Praise for Virus of the Mind Brodie is infectious, indeed, but his virus breeds truth.

Those who ingest this book are at great risk of seeing how things really are. ouglas !ushkoff, the author of Media Virus" and #othing $acred This isn%t a bookit%s a &ental adventure. Virus of the Mind sti&ulates, educates, and awakens you to what really ha''ens to the things you see and hear. Buy it and study it. )effrey *ito&er, the author of The $ales Bible The true ear&ark of genius is taking a co&'le+ conce't and &aking it si&'le ,for 'eo'le like &e- to understand and, far &ore i&'ortantly, utili.e. /f the &e&e truly is funda&ental to behavior ,child i&itates child, child i&itates adult, world leader i&itates world leader . . . -, then all of us need to s'read &e&es with &uch greater intentionand care" Brodie%s hu&or &akes this book a fun, absorbing, educational, and at ti&es controversial read. Pick u' this book, then give it to so&eone you love and you will s'read a truly valuable Virus" 0evin 1ogan, Psy. ., the co2author of /rresistible 3ttraction and author of The Psychology of Persuasion Virus of the Mind can do for &e&etics what 4arl $agan has done for astrono&y and astro'hysics with 4os&os. 5lan Morit., Ph. ., director of the /nstitute for Me&etic !esearch

V/!6$ 78 T15 M/#

3lso by !ichard Brodie *etting Past 709 3 $traightforward *uide to 1aving a 8antastic :ife

1ay 1ouse Titles of !elated /nterest ;76 43# 153: ;76! :/85, the &ovie, starring :ouise :. 1ay < 8riends ,available as a =2 V 'rogra& and an e+'anded >2 V set- ?atch the trailer at9 www.:ouise1ayMovie.co& the shift9 the &ovie, starring ?ayne ?. yer ,available as a =2 V 'rogra& and an e+'anded >2 V set- ?atch the trailer at9 www. yerMovie.co&

T15 B/7:7*; 78 B5:/589 6nleashing the Power of 4onsciousness, Matter < Miracles, by Bruce 1. :i'ton, Ph. . 8!34T3: T/M59 The $ecret of >@=> and a #ew ?orld 3ge, by *regg Braden T15 :3$T !7P76T9 $to' the 5'ide&ic" by Bill Milliken M/# P!7*!3MM/#*9 8ro& Persuasion and Brainwashing to $elf21el' and Practical Meta'hysics, by 5ldon Taylor ,hardcover2with24 5A46$5$ B5*7#5"9 1ow to 4hange :ifelong, $elf2 efeating Thinking 1abits, by r. ?ayne ?. yer P7?5! vs. 87!459 The 1idden eter&inants of 1u&an Behavior, by avid !. 1awkins, M. ., Ph. . Please visit 1ay 1ouse 6$39 www.hayhouse.co& B 1ay 1ouse 3ustralia9 www.hayhouse.co&.au 1ay 1ouse 609 www.hayhouse.co.uk 1ay 1ouse $outh 3frica9 www.hayhouse.co..a 1ay 1ouse /ndia9 www.hayhouse.co.in

V/!6$ 78 T15 M/# The #ew $cience of the Me&e !ichard Brodie

4arlsbad, 4alifornia C #ew ;ork 4ity :ondon C $ydney C )ohannesburg Vancouver C 1ong 0ong C #ew elhi

4o'yright D =EEG by !ichard Brodie Published and distributed in the 6nited $tates by9 1ay 1ouse, /nc.9 www.hay house.co& C Published and distributed in 3ustralia by9 1ay 1ouse 3ustralia Pty. :td.9 www.hayhouse.co&.au C Published and distributed in the 6nited 0ingdo& by9 1ay 1ouse 60, :td.9 www.hayhouse.co.uk C Published and distributed in the !e'ublic of $outh 3frica by9 1ay 1ouse $3 ,Pty-, :td.9 www.hayhouse.co..a C istributed in 4anada by9 !aincoast9 www.raincoast.co& C Published in /ndia by9 1ay 1ouse Publishers /ndia9 www.hayhouse.co.in 5ditorial su'ervision9 )ill 0ra&er C 4o&fort esign9 Tricia Breidenthal /nde+er9 !ichard

3ll rights reserved. #o 'art of this book &ay be re'roduced by any &echanical, 'hotogra'hic, or electronic 'rocess, or in the for& of a 'honogra'hic recordingH nor &ay it be stored in a retrieval syste&, trans&itted, or otherwise be co'ied for 'ublic or 'rivate useother than for fair use as brief Iuotations e&bodied in articles and reviewswithout 'rior written 'er&ission of the 'ublisher. The author of this book does not dis'ense &edical advice or 'rescribe the use of any techniIue as a for& of treat&ent for 'hysical, e&otional, or &edical 'roble&s without the advice of a 'hysician, either directly or indirectly. The intent of the author is only to offer infor&ation of a general nature to hel' you in your Iuest for e&otional and s'iritual well2being. /n the event you use any of the infor&ation in this book for yourself, which is your constitutional right, the author and the 'ublisher assu&e no res'onsibility for your actions. Previously 'ublished by /ntegral Press ,/$B#9 @2EGJG@@=2>2K:ibrary of 4ongress 4ataloging2in2Publication ata Brodie, !ichard. Virus of the &ind 9 the new science of the &e&e L !ichard Brodie.22=st ed. '. c&. /ncludes inde+. 7riginally 'ublished9 $eattle, ?ash. 9 /ntegral Press, c=EEG. /$B# EMN2=2O@=E2>OGN2J ,hardcover 9 alk. 'a'er- =. $ocial 'sychology. >. *enetic 'sychology. J. 4ontagion ,$ocial 'sychology- O. Public o'inion. K. Me&etics. /. Title. 1MG>G.BMG >@@E J@>22dc>> >@@N@OGJKE

/$B#9 EMN2=2O@=E2>OGN2J => == =@ @E O J > = =st 1ay 1ouse edition, May >@@E Printed in the 6nited $tates of 3&erica

8or &y &other, Mary 3nn Brodie, who got &e thinking . . .

47#T5#T$ /ntroduction9 4risis of the Mind 4ha'ter =9 Me&es 4ha'ter >9 Mind and Behavior 4ha'ter J9 Viruses 4ha'ter O9 5volution 4ha'ter K9 The 5volution of Me&es 4ha'ter G9 $e+9 The !oot of 3ll 5volution 4ha'ter M9 $urvival and 8ear 4ha'ter N9 1ow ?e *et Progra&&ed 4ha'ter E9 4ultural Viruses 4ha'ter =@9 The Me&etics of !eligion 4ha'ter ==9 esigner Viruses ,1ow to $tart a 4ult4ha'ter =>9 isinfection !eco&&ended !eading 3cknowledg&ents 3bout the 3uthor

?arning9 This book contains a live &ind virus. o not read further unless you are willing to be infected. The infection &ay affect the way you think in subtle or not2so2 subtle waysor even turn your current worldview inside out.

/#T!7 64T/7# 4risis of the Mind ?hat a waste it is to lose one%s &ind or not to have a &ind is very wasteful. an Ruayle, &utating the &e&es in the 6nited #egro 4ollege 8und%s &otto, 3 &ind is a terrible thing to waste. There is so&e good news in this book. $o before / get into how &ind viruses are s'reading wildly throughout the worldinfecting 'eo'le with unwanted 'rogra&&ing like the Michelangelo co&'uter virus infects co&'uters with self2destruct instructions/%ll start with the good news. . . . The good news is that the long2awaited scientific theory unifying biology, 'sychology, and cognitive science is here. 3n interdisci'linary effort by scientists in all those fields over the last >@ years or soreally back to =NKE and 4harles arwin, if you likehas 'roduced a new science called &e&etics. The science of &e&etics is based on evolution. arwin%s theory of the evolution of s'ecies by natural selection utterly transfor&ed the field of biology. $cientists are now a''lying &odern evolutionary theory to the way the &ind works, the way 'eo'le learn and grow, and the way culture 'rogresses. /n so doing, the field of 'sychology will ulti&ately be as transfor&ed by the scientists researching &e&etics as biology was by arwin. 8or those of us who yearn to understand ourselves, learning about &e&etics gives us a huge a&ount of satisfaction. / also believe that 'eo'le who understand &e&etics will have an increasing advantage in life, es'ecially in 'reventing the&selves fro& being &ani'ulated or taken advantage of. /f you better understand how your &ind works, you can better navigate through a world of increasingly subtle &ani'ulation. #ow the bad news. . . . The bad news is that this book raises &ore Iuestions than it answers. /n 'articular, &e&etics has uncovered the e+istence of viruses of the &ind but gives us few insights into what to do about the&. Viruses of the &ind have been with us throughout history, but they are constantly evolving and changing. They are infectious 'ieces of our culture that s'read ra'idly throughout a 'o'ulation, altering 'eo'le%s thoughts and lives in their wake. Mind viruses include everything fro& the relatively har&less e+a&'les, such as &iniskirts and slang 'hrases, to those that seriously derail 'eo'le%s lives, such as the cycle of unwed &others on welfare, the 4ri's and Bloods youth gangs, and the Branch avidian religious cult. ?hen these 'ieces of culture are ones we like, there%s no 'roble&. 1owever, Sust as the Michelangelo co&'uter virus 'rogra&s co&'uters with instructions to destroy their data, viruses of the &ind can 'rogra& us to think and behave in ways that are destructive to our lives. This is the &ost sur'rising and &ost 'rofound insight fro& the science of &e&etics9 your thoughts are not always your own original ideas. ;ou catch thoughtsyou get infected with the&, both directly fro& other 'eo'le and indirectly fro& viruses of the &ind. Peo'le don%t see& to like the idea that they aren%t in control of their thoughts. The reluctance of 'eo'le to even consider this notion is 'robably the &ain reason the scientific work done so far is not better known. 3s we%ll see, ideas 'eo'le don%t like have a hard ti&e catching on. 8urther co&'ounding the 'roble& is that you don%t i&&ediately know whether the 'rogra&&ing you get fro& a given &ind virus is har&ful or beneficial. #obody ever Soined a religious cult with the intention of getting brainwashed, &oving to *uyana, and co&&itting suicide. ?hen the teenage Bill *ates caught the 'oker2'laying &ind virus at 1arvard, was that har&ful because it ke't hi& fro& his studiesT 7r was it beneficial because it hel'ed sway his decision to dro' out, start Microsoft, and beco&e a &ulti2 billionaireT Paradig& $hift

5very so often, the world of science e+'eriences so&ething called a 'aradig& shift. That ha''ens when one of the basic, underlying assu&'tions we%ve been living with changes, such as when we shifted fro& looking at the universe as revolving around the earth to the earth revolving around the sun. 3nother shift occurred when 5instein discovered the relationshi's between s'ace and ti&e and between energy and &atter. 5ach of these 'aradig& shifts took so&e ti&e to 'enetrate the scientific co&&unity and even longer to beco&e acce'ted by the general 'ublic. Viruses of the &ind, and the whole science of &e&etics, re'resent a &aSor 'aradig& shift in the science of the &ind. Because understanding this new science involves a significant change in the way 'eo'le think about the &ind and culture, it has been difficult for the& to gras'. 3s with any 'aradig& shift, &e&etics doesn%t fit into our e+isting way of looking at things, of understanding the world. The trick to learning a new 'aradig& is to set aside your current one while you%re learning rather than atte&'t to fit the new knowledge into your e+isting &odel. /t won%t fit" /f you%re willing to set aside your current thinking long enough to consider four conce'ts, so&e or all of which &ay be new to you, you%ll be rewarded with an understanding of &e&etics. ?ith that understanding, / ho'e, co&es a call to action for anyone concerned with the future of hu&an life. The first conce'tthe star of the showis the &e&e, which / introduce in 4ha'ter = and which 'lays a leading role throughout this book. The &e&e, which rhy&es with bea&, is the basic building block of culture in the sa&e way the gene is the basic building block of life. 3s / outline in 4ha'ter >, &e&es are not only the building blocks of culture on a large scale&aking u' countries, languages, and religionsbut also on a s&all scale9 &e&es are the building blocks of your &ind, the 'rogra&&ing of your &ental co&'uter. $econd is the conce't of virus. /t%s well known that viruses e+ist in biology and in the world of co&'uters. #ow we%ll see how they show u' in the world of &ind and culture, the world of &e&etics. /n 4ha'ter J, /%ll draw 'arallels between the three different universes that viruses live in to show what we can e+'ect fro& &ind viruses in the future. The third conce't that contributes to this 'aradig& shift is evolution. 5volution is one of those words that &any 'eo'le use, thinking they are talking about the sa&e thing but really having different ideas of what it is and &eans. /%ll discuss scientists% &ost current theory of evolution in 4ha'ter O and how it a''lies to &e&es in 4ha'ter K. The fourth conce't necessary to understanding &ind viruses is the new science of evolutionary 'sychology. This field e+a&ines the biases and &echanis&s of our &inds that evolved to su''ort our survival and re'roduction. $o&e of these biases take the for& of 'sychological buttons that can be 'ushed to 'enetrate our &ental defenses. / called this 'art of the book 4risis of the Mind rather than si&'ly /ntroduction because the for&er 'ushes &ore buttons9 it attracts &ore attention, and &ore 'eo'le will read it. / called this book Virus of the Mind rather than /ntroduction to Me&etics for the sa&e reason. 4urrently a controversial to'ic, evolutionary 'sychology e+'lores and e+'lains &any of the stereoty'ical differences between &en and wo&en, es'ecially in the real& of &ating behavior. 4ha'ter G is about the &ating 'art of evolutionary 'sychologyH 4ha'ter M covers the survival as'ect.

Me&etics builds on these four conce'tual blocks to for& a new 'aradig& of how culture evolved and is evolving. /t illu&inates a &aSor decision 'oint for hu&anity9 ?ill we allow natural selection to evolve us rando&ly, without regard for our ha''iness, satisfaction, or s'iritT 7r will we sei.e the reins of our own evolution and 'ick a direction for ourselvesT Me&etics gives us the knowledge and 'ower to direct our own evolution &ore than we%ve done at any ti&e in history. #ow that we have that 'ower, what will we do with itT 3 Threat to 1u&anity 3 &ind virus is not s'read by snee.ing, like the flu, or by se+, like 3/ $. /t%s not a 'hysical thing. Mind viruses are s'read by so&ething as si&'le as co&&unicating. / discuss the ways we get 'rogra&&ed by &ind viruses in 4ha'ter N. /n a way, &ind viruses are the 'rice of one of the freedo&s &ost dear to us9 freedo& of s'eech. The &ore freedo& there is to 'ut forth any co&&unication, the &ore welco&ing the environ&ent for &ind viruses. $o&e &ind viruses arise s'ontaneously, as / discuss in 4ha'ters E and =@H so&e are created intentionally, as / cover in 4ha'ter ==. But all of the& share one thing in co&&on9 7nce created, a virus of the &ind gains a life inde'endent of its creator and evolves Iuickly to infect as &any 'eo'le as 'ossible. Viruses of the &ind are not so&e far2off future worry like the sun burning out or the earth being hit by a co&et. They are here with us nowhave been with us since before recorded historyand they are evolving to beco&e better and better at their Sob of infecting us. ?e are being infected in so&e new ways ,television, 'o'ular &usic, sales techniIues-, but also in very ancient ways ,education, religious teachings, even talking to our closest friends-. 7ur 'arents unwittingly infected us when we were kids. /f you have children, chances are that you are s'reading the viruses to the& every day. !ead a news'a'erT 4atch a &ind virus. :isten to the radioT 4atch a &ind virus. 1ang out with your friends and shoot the bree.e about nothing in 'articularT 4atch one &ind virus after another. /f your life isn%t going the way you would like, you can bet &ind viruses are 'laying a large 'art. 1aving relationshi' 'roble&sT Mind viruses take over 'arts of your brain and divert you fro& what would give you long2ter& ha''iness. 1aving trouble in your Sob or careerT Mind viruses cloud your future and steer you along a career 'ath that su''orts their agenda, not your Iuality of life. 4ult religions are s'ringing u' everywhere, the result of &ore and &ore 'owerful &ind viruses. These cults take control of 'eo'le%s &inds and &ake &e&bers engage in bi.arre behavior, ranging fro& odd rituals to &ass suicide. /f you think you%re i&&une, re&e&ber9 nobody ever set out intentionally to Soin a cult and have their &ind taken over. /t%s the work of tricky and 'ernicious &ind viruses. 3nd once the founder of the cult starts the 'rocess, the virus of the &ind takes on a life of its own. Because of &ass &edia and direct elections, the 6.$. and other govern&ents are beco&ing &ore and &ore subSect to infection by &ind viruses. 3 'olitician today cannot be elected without co&ing u' with an effective i&age that 'ushes 'eo'le%s buttons and gets the votes. ?e%re having a crisis, and only / can fi+ it, they say, or Those other guys have caused all these 'roble&sH surely any change is better than what we%ve got" Politicians% well2crafted i&ages are hooks into so&e of the &ost elaborate and 'ervasive &ind viruses infecting society today. ?hat brand of soft drink do you buyT The ones that sell the &ost cost twice as &uch as unadvertised store brands. The e+tra &oney goes into television advertising, sending out the s'ores of ever2&ore2'enetrating &ind viruses that take control of your &ind and coerce you to 'ush your sho''ing cart over to their shelf. $uccessfully 'rogra&&ing your &ind to believe that you 'refer that brand, advertising agencies are a&ong the &ost bra.en and calculating of the &ind2virus instigators.

The unchecked s'read of &ind viruses shows u' &ost alar&ingly in the state of our children today. $tarting with the inner cities and Iuickly s'reading, the &ind viruses infecting &any kids are 'ushing the& into ho'elessness, single &otherhood, and gang warfare. Many young 'eo'le see& to be losing their sense of values and taking off in so&e very unsettling directions. 4ha'ter => discusses the 'ossibility of disinfection for our children and ourselves. My 3genda :et &e tell you right now/ have an agenda in writing this book, and that is to &ake a difference in 'eo'le%s lives. $o&e of the content found herein could be used for self2 i&'rove&ent. ;ou &ight not e+'ect a book about science to include ideas fro& the self2 develo'&ent field, but the science of &e&etics deals with the &ind, with 'eo'le%s lives. 6nderstanding &e&etics can naturally hel' increase the Iuality of 'eo'le%s lives. /n the first 'lace, / would never have written this bookor &y first one, *etting Past 70if / had not intentionally disinfected &yself of &any of the &e&es that / got as / grew u' and then re'rogra&&ed &yself with new &e&es. ?hat new &e&es would you choose to re'rogra& yourself with, given the chanceT That%s entirely u' to you. / had no idea what that even &eant when / started this research. #ow that / do, / choose to 'rogra& &yself with &e&es that su''ort &y values in life rather than ones that su''ort the agendas of viruses of the &ind. ;ou can do that or so&ething different. But you won%t have the o'tion to do anything like that unless you understand &e&etics. The reason /%& writing this book is that / really enSoy &aking a difference in 'eo'le%s lives. / believe that knowledge of &e&etics is i&'ortant, so /%& s'reading the word. /%& not Sust writing this book as an intellectual e+ercise. 3lthough Virus of the Mind is about science, it%s obviously not a scientific te+t. /t%s designed with an intention, and that is to consciously s'read the new 'aradig& of &e&etics because / think it%s of value. 4onsciously s'reading ideas you consider i&'ortant is one way to co&bat &ind viruses. 1ave you ever wondered why life see&s so co&'licated today&ore co&'licated and stressful year after yearT 7ne reason is the ever2evolving ar&y of &ind viruses, taking over a greater and greater 'ortion of your &ind, diverting you fro& your 'ursuit of ha''iness and due to have an even greater effect on the ne+t generation. 5ver wonder why, with greater and greater 'rogress and technology, life doesn%t see& to get si&'ler, but Sust the reverseT 5very ti&e you%re e+'osed to a new virus of the &ind, your &ind takes on Sust a little &ore stress, a little &ore confusion. Peo'le are flocking to everything fro& 'sychothera'y to the #ew 3ge &ove&ent to try to relieve the crushing burden of stress. octors are &ore and &ore certain that e+cess stress is our nu&ber one killer, but e+'erts disagree on what causes stress and how to cure it. The &edical co&&unity talked of stressed2out ty'e 3 and laid2back ty'e B 'ersonalities, with no clear idea of what caused so&eone to have one or the other. 3nd even the ty'e B%s had stress2related sy&'to&s at ti&es. The new science of &e&etics gives &uch insight into the 'roble& of stress. Taking over bits of your &ind and 'ulling you in different directions, &ind viruses distract you fro& what%s &ost i&'ortant to you in life and cause confusion, stress, and even des'air. Mind viruses infect your &ind, 'rogra&&ing you with directions that 'oint you away fro& where you want to go. $ince this ha''ens unconsciously, all you%re aware of is that as you grow older, life beco&es &ore stressful, less fun, &ore of a drag, and less &eaningful. ;ou &ay feel your &otivation sli''ing away. ;ou &ay get less e+cited about things than you used to. These are so&e of the effects of infection by a virus of the &ind, an infection you can%t avoid entirely short of living in co&'lete isolation fro& birth. ;ou can, however, begin to disinfect yourself. My ho'e is that the understanding you gain fro& this book will be a big first ste' in that disinfection. But it takes a bit of effort to

teach yourself a new 'aradig&. Birth of a #ew Paradig& /t%s always been hard for scientists to co&&unicate their ideas to the general 'ublic. $cience, by its very nature, is an artificial selection of ideas based on rigorous testing of their usefulness rather than on 'eo'le%s gut feelings. 3s such, new scientific ideas tend to rub 'eo'le the wrong way at first and 'roduce 'redictable reactions. ?hen 4harles arwin first 'ro'osed his theories on natural selection in =NKE, there were several stages of 'ublic reactionones that any revolutionary new scientific idea see&s to go through before beco&ing acce'ted9 =. 4o&'lacencyLMarginali.ation. 3t first, the new theory is seen as an off2the2wall idea9 Iuaint, but not a serious threat to the do&inant worldview'erha's a si&'le variant of so&e already2known theory. Me&etics is graduating fro& this stage to the ne+t as / write this. 5ditors of The #ew ;ork Ti&es Maga.ine of )anuary >>, =EEK, 'icked u' on the growing use of the word &e&e and &ildly atte&'ted to &arginali.e it9 3 ske'tic &ight wonder what the notion of a &e&e adds to the 'aradig& of cultural evolution. Perha's there is nothing new under the sun. By the end of this book, you will discover that rather than adding to the e+isting 'aradig& of cultural evolution, &e&etics itself is a new and &ore 'owerful 'aradig&. >. !idicule. 4o&'lacency fades as the new idea refuses to die, resulting in ridicule by 'eo'le who clearly and laughingly see that it%s inconsistent with so&ething they hold to be true. /n arwin%s case, conte&'oraries laughed at the naturalist%s inability to see the necessity of a $u're&e esigner doing the selecting. arwin was frustrated by his see&ing inability to co&&unicate this new 'aradig&. $i&ilar ridicule of &e&etics is seen fro& ti&e to ti&e in the few 'laces where this to'ic is discussed. J. 4riticis&. 3s the new idea gains acce'tance, 'eo'le who have held conflicting worldviews for so&e ti&e, or who have their re'utation invested in old 'aradig&s, take off their gloves. arwinis& is still being attacked today by creationists, who believe it conflicts with their Truth. /t%s 'ossible that this book will touch off serious criticis& of &e&etics. /f it does, we shouldn%t worryH it%s the nature of a 'aradig& shift. O. 3cce'tance. 8inally, enough 'eo'le &ake the lea' to the new 'aradig& that it gains 'sychological as well as intellectual acce'tance. Those who understand the new ideas are no longer as alone and unloved as 4olu&bus a&ong the flat25arth believers. The new world agrees on the new 'aradig&. Peer 'ressure starts to work for it rather than against it. /t begins to be taught in ele&entary schools. $cientists can &ove on to their ne+t challenge. 7ur &inds, it see&s, are not well eIui''ed to understand how they the&selves work. ;ou, in fact, &ay at first be very confused or distracted, or suddenly get tired, as you read thisH you &ay even beco&e angry Sust fro& reading these words. 3lthough right now you &ay think that this state&ent is absurd, those feelings and sy&'to&s are actually the defense &echanis&s of &ind viruses. They have evolved to be very 'rotective of the 'arts of your &ind that they%ve stolen, and any atte&'ts to cleanse yourself of the& can trigger reactions. /f you e+'erience one or &ore of these reactions while reading this book, don%t worry9 the reaction will 'ass if you ride it out. /f you do, you%ll be rewarded with a 'owerful tool

for your future . . . and the future of hu&anity.

413PT5! 7#5 M5M5$ There are no whole truthsH all truths are half2truths. /t is trying to treat the& as whole truths that 'lays the devil. 3lfred #orth ?hitehead / first heard the word &e&e several years ago during a ty'ical hard2nosed 'olitical discussion in the Microsoft cafeteria. /t wasn%t often in those days that / heard a new word while dining. / 'robably had enough arrogance to think that, being fairly well2read and having attended 1arvard for three and a half years, / had already learned &ost words likely to be used in a cafeteria setting. / was lunching with 4harles $i&onyi and *reg 0usnick, two of &y &ost estee&ed colleagues at Microsoft. 1aving lunch with brilliant and well2educated &en of this sort was always &y secret reason for working at Microsoft. 4harles, in fact, hired &e to work there in =EN= and assigned &e to write the first version of Microsoft ?ord a year later. ,That turned out well. / now reali.e ?ord had good &e&es.?e were talking about 'olitics and govern&ent, about why 'ork2barrel 'roSects continued to get funded, about why ineffective or corru't 'oliticians continued to get elected. ?ere voters Sust stu'idT ,3 co&&on &e&e at Microsoft was that if so&ething didn%t get done the way it ought to, there was a good chance it was because so&ebody was Sust stu'id.- 4harles re'lied, with his 1ungarian accent and custo&ary 'ith, through bites of his usual 4aesar salad, no anchovies, add red 'e''ers9 *ood &e&es. *esundheit" / said. #o, goood &ee&es, 4harles reiterated. *ood whatT / asked insistently. Mee&es, &eeeee&es" 4harles rebutted. Me&es, chi&ed in 0usnick. ;ou%re kidding" said 4harles, incredulous. ;ou have never heard of &e&esT ;ou don%t know about &e&esT chi&ed in 0usnick. Me&esT / re'eated, starting to sound like a &ooing cow, with about as &uch to contribute to this conversation. ?hat%s a &e&eT /t%s like Beethoven%s 8ifth $y&'hony, 4harles ventured. 0usnick de&urred9 ?ait a &inute/ disagree with that. /%& not sure Beethoven%s 8ifth $y&'hony is a &e&e. /t &ay have good &e&es, but it%s not a &e&e. 4harles wrinkled his brow to 'onder this challenge to his 'osition. ?ell&u&ble. 1e actually said &u&ble. That%s a &e&e ,or is itT- he 'icked u' fro& his days at Aero+ Palo 3lto !esearch 4enter ,P3!4-. /t served the function of 'reventing anyone else fro& using u' the conversational bandwidth ,that is, talking- while he was audibly considering what to say ne+t. 7kay, you%re right, 4harles conceded. Beethoven%s 8ifth $y&'hony isn%t a &e&e. Ta2ta2ta2T6M is the &e&e. 0usnick said, #o, / don%t even think ta2ta2ta2T6M is a &e&e. 7r if it is, it%s a &e&e in a very li&ited sense of the word. But it%s a 'oor e+a&'le. ?hat%s a good e+a&'leT / 'i'ed u', getting curiouser and curiouser. ?ell, said 0usnick, / guess if you were to go around hu&&ing ta2ta2ta2T6M, that would be a good &e&e. But / don%t think that%s what 4harles is talking about. The fact that there are &illions of co'ies of Beethoven%s 8ifth $y&'hony on record albu&s and 4 s doesn%t &ake it a good &e&e. 7h, / beg to differ, said 4harles. 0usnick said, 1&&. $o you%re saying a library is Sust a book%s way of &aking another book. Before / had a chance to analy.e that 'ithy re&ark, he went on9 $ee, / thinkand this &ay be a 'hiloso'hical 'ointthat &e&es have to do with hu&an

beings. $o if you &ake a bunch of 'hotoco'ies U of a docu&ent, that doesn%t give it good &e&es. But if you hand the& out and 'eo'le start &e&ori.ing the& and reciting the&, then it%s a good &e&e. 4harles%s &ind 'rocessed this thought, an aweso&e sight to behold. ?ell, &u&ble. 7kay. *ood 'oint. Thank you. #o one said anything for a few seconds, and / began to 'anic as / reali.ed that they thought they were done with the conversation and / still didn%t know what a &e&e was. / was getting that it had so&ething to do with infor&ation, and / thought /%d float a trial balloon. $o, / said, a &e&e is any infor&ationT 4harles and 0usnick o'ened their &ouths si&ultaneously, and 0usnick said, May /T Thank you. 3 &e&e is anything that gets i&itated. /t%s the basic unit of i&itation. $o a yawn would be a &e&e, / ventured. 1&&. #o. ?ell, yes. / don%t know. That%s a tricky one. 1eh2heh2heh. 1oh2hoh2hoh, chuckled 4harles. ;ou got caught by your own tra'. #o, / didn%t, said 0usnick. /t%s Sust that a yawn is behavior, and / think &e&es are thoughts. 4o&e on" e+clai&ed 4harles. ;ou are asking the wrong Iuestion" ?ho cares if a yawn is a &e&e or notT" The right Iuestion is, V?hat are the interesting &e&esT% 5+actly, chi&ed in 0usnick. ?hat are the interesting &e&esT / asked, always good at following instructions. *ood Iuestion, affir&ed 4harles. / s'ent &uch of the ne+t two years looking for answers to that Iuestion. Me&es and Me&etics The &e&e is the secret code of hu&an behavior, a !osetta stone finally giving us the key to understanding religion, 'olitics, 'sychology, and cultural evolution. That key, though, also unlocks Pandora%s bo+, o'ening u' such so'histicated new techniIues for &ass &ani'ulation that we &ay soon look on today%s &ani'ulative TV co&&ercials, 'olitical s'eeches, and televangelists as fond re&e&brances of the good old days. The word &e&e was coined by 7+ford biologist !ichard awkins in his =EMG book The $elfish *ene. $ince then it has been tossed about by awkins and other evolutionary biologists, 'sychologists such as 1enry Plotkin, and cognitive scientists such as ouglas 1ofstadter and aniel ennett in an effort to flesh out the biological, 'sychological, and 'hiloso'hical i&'lications of this new &odel of consciousness and thought. U The &e&e has a central 'lace in the 'aradig& shift that%s currently taking 'lace in the science of life and culture. /n the new 'aradig&, we look at cultural evolution fro& the 'oint of view of the &e&e, rather than the 'oint of view of an individual or society. ?hy bother to look at life in this new, u'setting, inside2out wayT ?ell, for the sa&e reason e+'lorers started to look at the earth as round instead of flat, and the sa&e reason astrono&ers sto''ed looking at the universe as if it revolved around the earth9 it &akes a lot &ore sense, and you can get &ore e+citing things acco&'lished when you find a better &odel for e+'laining the way the world works. $uch a &odel is the theory of the &e&e, or &e&etics. Me&etics is the study of the workings of &e&es9 how they interact, re'licate, and evolve. The science of &e&etics is the &ind universe%s analogue to genetics, which studies the sa&e things about genes in the biological universe. efining the Me&e

