humane?]

Herd mentality

Gathering all relevant information to make fully informed decisions is not only nearly impossible, but also extremely time-consuming. Herd mentality likely evolved as an adaptive behavior, enabling individuals to benefit from following the actions and decisions of others within a group. In early evolutionary contexts, this strategy increased survival by allowing animals to quickly respond to threats or opportunities without the need for each individual to independently assess every situation. However, this behavior developed in environments where intentions were generally transparent and not deliberately misleading. In modern human societies, where individuals can intentionally manipulate or deceive, relying on herd mentality will lead to the uncritical acceptance of false, biased, or harmful ideas and behaviors.

[TODO]

Idolization, Conformity, Influencers and compliancy

The complexity of an organism’s behavioral repertoire tends to increase with its size and the extent of its interaction with the environment. While simple organisms, such as bacteria, may exhibit basic behaviors primarily focused on resource acquisition and reproduction, larger and more complex organisms require a broader range of adaptive strategies. For example, a fox must master intricate motor skills, such as locomotion and vocalization, as well as complex social behaviors, including concealment, threat displays, dominance assertion, and courtship rituals. Given the complexity and potential risks associated with acquiring these behaviors through individual trial and error – social learning – particularly imitation of conspecific adults (e.g., parents), represents an efficient and adaptive strategy for acquiring essential skills and behaviors very quickly.

While social learning through imitation is an efficient mechanism for acquiring fundamental skills and behaviors, reliance on mimicry beyond the initial stages of development may increase susceptibility to manipulation. After acquiring a foundational understanding of the environment, the development of independent and logical thinking becomes crucial. Over-reliance on mimicry can impede the development of the social and survival skills, potentially rendering individuals vulnerable to not only manipulation, but any environmental dangers as well. Moreover, it inhibits the development of the new, which is essential not only for individual growth and adaptation but also for collective human advancement – novel ideas, unprecedented solutions, and creative breakthroughs emerge precisely when individuals transcend imitative patterns and engage in a new thought, ultimately driving the evolution of culture, technology, and knowledge that benefits humanity’s collective future (or even the world around us).

[TODO]

Religion

So what does the religion do to the people:
– forces them to avoid looking for the reasons how and why
– forces them to avoid looking for fault and guilt and just blame it on themselves
– grows aggression as people can’t reason and still need to force their view onto others
– degrades the ability to outgrow the “follower” behavior of a child that copies whatever the “parent” is doing

[TODO]
Mirroring/Modeling behavior come not only as a way to learn the complex structures of our organisms and what to do with it as well as the environment around as, but as a way to quickly learn things to avoid – when we observe something bad/good happening to some – to make it easy for us to replicate or avoid such actions

Some examples

[TODO EXAMPLES]
– doctors recommending cigarettes (like the Marlboro videos)
– “this is impossible” (for instance Mercedes CEO claims on EV trucks)
– article titles that say one thing, but in the article there isn’t any proof of it at all or the opposite is proven
– smear campaigns
– individual’s titles like “doctor”, “professor”, “P.E.” and so on.. Used so that the information/conclusions they provides needs as little proof or explanation, or not even at all, as possible
– add references to current, probably unintentional, acts of spreading propaganda/manipulations. For instance in Russian-Ukranian war and/or trump
– add example for Musk falling for such practices and heavily contributing
– One Hundred Authors Against Einstein was published in 1931. When asked to comment on this denunciation of relativity by so many scientists, Einstein replied that to defeat relativity one did not need the word of 100 scientists, just one fact. (source)
– Here’s an interview with someone describing this – how people are being manipulated and in all the examples you can see how they even seek it: