The 'mental-superbug' epidemic

[barn]

Hi thinkers and alike,

Ever tried to explain something that required higher cognitive functions,... to a wasted drunkard? To a person seeing lepricons somersaulting? To a sociali...

In a mental state with several blockers (chemically in the brain) preventing certain parts from activation, there's little to no chance successfully transmitting sense, nevertheless the person's hardly capable to retain/have an accurate recollection afterwards, partly due to 'skewed' evaluation of reality. (That's why socialising/working while drinking 'heavily' is an empty interaction, there can't be quality there. Illusons, sure.)

Has anyone had any success getting through to a person who's clearly about to begin / in the mode of: 'I'm repeating this sentence! I'm repeating this sentence! I'm repeating this sentence!...'
Like a child having a tantrum, obsessively sticking to something, making a scene.

If a person is unable to partake in being 'the driver' , the person supposedly in charge of its own body / actions is clearly enacting mindlessly the will of others, what could be the most constructive reaction to their behaviour? (with caring for our & their own wellbeing, universal standards...)

Wouldn't it be simply sensible de-fanging them, making sure they can't do harm to others? (This, I don't have a firm stance on... but can, if they wish, to themselves?)

(This, below, is probably not my own idea but can't recall from where/what pieces came from... would love to, bc then I could compare, evaluate more. If anyone remembered Stefan Molyneux or anyone substantial speaking to the topic, give me a shout, would you?)

Throughout the evolution of mankind, the most stupid, wreckless, irresponsible individuals had a rough time surviving, if they did at all in-fact. They'd 'invite an unproportionally greater amount of bad luck' in their existence... As in: the most bloodthirsty, careless, greedy, bold, aggressive, disorganised, restless, psychopathic... etc. would end up torn to pieces by a saber tooth tiger, they'd be the most likely candidates for being stabbed in the back, they'd be discarded first during piece-time for continously causing trouble... etc.

Especially in piece-time and more importantly if they had no unique-essential skill-set(s) making them indispensable during those piece-times.

If we said that throughout the last few thousands of years there was a general trend for humanity becoming more 'domesticated' and was slowly, one-by-one removing mechanisms that in the many hundreds of thousands of years of its past served as 'natural discarding processes', it might be actually biology 'disagreeing and pushing back' against those intents on humanity's manifested new direction towards changing how it wanted to live as a society. Obviously I don't think biology has a conscience or that humanity knew / knows what it is doing as a whole but this thought came up as I was reading about how Ebola's latest mutations were documented, degree and type of infection rate, their implications... etc.

Think of this. A chosen 'bug' is treated with a drug, effectively killing it off or making it lay dormant somewhere undisturbed, out of reach for sufficient re-propagation, it basically means no harm. (ie. - Erradicated, like Smallpox) That means, that the 'free-market' of pathogens don't need to compete with, don't interact with said 'bug' and can have their 'free-rein' until they're countered or the circumstances change for their detriment.

Another scenario is, when a chosen 'bug' becomes Drug Resistant (MultiDR, TotalDR... etc) that'd had to have come about by either insufficient treatment or mutation (or a mixture of both). Meaning, something harmful was not countered with sufficient force and it got updated/manged to outgrow the current capacity for combating it. It still only exists in a small quantity but its potential for a not yet seen devastation grows by each failing to isolate it from the rest of the world. Not because it's impossible to find an antidote but because its potential for debilitating too many, too quickly before any meaningful progress could be made to research it, understand it at least, is so very unlikely.

What if something, similar-in-structure was going on in the realm of morality interconnected with genome selection for Critical Thinking Resistance and what we are looking at currently is an age old 'mental-bug' getting out of hand, further aided by 'fascinated-witch-doctors' whom rather than calling for immediate and swiftly administered inoculation shots (do witch-doctors do that?! ) , choose to conduct experiments in the name of (bad) science on the larger population?

This is no way to aim for conspiracy theories but I was wondering how come people are so susceptible to what best can be described as instigation, division, backing ridiculously silly ideas more viciously in more and more numbers (meanwhile, facts and reasoning, readily available, at the fingertips of everyone)

Is this the rise of a 'mental-bug' that once got nearly eradicated but 'humanity stopped with the treatment at the first sign of relief'?

How to counter an anti-reason epidemic, where those 'infected' show signs of Critical-Thinking-Resistance?

[barn]

A very interesting video from Sargon Of Akkad.

I believe, it's highly pertinent in this thread.

Enjoy!