/t%s not so easy to answer even the obvious Iuestion, ?hat is a &e&eT /f you ask a biologist, the answer is likely to be along the lines of awkins%s original definition9 Biological efinition of Me&e ,fro& awkinsThe &e&e is the basic unit of cultural trans&ission, or i&itation. 3ccording to this definition, everything we call culture is co&'osed of ato&like &e&es, which co&'ete with one another. These &e&es s'read by being 'assed fro& &ind to &ind in the sa&e way genes s'read by being 'assed down through s'er& and egg. The &e&es that win this co&'etitionthose that are successful at 'enetrating the &ost &indsare the ones res'onsible for the activities and creations that constitute 'resent2 day culture. The &ost interesting &e&es to a biologist have to do with behavior. awkins%s original e+a&'les of &e&es were9 . . . tunes, ideas, catch2'hrases, clothes fashions, ways of &aking 'ots or of building arches. 3ccording to the biological definition, wo&en wear long skirts one year, then a new short2skirt &e&e catches on for whatever reason, and now wo&en wear short skirts. Po'ular songs co&'ete for the To' O@, each a &e&e or 'erha's a bundle of &e&es. Then 'eo'le start hu&&ing the catchy tunes, s'reading those &e&es even further. 5ngineers build bridges on the cantilever 'rinci'leH then the sus'ension bridge is invented and its &e&e s'reads Iuickly to beco&e the new state of the art in bridge building. This biological definition is kind of satisfying, because it gives us a way to reduce all of culture to &anageable 'ieces and start to label the& and see how they interact and evolve. 8rustratingly, though, it doesn%t lend &uch insight into the Iuestion of why certain &e&es s'read and others don%t. $o let%s 'ut that definition on hold for a &o&ent and look at so&e other 'oints of view. 3 Psychological efinition /f a 'sychologist were asked what a &e&e is, he would give a slightly different answer, one that illu&inates &ore the workings of the &ind than the co&'onents of behavior. 1ere is 'sychologist 1enry Plotkin%s definition of &e&e9 Psychological efinition of Me&e ,fro& Plotkin3 &e&e is the unit of cultural heredity analogous to the gene. /t is the internal re'resentation of knowledge. This definition stresses the analogy to genes, which are tiny che&ical 'atterns living on strands of #3. 3s those tiny #3 'atterns cause all kinds of e+ternal effectseye and hair color, blood ty'e, even whether you grow u' to be a hu&an or a golden retrieverthe &e&es in your head cause behavioral effects. :ikening your &ind to a co&'uter, &e&es are the software 'art of your 'rogra&&ingH the brain and central nervous syste&, 'roduced by your genes, are the hardware 'art. The &e&es in this definition don%t live in the e+ternal tra''ings of culture, but in the &ind. 3fter all, it is in each individual%s &ind where the co&'etition for &e&es takes 'lace. 3ccording to this definition, a wo&an &ight have in &ind a &e&e like /t%s good to be aware of the current fashionH another &e&e, ?o&en who dress fashionably get aheadH and a third &e&e, / want to get ahead. ?earing short skirts when they beco&e fashionable is a behavior that results fro& having all these &e&es working together in her &ind. /f there are enough wo&en who have these su''orting &e&es in their &inds, all it would take would be one &ore &e&e$hort skirts are fashionableto cause a 'roliferation of raised he&lines. Bridge2building &ethods evolve because of &e&es. 3n engineer &ight be 'rogra&&ed with &e&es such as $us'ension bridges are the &ost efficient for this kind of SobH 5ngineers who do a good Sob get their bosses% a''rovalH and *etting the a''roval of

&y boss is i&'ortant. ?ithout any of these three, the engineer &ight not build a sus'ension bridge. 3ll three &e&es acting together cause so&ething to get built out in the world. 7f course, the engineer works with other engineers, construction workers, tea&sters, and so on, all behaving as directed by their &e&es. 6nder this definition, &e&es are to a hu&an%s behavior what our genes are to our bodies9 internal re'resentations of knowledge that result in outward effects on the world. *enes are hidden, internal 'ieces of infor&ation stored in an e&bryo that result, with the influence of its environ&ent, in the flesh and blood of the develo'ed organis&. Me&es are hidden, internal re'resentations of knowledge that result, again along with environ&ental influence, in e+ternal behavior and the 'roduction of cultural artifacts such as skirts and bridges. /f / look around and see short skirts, that &ight cause the 'roduction of a &e&e in &y &ind such as $hort skirts are in fashion. But the &e&e is in &y &ind, not on Meg !yan%s body. /f so&eone is having difficulties in life, a &e&etic 'sychologist &ight e+'lore what &e&es the 'atient has that are 'roducing the undesirable results. 7nce discovered, those &e&es could be changed. U This way of looking at &e&es is useful for understanding how 'eo'le work. 1owever, it still has so&e 'roble&s as a co&'lete theory of the evolution of knowledge. /t centers around the hu&an &ind, and not all knowledge in the world is stored in 'eo'le%s &inds. 3s 'eo'le interact with other for&s of knowledgegeogra'hy, the genetic knowledge contained in each organis&%s #3, the astrono&ical knowledge of the universehow does that affect culture and behaviorT 3 4ognitive efinition ?e can eli&inate ourselves fro& the 'icture entirely, then, and look at an even &ore abstract definition of &e&e. This one is fro& cognitive scientist and 'hiloso'her aniel ennett9 4ognitive efinition of Me&e ,fro& ennett3 &e&e is an idea, the kind of co&'le+ idea that for&s itself into a distinct &e&orable unit. /t is s'read by vehicles that are 'hysical &anifestations of the &e&e. 3s ennett says9 3 wagon with s'oked wheels carries not only grain or freight fro& 'lace to 'laceH it carries the brilliant idea of a wagon with s'oked wheels fro& &ind to &ind. #ow this definition really gives you a &e&e%s2eye view of the universe. #otice the 'hrase for&s itself. ?ell, we know ideas don%t for& the&selves any &ore than s'oons get u' and dance on the table. This definition is a scientific &odeland as we have seen, there are &any such &odels 'ossible Sust surrounding the ter& &e&e. 6sing the 'hrase for&s itself is a trick to get us to look at things fro& a &e&e%s 'oint of view. ;ou notice interesting things when you look at a s'ecific &e&e and see what ha''ens around it9 how it s'reads, &utates, or dies. $o&eone whose &ind carried the s'oked wheel &e&e &ight build a wagon with s'oked wheels. $o&eone else would see the wagon, catch the s'oked wheel &e&e, and build another wagon. The 'rocess would then re'eat itself indefinitely. 6nlike the biological definition, this view of &e&es 'laces the& in the real& of the unseensoftware of the &ind, ready to 'roduce results in the 'hysical world that then carry their own seeds to other hu&an beings. The cognitive definition gives us license to take out a &agnifying glass and follow around a s'ecific &e&e like a 'rivate investigatorwatching to see how infection with it affects 'eo'le%s behaviorH noticing how 'eo'le s'read itH co&'aring it with co&'eting &e&es, like the sus'ension bridge with the cantileverto see what 'ro'erties it has that &ake it occu'y &ore or fewer &inds than its rivals. 7ne 'otential 'itfall with this definition is the use of the ter& vehicles. The distinction of

a &e&e2carrying vehicle is not as clear2cut as in biology, where organis&s are vehicles for the s'read of #3. #ot all &e&e trans&ission is as si&'le as i&itating a catchy tune or noticing a s'oked wheel.

7nce so&eone builds a s'oked wheel or &akes a recording of Beethoven%s 8ifth $y&'hony, those 'hysical obSects serve as vehicles to s'read &e&esin this case, the s'oked wheel &e&e and the ta2ta2ta2T6M &e&eindirectly to new &inds. /f &e&es are our internal 'rogra&&ing, we can draw on decades of research in 'sychology to look at how we get 'rogra&&edhow &e&es get trans&itted into our &inds. 7nce 'rogra&&ed, we behave in co&'le+ ways that s'read &e&es indirectly. $o while it &ay so&eti&es be illu&inating to use the ter& vehicle to describe behavior or an artifact that tends to infect 'eo'le with a &e&e, &ore often the e+istence of a &e&e will trigger a !ube *oldbergWlike seIuence of actions that only indirectly causes s'reading of the &e&e. The wagon wheel and the co&&ercial advertising on TV 'rogra&s are the e+ce'tions as &e&e2s'reading vehiclesH the rule is &ore co&'le+. 3 ?orking efinition ?e want a definition of &e&e that gives us access to understanding cultural evolution, as in the biological definition. But we want to be clear that &e&es are internal re'resentations, as in the 'sychological definition. 3nd we want to look at &e&es as ideasas our software, our own internal 'rogra&&ingthat 'roduce an effect on the outside world, as in the cognitive definition. The result is the definition / use in this book, a definition si&ilar to the one awkins ado'ted in his =EN> book The 5+tended Phenoty'e9 efinition of Me&e 3 &e&e is a unit of infor&ation in a &ind whose e+istence influences events such that &ore co'ies of itself get created in other &inds.

#ow, with this definition, we can answer the Iuestions / asked 4harles $i&onyi and *reg 0usnick back at Microsoft. /s a yawn a &e&eT #o, a yawn is behavior and, as far as / know, has nothing to do with an internal re'resentation of any infor&ation. ?hile it a''ears to be self2re'licating, it%s &ore like an unreliable radio relay9 see a yawn, e&it a yawn, &aybe. /t%s not influencing events such that &ore co'ies of infor&ation get created. Peo'le yawn when they see others do so, but their internal state hasn%t changed to &ake the& &ore likely to yawn in the future, or to do anything that / a& aware of. 1ow about ta2ta2ta2T6M, the fa&ous &otif fro& Beethoven%s 8ifth $y&'honyT 3s it%s stored in &y brain, 4harles%s, and 0usnick%s, it is a &e&e. /%ve Sust infected you with a co'y of it. /f you hear the &usic, or hear anyone talk about Beethoven%s 8ifth in the ne+t few days, you%ll have no choice but to associate it with this discussion. /f you then start u' a conversation and say, 1ey, that%s odd" / Sust read about ta2ta2ta2T6M in this book Virus of the Mind, and do you know it%s a &e&eT you will be s'reading so&e of the &e&es fro& this book that you%re already infected with. Meta&e&es" This book is a collection of ideas about &e&es. ?hen you read and understand it, you%ll have &e&es about &e&es in your head&eta&e&es" /f you write a book about &e&es, tell so&eone else about &e&etics, or lend your co'y of Virus of the Mind to so&eone who reads and understands it, then the &eta&e&es in your &ind will have self2re'licated. 7ne &eta&e&e / want to stress is that everything in these 'ages is, as ?hitehead ad&onishes in the Iuote that begins this cha'ter, a half2truth. #ow that%s not an indict&ent of this bookH /, and ?hitehead, would say the sa&e about every other science book. My 'oint is, &e&etics is a scientific &odel. /t%s one way of looking at things. /t%s looking at ideas&e&esas distinct entities in co&'etition for a share of your &ind and a share of everyone else%s. ?hen those ideas are har&ful ones and they beco&e 'art of an infectious &ind virus, understanding this &odel can show you how to co&bat the infection. /%& not saying this is the Truth. U /%& not saying this is what !eally 1a''ens. /%& not saying this is the 7nly ?ay or the !ight ?ay to look at the &ind. 3 neuroscientist would say what is really ha''ening when an idea for&s in your &ind is that a co&'le+ web of electroche&ical changes is occurring in various 'arts of the brainH this 'erson &ight even 'oint out which 'arts those are and show e+'eri&ental evidence that 'atients with brain da&age in those areas are unable to have that &e&e in their &inds. This is co&'letely validH it%s Sust not what this book is about. /t%s not &e&etics. 3 'sychologist would say what is ha''ening is that there are certain unfulfilled drives, co&'eting instincts, 'ast trau&as, and so on that contribute to the ideas 'eo'le think and s'eak. 3gain, this is a 'erfectly valid &odel, but it%s not what this book is aboutH it%s not &e&etics. /n the last few years, 'hysics has collided with 'hiloso'hy. ?e now understand so &uch about Iuantu& 'hysicsthe 'hysics of 'articles s&aller than ato&sthat we reali.e it%s i&'ossible to se'arate reality fro& the observer of reality. ?e were so sure all &atter was co&'osed of ato&s. Then we got so e+cited when we discovered ato&s were the&selves &ade u' of 'rotons, neutrons, and electrons. /t was a little disturbing when we found that there see&ed to be lots of e&'ty s'ace inside the ato&s, but those 'rotons and neutrons looked like the basic units of &atter9 &ore solid than a rock. Today we%ve sliced u' even the 'roton and neutron. Physicists have eIuations that describe the behavior of the co&'onents of these subato&ic 'articles. The trouble is,

they don%t really see& to behave like &atter. They don%t Iuite behave like energy, though, either. 3nd to to' it off, the fa&ous uncertainty 'rinci'le of ?erner 1eisenberg states that it%s i&'ossible to &easure these things further without actually changing the&. /t%s as if they don%t really e+ist in a 'articular ti&e and 'lace until we atte&'t to &easure the&. ?hat all this 'oints out is the &e&etic nature of everything we call reality. 3ll of our labels for things are &e&es, not Truth. The idea of ato&s is a &e&e, invented in ancient *reece. The idea of subato&ic 'articles and those co&'le+ for&ulas that describe the&Iuantu& 'hysicsis a newer set of &e&es. /f your &odel of reality, as the *reeks believed, was that there were four ele&entsearth, air, fire, and wateryou &ight s'end a lot of ti&e trying to convert lead into gold. /f your &odel of reality is that we have do.ens of ele&ents &ade of i&&utable and indivisible ato&s, you won%t waste that ti&e. 3nd if your &odel of reality is that those ato&s can be s'lit, you have research leading to ato&ic energy and the Bo&b. The way you describe realitythe &e&es you have that label things&akes a big difference in life. That%s why the &eta&e&es in this book are i&'ortant. ;ou could easily go through life without any of these ideas about &e&etics, Sust as the *reeks went through life not knowing about the ele&ents of the 'eriodic table. But knowledge of ele&ents has given us everything fro& steel to co&'uter chi's. :ikewise, knowledge of &e&etics o'ens u' enor&ous 'ossibilities for understanding &any of the 'roble&s we now consider i&'ossible9 ending world hunger, 'reventing hu&an2rights abuses, and giving each child an o''ortunity for education and the 'ursuit of ha''iness. These social issues that Sust won%t see& to go awaythese 'ersistent, infectious cultural 'laguesare universally considered undesirable, but they kee' s'reading. Me&etics identifies these 'roble&s as viruses of the &ind, giving us, 'erha's for the first ti&e, tools 'owerful enough to deal with the&. *ood Me&es and Mind Viruses ?hen 4harles $i&onyi used the succinct e+'lanation good &e&es to e+'lain why we ke't electing ineffective 'oliticians, he didn%t &ean that ineffectiveness was a good idea. 1e &eant that there were &e&es 'resent in 'eo'le%s &inds that influenced the& to vote for those candidates, and that those &e&es, for whatever reason, were good at s'reading. /f / talk about a good &e&e or a successful &e&e, /%& talking about an idea or belief that s'reads easily throughout the 'o'ulation, not necessarily what we think of as a good idea. $o&e &e&es s'read directly fro& &ind to &ind. ;elling 8ire" in a crowded theater does a great Sob of s'reading that &e&e fro& &ind to &ind Iuickly. $o&e s'read &ore indirectly. 3 &other, not wanting to 'er'etuate the unha''y e+'erience she had when her &other raised her with iron disci'line, &ay react by raising her daughter with a very loose reina &e&e for the o''osite child2rearing strategy. The granddaughter, in turn, &ay react to her unha''y e+'erience of the loose rein by resu&ing *rand&other%s iron hand. The iron hand &e&e got trans&itted indirectly. U Me&es can s'read in ways that are easy to understand, like those e+a&'les, or they can s'read through a co&'licated chain of cause and effect, al&ost rando&ly, chaotically. But out of the chaos occasionally arises a stable web of cause and effect9 so&ething goes on in the world that infects 'eo'le with certain &e&es, and those &e&es eventually influence their hosts% behavior in such a way that the so&ething gets re'eated andLor s'read. That so&ething is a virus of the &ind. #a.i beliefs s'read Iuickly throughout 1itler%s *er&any because a virus of the &ind was unleashed that successfully infected 'eo'le with those &e&esnot because they

were good ideas in any other sense. /n fact, #a.is& was a 'athological virus of the &inda classic case of an e'ide&ic thought2infection 'roducing horrifying atrocities as a result of the behavior of 'eo'le infected with its &e&es. 3 virus of the &ind is so&ething out in the world that infects 'eo'le with &e&es. Those &e&es, in turn, influence the infected 'eo'le%s behavior so that they hel' 'er'etuate and s'read the virus. / know the word so&ething is about as vague as you can get, and / 'ro&ise /%ll cover in detail what kinds of &e&es, and what kinds of &ind viruses, are good at s'reading before the end of the book. 8or now /%ll Sust assert that the &e&es that s'read successfully are not necessarily the ones that &a+i&i.e 'eo'le%s Iuality of lifein fact, they%re often har&ful. 3nd the &e&es that &ind viruses infect you with to 'er'etuate the&selves range fro& distracting to disastrous. The science of &e&etics, like all sciences, is a set of &e&es designed to give you access to and 'ower over so&e as'ect of the universe. !e&e&ber, / didn%t say, Me&etics is the way the universe actually works, or ?e now know &e&etics is the Truth about the functioning of the hu&an &ind. /t%s not the TruthH it%s a &odel, like all scienceslike all &e&es. 7nce you start believing &e&es are True, you lose your 'ower to 'ick and choose which &e&es you%re 'rogra&&ed with, and you beco&e &ore subSect to infection by &ind viruses. The &ost interesting thing about &e&es is not whether they%re true or falseH it%s that they are the building blocks of your &ind. The as'ect of the universe that &e&etics gives you access to is a 'articularly interesting one9 what causes you and everyone else to think and behave as they do. The 'ur'ose of this book is to teach youinfect you withthe set of &e&es called &e&etics. There%s a lot you can do with that knowledge, fro& i&'roving your &ental fitness to 'erha's creating a new golden age for hu&anity. To begin with, let%s look at how &e&es work to for& your &ind and influence your behavior.

U0usnick, 4harles, and / all worked at Aero+ in the late %M@s. The reason 0usnick is always called by his last na&e is that there were two other *regs working with 4harles at that ti&e. The distinctive sound of 4harles 'oking his head out into the hall calling 0usnick" was a catchy &e&e. 3nyway, as 'art of the Aero+ e&'loyee orientationLindoctrination, we were taught to never use the cor'orate trade&ark as a generic word for 'hotoco'y. Both of those &e&es stayed with us. U$ee the !eco&&ended !eading section at the back of the book for references to the work of these scientists. UThis is in fact close to what goes on in the 'ractice of cognitive thera'y, 'ioneered by 'sychologist 3lbert 5llis and 'sychiatrist 3aron Beck in the =EK@s. 4ognitive thera'ists theori.e that unwanted &ental states such as de'ression are the result of incorrect thinking ,cognition- about life and the world. $ince the 'atient is living with an inaccurate &odel of reality, naturally he or she has difficulty succeeding in life. The cognitive thera'ist interviews the 'atient and &ethodically uncovers and corrects illogical or inaccurate beliefs, eventually leaving the 'atient with a better working &odel of how to get along in life and therefore a feeling of well2being. UThroughout this book / use Truth or True with a ca'ital T when referring to the conce't of absolute, eternal trutha conce't that freIuently leads to Trouble. UBut 'erha's the / don%t want to be like &y &other &e&e was 'assed on directly.

413PT5! T?7 M/# 3# B513V/7! 5very &an%s work, whether it be literature or &usic or 'ictures or architecture or anything else, is always a 'ortrait of hi&self. $a&uel Butler Me&es s'read by influencing 'eo'le%s &inds, and thus their behavior, so that eventually so&eone else gets infected with the &e&e. /f a &e&e is in your &ind, it can greatly or subtly influence your behavior. /n this book, /%& going to write as though all your behavior is dictated by a co&bination of the instructions in your #3 and the &ental 'rogra&&ing you acIuired as you grew u'9 your genes and your &e&es. $o&e 'eo'le believe there%s a third factor in there9 a soul, a s'irit, a little &e" &e" &e" de&anding recognition as so&ething &ore than &achinery. This &e" factor is, according to your beliefs, either a divinely inSected s'ark or si&'ly a biological trait like an o''osable thu&b or a high /R9 so&e co&bination of genes and &e&es. 8ortunately, we don%t have to resolve that 'articular 'hiloso'hical issue right here, since either belief works fine for understanding &e&etics and this book. /nstincts and Progra&&ing There are certain tendencies you have because you are a 'roduct of nature. These tendencies su''ort your survival and re'roduction. They are things like your se+ drive and your desire to breathe, eat, slee', and so forth. $cientists have a nu&ber of different na&es for different brands of these tendencies, but /%& Sust going to lu&' the& all together under the ter& instincts. 6nfortunately, hu&an instincts evolved to su''ort our survival a long ti&e ago and didn%t take into account the kind of world we live in today. /n &odern ti&es, those 'rehistoric instincts often don%t work any better than a deer%s instinct to free.e in the face of onco&ing headlights. 8ortunately, we have conscious &inds that we can use to override our instincts and 'ro'el us in the direction of our 'ursuit of ha''iness. $o as you read the ne+t few cha'ters, which outline in 'ainful detail Sust how 'oorly ada'ted we are to &odern life, re&e&ber9 instincts are Sust instinctsH tendencies are Sust tendencies. 0nowing what they are gives you &ore 'ower to consciously override the& if you choose. The study of how your instincts evolved is called evolutionary 'sychology, covered in 4ha'ters G and M. /t%s i&'ortant to understand hu&an instincts, because they have a great influence on the evolution of &e&es. The &e&es that a''eal to 'eo'le%s instincts are &ore likely to re'licate and s'read throughout the 'o'ulation than the ones that don%t. 5verything you do that is not instinctual is the result of 'rogra&&ing. ;ou are 'rogra&&ed by &e&es. /f you went to college, you 'robably did so to get educated, which is to say, to get 'rogra&&ed with a set of &e&es that would su''ort your success in life. 1aving been to college, you have thoughts and behaviors you wouldn%t have had if you were Sust going on instinct. Most &e&es that 'eo'le are 'rogra&&ed with are acIuired without any conscious intentH they Sust infect you and there you are, living your life by their 'rogra&&ing. $uch 'rogra&&ing includes9 C ;our religious ,or atheistic- u'bringing C The e+a&'le your 'arents set of how relationshi's work, or don%t

C The TV shows and co&&ercials you%ve watched /n 4ha'ter N, /%ll cover the ways in which we get 'rogra&&edhow 'rogra&&ing, es'ecially unwanted 'rogra&&ing, gets into our &inds. 8irst, though, let%s look at the nature of that 'rogra&&ing. :et%s look at the nature of &e&es. ?hat kinds of &e&es are thereT /%ve divided &e&es into three classes9 distinctions, knives used to slice u' realityH strategies, beliefs about which causes will 'roduce which effectsH and associations, attitudes about everything in life. 5ach class of &e&e works to 'rogra& you in a different way. /%ll e+'lain why / chose these three classes in 4ha'ter K, where we look at the origins of &e&es, but this division into classes is si&'ly a convenience and certainly not True with a ca'tital T. istinction2&e&es The universe is full of stuff. 1owever, anything we say about that stuff is 'urely a conce'ta set of &e&esinvented by hu&an beings. 3ll conce'ts are co&'osed of &e&es. 8or instance, the 6nited $tates are only states because we have invented K@ distinctions&e&escarving out that territory. 3laba&a isn%t a realityH it%s Sust there because we say so, because we are 'rogra&&ed with a &e&e for 3laba&a. /f we didn%t have an 3laba&a &e&e, that land would Sust be &ore dirt. :ikewise, the earth is si&'ly a distinctiona &e&ewe invented because it was convenient to 'ut edges around the 'lace we live in order to distinguish it fro& the rest of the universe. To the universe, it%s all Sust stuff. ;ou &ay say, But there really are edges" There%s where the dirt ends and the at&os'here begins, or where the at&os'here gives way to outer s'ace" !eallyT irt, at&os'here, outer s'acethey%re all &e&es. /f you think dirt is really dirt, not a &e&e we invented for our convenience, then all you%ll ever have is dirt. /f you see that it%s a &e&e, not the Truth, you o'en u' the 'ossibility of other &e&es to talk about the sa&e thing9 ele&ents, crystals, subato&ic 'articles. !e&e&ber that viewed through an electron &icrosco'e, it%s all &ostly e&'ty s'ace" 1ow about this one9 you are si&'ly a distinctiona &e&einvented because it was convenient to talk about the 'arts of the universe that feel 'ain when hit with a ha&&er. To the universe, there%s no you . . . or hu&an beings or giraffes or solar syste&s or gala+ies. 3ll those are hu&an2invented distinctions. They are all &e&es. #ow one &ore 'oint9 everything / Sust said about the distinction between obSective reality and conce'ts . . . is a conce't. /t%s a &e&e. To the universe, there%s no such thing as a conce't. / Sust drew this distinction because it was convenient to use when we%re talking about &e&etics. istinctions are one kind of &e&e. They are ways of carving u' the world by categori.ing or labeling things. ?hen you create a distinction, you gain access to so&e things and lose access to others. /t%s useful to be conscious of what distinction2&e&es you%re 'rogra&&ed with and to know that all the distinctions you draw are hu&an invented and not reality. istinctions, as / Sust &entioned, are one kind of &e&e that contributes to your 'rogra&&ing. $o&eone educated ,'rogra&&ed- in the &e&es of 8rench will behave differently in 8rance fro& so&eone who has no knowledge of the languagehis &ind will recogni.e &eaning where others will hear only noise. $o&eone 'rogra&&ed with the distinction 4oca24ola will be &ore likely to buy 4oke than the store brand of cola. 1er &ind will recogni.e the fa&iliar red can with the white swishH the store brand will not register because she has no distinction2&e&e for it. The 4oca24ola 4o&'any knows this, by the way, which is why their logo has grown bigger and bigger over the years until today the entire front 'anel of a si+2foot2tall 4oke &achine bears the distinctive red and white trade&ark. 3dvertisers, 'oliticians, and anyone else who wants your &oney or su''ort are very interested in 'rogra&&ing you with certain distinctions over others and understanding

the distinctions you see the world through so that they can take advantage of the&. ?hat are you &ore likely to buy for breakfast9 a slice of chocolate cake or a chocolate2 chi' &uffinT 4alling a round 'iece of high2fat chocolate cake a &uffin takes advantage of the distinctions you have around breakfast food and increases sales. My local cafX has Sust co&e out with scone2sha'ed brownies" 7f course, not &any 'eo'le would eat brownies for breakfast, but scones . . . T" $trategy2&e&es 3nother kind of &e&e is a strategy, a kind of floating rule of thu&b that tells you what to do when you co&e across an a''licable situation in order to achieve so&e desired result. 8or e+a&'le, if you drive, you have a set of distinction2&e&es having to do with driving9 traffic lights, s'eed li&its, lane &arkers, and so on. ;ou also have a set of strategy2&e&es giving you your driving behavior9 C ?hen you co&e to a red light and you want to turn right, sto' and then turn. C 3t a four2way sto', wait for all the cars that were there ahead of you to go, then you go. C ?hen you get to a traffic circle, go counterclockwise. C ?hen you see a co', slow down. The effect of all these strategy2&e&es is that you avoid accidents, get where you%re going, or avoid being ticketed. ;ou can see these strategy2&e&es at work unconsciously every day. /t%s not unusual to see 'eo'le who are not s'eeding ste' on the brake when they 'ass a 'olice car. Traffic circles in foreign countries are 'articularly difficult for 'eo'le used to driving on the other side of the road because they have to consciously override several learned strategies. 3nd if you%ve ever seen four drivers co&e to a four2way sto' si&ultaneously, you have an idea how behavior beco&es un'redictable when 'eo'le%s strategy2&e&es suddenly don%t a''ly. $ince the future is un'redictable, strategy2&e&es are never cast2in2stone Truths about how to behave. 3ll strategy2&e&es are a''ro+i&ations, based on the idea that if you behave in a certain way, you%ll have a certain effect on the world. $trategies are beliefs about cause and effect. ?hen you are 'rogra&&ed with a strategy2&e&e, you unconsciously believe behaving a certain way is likely to 'roduce a certain effect. That behavior &ay trigger a chain of events that results in s'reading the strategy2&e&e to another &ind. 3s the world changes and as you change and grow, the relationshi' between cause and effect changes, too. 8or instance, 'eo'le learn &any of their strategies for relating to 'eo'le by the ti&e they are five years old. 7ften those aren%t the &ost 'owerful strategies to use as adults. 8or e+a&'le, a two2year2old boy &ight beco&e 'rogra&&ed with a strategy2&e&e for sulking. 1e &ight co'y this behavior fro& another child or learn, through trial and error, that sulking brings e+tra attention and love. 5ither way, he now has this strategy2&e&e as 'art of his &ental 'rogra&&ing, waiting for an a''licable situation to fire u' and take effect. 1is &other is on the 'honeT $ulk. $he ends the call and co&es over to give the kid so&e attention. 7ther 'eo'le%s &others &ay res'ond better to tantru&s, caSoling, or s&ilestheir kids would get 'rogra&&ed with a''ro'riate strategy2&e&es to that environ&ent. /n other words, your 'arents% behavior directs a lot of your initial

'rogra&&ing. Thirty years later, that two2year2old boy is now a J>2year2old &an in a Sob where he doesn%t feel a''reciated. 1e &ay still be 'rogra&&ed with that strategy2&e&e he acIuired at the age of two. 1owever, sulking in that new scenario 'robably wouldn%t cause as satisfying a result as it did when he was a child. 6nfortunately, he doesn%t even reali.e he%s doing it. 3s adults, we have the 'ower and tools to influence others far beyond what we had as two2year2olds. The 'roble& is that our heads are full of old strategy2&e&es, and we have office buildings full of adults sulking, throwing tantru&s, caSoling, and s&iling in an unconscious and ineffective effort to satisfy so&e un&et need. ?e often don%t reali.e we%re 'rogra&&ed with strategy2&e&es, and the ones we have are often ineffective. 6nderstanding the strategy2&e&es we%re 'rogra&&ed with gives us the 'ower to consciously choose which strategies to follow using our full brain'ower. 3ssociation2&e&es 3 third kind of &e&e is an association, which links two or &ore &e&es in your &ind. 8or instance, if / s&ell creosoteand / only know it%s creosote because / have a distinction2&e&e for creosote/ associate it with the Boston waterfront fro& &y childhood, where &y dad would take &e on s'ecial occasions. / like that s&ell. /t re&inds &e of ha''y ti&es. /f advertisers knew / liked it and if other 'eo'le liked it Sust as &uch, we%d soon see creosote2s&elling ads for vacation s'ots to take advantage of that association. $aid in another way, / have a certain attitude about creosote. / have attitudes about &y work, about all the 'eo'le in &y life, about television, about &e&esabout everything. These attitudes are &e&es that associate other &e&es with one another so that when we are 'resent to one, we beco&e 'resent to the other. 3dvertisers don%t wait for you to develo' your own association2&e&es. They go ahead and 'rogra& you with theirs through television9 C Baseball, hot dogs, a''le 'ie, and 4hevrolet C $e+y &en and iet 4oke

C $e+y wo&en and beer C $e+y wo&en and co&'uters, cars, garden tools, fan belts . . . Being 'rogra&&ed with association2&e&es influences your behavior. This is the classic e+'eri&ent Pavlov 'erfor&ed on his dog9 1e rang a bell each ti&e he was about to feed it. $oon the dog develo'ed an association2&e&e9 the bell and food. ?hen the 'rogra&&ing was co&'lete, the dog began to salivate u'on hearing the bell. 3dvertisers want you to salivate, or the se+ual eIuivalent, when you see their 'roduct. There%s a 'otential Iuibble here over whether all such associationsor all strategies, for that &atterare &e&es, or whether so&e are Sust 'lain old behavioral 'rogra&&ing, which we know all about and wouldn%t reIuire a beautiful new theory such as &e&etics to e+'lain. ?ell, the world is very co&'le+. /f being 'rogra&&ed with an association causes any change in your behavior, then it &akes sense to consider that bit of 'rogra&&ing a 'otential &e&e, looking to see if there%s any 'ossibility that the change in your behavior will end u' creating co'ies of the association in others. /f you go to a baseball ga&e and say, id you know 0en *riffey, )r., drives a 4hevyT you%ve Sust 'assed on your association&e&e to so&eone else. 3ssociations are connections between &e&es. ?hen you are 'rogra&&ed with an

association2&e&e, the 'resence of one thing triggers a thought or feeling about so&ething else. This causes a change in your behavior, which can ulti&ately s'read the &e&e to another &ind. 3ssociation2&e&es are subtle, and their e+'loitation can be insidious. 4ults 'rogra& their &e&bers with association2&e&es linking good feelings with the teachings of the grou'. /t takes only a short ti&e for 'eo'le to believe that their Iuality of life, or 'erha's their very survival, de'ends on staying in the cultthat they should be grateful for the cult giving the& life. /n 4ha'ter N, we%ll see how those of us who are not cult &e&bers &ay have the sa&e kind of 'rogra&&ingif not Iuite so intenseabout the co&'any we work for, ca'italis&, de&ocracy, our fa&ily, our religion, and our s'ouse. The 5ffect of Progra&&ing 3s any co'yright lawyer can tell you, 'eo'le don%t own ideas. ;ou can co'yright the e+'ression of an idea, artistic or otherwise9 you can own the rights to a 'ainting, novel, 'oe&, or sy&'hony based on whatever ideas you wantH but you can%t own an idea. /n fact, the reverse is often true9 ideas so&eti&es own 'eo'le. 3nd ideas are &ade u' of &e&es. Me&es can and do run your life, 'robably to a far greater degree than you reali.e. 1ow can a &e&e own youT The &ost straightforward way is through the laws and custo&s of your society. Men%s and wo&en%s roles in society, for instance, were ruled a hundred years ago by &e&es that see& odd, offensive, or even ridiculous today9 3 wo&an%s 'lace is in the ho&eH Behind every great &an there is a wo&anH 3 wo&an ought not &ake wavesH and so on. 7ut of these &e&es ca&e a loss of o''ortunity for both wo&en and &en. That changed only when a few co&&itted 'eo'le refused to buy into those &e&es and worked to 'ry the& out of 'eo'le%s &inds and re'lace the& with new ones9 eIual o''ortunityH3 wo&an can be anything she wants to beH 3 wo&an without a &an is like a fish without a bicycleH and so on. Those old se+ist &e&es severely li&ited wo&en%s o'tions in life Sust because &ost 'eo'le were 'rogra&&ed with the&. The laws we live under are another e+a&'le of how &e&es rule us. ?hile not &any would argue with laws against cri&es such as &urder, other laws see& a bit &ore arbitrary, yet greatly affect the way 'eo'le live their lives. /n the for&er $oviet 6nion, 'eo'le lived under laws that forbade s'eaking out against the govern&ent and cri&inali.ed &aking a 'rofitH while in the 6nited $tates, 'eo'le go to 'rison for growing &ariSuana and insider trading, violating the rules of the stock &arket. The 'rice of civili.ation is co&'ro&ise. ?ithout general agree&ent on &illions of ideas, big and s&all, the incredibly co&'le+ society we have built would Iuickly disintegrate. )ust think what life would be like if &ost of us did not agree on the &e&es of 'ro'erty ownershi', contracts, what the colors on traffic lights &ean, or saving and withdrawing &oney fro& a bank. Take a look at Sust the distinction2&e&e of &oney" ?hat if one day we all changed our &inds about the idea of what &oney was used for and what it was worth and discovered a bunch of dirty green 'ieces of 'a'er in our 'ocketsT $o&ething like this ha''ened, by the way, in 'ostW?orld ?ar // 5astern 5uro'e in ti&es of hy'erinflation. These broad, societal &e&es are too &any to enu&erate, yet they have tre&endous influence over the way we live our lives. #ot all of the& have such a goodLbad flavor to the&, as do our se+ roles, yet we need to understand that they are all artificial, &an&ade, and in &ost cases not a 'roud result of conscious choice such as the 6.$. 4onstitution. Most of these &e&es, like the 're>@th2century se+ roles, Sust sort of evolved without anybody seriously Iuestioning the&. /t is, of course, nothing new to Iuestion societal nor&s. Peo'le throughout history have written about the silliness of living in a cage of arbitrary social rules. But the task of changing those rules is difficult.

/t is 'ossible to shift the do&inant &e&es that constitute a society, but because of the way viruses of the &ind s'read ideas, it%s not a straightforward task to do so. Me&etics gives those who understand it the o''ortunity to better influence the s'read of &e&es. Peer Pressure $lavery to &e&es doesn%t sto' at the national level. 3ny grou' of 'eo'le who interact with each other is subSect to 'eer 'ressure9 the 'ressure on each individual to behave and think as the rest of the grou' does. Peer 'ressure often gets the bla&e for inducing children to s&oke, take drugs, and Soin gangsH but adults are also subSect to it. !ecovering alcoholics so&eti&es &ake the decision to give u' their friends who drink in order to esca'e the crushing 'eer 'ressure, and they Soin 3lcoholics 3nony&ous to intentionally subSect the&selves to &ore constructive 'eer 'ressure. 4o&'anies such as Microsoft, where / worked for &any years, have an elaborate internal culture that constantly reinforces certain &e&esH in Microsoft%s case, elitis&, co&&it&ent, intolerance of shoddiness, and hard work were large 'arts of that culture. ?hen 'eo'le get i&&ersed in a culture with strong new &e&es, it tends to be a sink2or2 swi& 'ro'osition. 5ither you change your &ind, succu&bing to 'eer 'ressure and ado'ting the new &e&es as your own, or you struggle with the e+tre&ely unco&fortable feeling of being surrounded by 'eo'le who think you%re cra.y or inadeIuate. The fact that you 'robably think the sa&e thing about the& is little consolation. 7ther subcultures have different ethics fro& Microsoft, but the results are the sa&e. 8or instance, &any of &y friends who have worked in govern&ent tell &e of a culture al&ost o''osite to that of Microsoft9 indifference, tolerance of shoddiness ,close enough for govern&ent work-, 'unching out at K, and &ediocrity as e+'ressed by the ubiIuitous sign /t%s tough to soar with the eagles when you have to work with the turkeys. /&&ersion in that culture has the sa&e effect9 either you ado't those &e&es or you struggle against the 'eer 'ressure. ;our Personal Progra&&ing The &e&es you are 'ersonally 'rogra&&ed with, even without considering the culture around you, affect your life in al&ost every conceivable way. That%s why a virus of the &ind is so&ething to be taken seriously. These viruses fill your &ind u' with &e&esideas, attitudes, and beliefsthat &ake the results you get in life very different fro& the results you &ay want. 7ne of the ways the &e&es you are 'rogra&&ed with greatly affect your future is through self2fulfilling 'ro'hecy. Believing that so&ething will ha''en often &akes it &ore likely to ha''en. 3 child who is told re'eatedly by 'arents that she is a successful 'erson who can be anything she wants to be is 'rogra&&ed for success ,at least by her 'arents% standards-H while a child who grows u' 'arentless in the inner city, seeing nothing but failure and des'air, is likewise 'rogra&&ed for failure. Mind viruses often fill our heads with self2sabotaging attitudes&e&esthat hinder us fro& &aking the &ost of our lives. $elf2fulfilling 'ro'hecy is the reason 'sychics and horosco'es can work. There%s an e+cellent 'sychic na&ed Ma+well who works in a local $eattle restaurant. / say e+cellent because /%ve seen hi& work twice. Both ti&es he gave tarot2card readings to friends of &ine that 'redicted health, wealth, and ha''iness, 'rovided they sei.ed the o''ortunity to 'ursue their life 'assion and acted soon. Being a bit of an a&ateur 'restidigitator, / noticed how he rigged the cards so that the right three would co&e u' in what%s known in the &agic bi. as a forcethe client believes he has chosen the cards of his own free will. The card trick added to Ma+well%s credibility and &ade it &ore likely that 'eo'le would take his advice. / ho'e they didit%s a great self2fulfilling 'ro'hecy likely to 'rogra& anyone for a rich, full life" 3side fro& steering our futures, the distinction2&e&es we%re 'rogra&&ed with for& a

'erce'tual filter on the i&&ediate2'resent world around us. Peo'le cannot take in any &ore than a s&all fraction of all the infor&ation that hits their sensory organs every second. ?hat infor&ation do we take in, and what do we filter outT 7ur unconscious &inds decide for us, based on the distinction2&e&es we are 'rogra&&ed with. The distinction2&e&es you are 'rogra&&ed with control what infor&ation you 'erceive. They actually &ake reality look different to you. Most 'eo'le haven%t consciously trained their &inds to look for the infor&ation that is &ost i&'ortant to the&Iuite a difficult and lengthy 'rocess, one / touch on in 4ha'ter =>so that choice is left u' to chance and the influence of &ind viruses. 5+a&'les of 'erce'tual filters abound9 5ver buy a new car and suddenly notice do.ens of others like it on the road where you hadn%t beforeT ;ou%ve got a new distinction2 &e&e. /f a friend notices the new car you bought out of your new distinction2&e&e and starts seeing the& all over the road, you%ve Sust s'read that &e&e to another &ind. 5ver learn a new word and suddenly see it everywhereT That word was there all the ti&e9 you Sust didn%t notice it because you didn%t have a distinction2&e&e for it. /f you start using it, or tell a friend how odd it is that you%ve been seeing this word all over the 'lace, you%ve Sust s'read the &e&e to another &ind. / have a friend who used to enSoy listening to Pachelbel%s 4anon in MaSor until / 'ointed out to hi& that it sounded a lot like the old Burger 0ing SingleH now every ti&e he hears it, all he can think about is 1old the 'ickle, hold the lettuce. . . . Being 'rogra&&ed with the distinction2&e&e Burger 0ing Single, he has no choice but to recogni.e that &elody whenever he hears his for&er favorite 'iece. 1e hates &e. 3dvertising works by altering your 'erce'tual filter to 'ay &ore attention to, or have better feelings toward, the advertiser%s 'roduct. Politicians with their slogans and rhetoric ho'e to infect your &ind with &e&es that &ake you 'erceive the& as a good choice to vote for. The world is full of &e&es s'read by &ind viruses, all co&'eting for a share of your &ind, your 'erce'tion, your attention. They care nothing for your well2being, but instead add to your confusion and subtract fro& your fulfill&ent. ;our attitudes about the 'ast also influence your life. 3 current trend in 3&erica is to label &ore and &ore 'eo'le victi&s of cruel, unfair, or neglectful treat&ent in their 'asts. ?hile it%s certainly a valid 'oint of view, those who look u'on the&selves as victi&s of their 'ersonal histories ty'ically e+'erience continuing e&otional 'ain and a feeling of 'owerlessness. 3 good course in self2e&'ower&ent trains 'eo'le to view the&selves as accountable for their entire lives, even those unfair and victi&i.ing events of the 'ast. 7nce 'eo'le &ake this so&eti&es difficult shift in attitudein their &e&etic 'rogra&&ingthey often go through a relatively brief 'eriod of grief or sadness, followed by an e+'erience of letting go and &oving forward with their lives. The Truth Tra' ?hat did 3lfred #orth ?hitehead &ean, in the Iuote that begins 4ha'ter =, that there are no whole truths, only half2truthsT / used that Iuote because the distinction2&e&e Truth, &eaning absolute fact or authority, is not 'art of the new 'aradig& of &e&etics. The truth of any 'ro'osition de'ends u'on the assu&'tions you &ake in considering itthe distinction2&e&es you use in thinking about it. ;ou &ight say that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. /s that trueT Maybe it%s &ore accurate to say that the earth orbits the sun. But is that trueT !eally, everything in the universe is influenced to a s&all degree by everything else. But if you%re building a ball'ark and you want to 'ut ho&e 'late where the sun won%t get in the batters% eyes, saying the sun sets in the west is a great &e&e to usea useful half2truth. /f you%re in charge of building the ball'ark and you start talking to the construction workers about relativity and gravitational theory, you%re unlikely to get the results you want.

U ?hat about all those eternal Iuestions whose answers &ight be called eternal truthsT /s there life after deathT e'ends on what you &ean by life, by death . . . even by is" /t%s dangerous to latch onto one answer without re&e&bering the assu&'tions 'resent in the Iuestion. 5very ti&e you have a new set of distinction2&e&es, you have a whole new 'hiloso'hy. :abeling a &e&e True lodges it in your 'rogra&&ing and eli&inates your conscious ability to choose your own &e&es. 7nce so&e authority convinces you so&ething is True or !ight or is so&ething you $hould do, you are effectively 'rogra&&ed. /f you reali.e there are only half2truthsthat the truth of any &e&e de'ends on the conte+t in which it e+istsyou have a 'owerful wea'on against the 'rogra&&ing of &ind viruses. o you obey rules or any for& of authority other than yourselfT :aws, your su'eriors at work, doctors, 'arents . . . T / ho'e you are res'ectful of your fellow inhabitants of the 'lanet, but / also ho'e you reali.e that anyti&e you%re obeying instructions, you%re ri'e for e+'loitation by &ind viruses. 3s you%ll see in 4ha'ter J, viruses work by taking instruction2obeying &echanis&s and co2o'ting the&. /f you are an instruction2obeying &echanis&, you will be co2o'ted, no doubt about it. ?hat can we do about itT 8or &ost of us, it doesn%t work to shut ourselves out of all cultural institutions. Partici'ating in Sobs, relationshi's, clubs, and Sudicial syste&s see&s essential or at least 'ractical in our atte&'ts to &ake lives for ourselves. But to avoid beco&ing enslaved by &ind viruses, we need to 'ick and choose. Ruestion 3uthority is 'robably the best bu&'er2sticker advice ever given, so long as you don%t read it to &ean 4ontradict 3uthority9 &ind viruses have Sust as big a field day with auto&atic rebels as with auto&atic yes2&en. Both rebels and yes2&en behave 'redictably according to their &e&etic 'rogra&&ing. The 'oint is to understand that you have &e&etic 'rogra&&ing so you can re'rogra& yourself when &ind2virus infections are interfering with your life" 3 &ind virus thrives on your belief that its &e&es are True. Peo'le defend the &e&es they%re 'rogra&&ed with like they were 'rotecting their own lives" /t%s the &ind virus%s 'aradise9 it has co2o'ted your intelligence and 'roble&2solving ability in order to 'reserve itself. The only way we learn and grow is by changing our belief syste&schanging our &e&etic 'rogra&&ing. ;et, 'arado+ically, we tend to hang on to that 'rogra&&ing as if it would kill us to be wrong about any of our &e&es. 4ultural institutionscountries, businesses, organi.ationsare nothing &ore than the results of cultural evolution, e+'loiting whatever resources were available as they evolved. There is nothing sacred about any of the& unless you choose to &ake it so. ?herever there are &asses of 'eo'le confused about their own 'ur'ose in life and willing to take orders, cultural institutions will s'ring u' to e+'loit the&. !arely is such an institution consciously chosen by its 'o'ulace to enhance the lives of the 'artici'antsH institutions that 'rogra& 'eo'le with self2serving &e&es are the ones that win. 3 cultural institution that 'rogra&s 'eo'le with self2serving &e&es is a virus of the &ind. That doesn%t necessarily &ean it%s a bad thing, but if / were you, /%d want to know which &ind viruses were co&'eting for use of &y life so that / could at least 'ick and choose a&ong the&, if not invent &y own. 3ccording to the new 'aradig& of &e&etics, the &ind works as a co&bination of instinct and &e&etic 'rogra&&ing. /t%s 'ossible to consciously choose your own &e&etic 'rogra&&ing to better serve whatever 'ur'ose you choose, u'on reflection, to have for your life. ?ithout understanding &e&etics, though, the 'rogra&&ing 'eo'le have tends to be whatever they ha''ened to get as they went through childhood and life. 3s you%ll see in the ne+t few cha'ters, &uch of that 'rogra&&ing is the result of infection by &ind viruses. To begin to see that, take a look at what a virus is and how it

works.

U5ven the half2truth The sun sets in the west has Iuestionable assu&'tions. / was standing on &y deck in $eattle on the 8ourth of )uly watching a beautiful sunset when it occurred to &e9 1ey" The sun%s setting in the north" $ure enough, fro& &y west2 facing deck, / had to turn a full E@ degrees to see the sun set. ?hat was going onT 8irst, it wasn%t True that &y deck faced west. /n $eattle, we tend to call the direction that faces Puget $ound%s 5lliott Bay westH however, where / live there%s a bend in the shoreline so that the water2facing direction is actually &ore southwest. $econd, the sun really doesn%t always set in the west" #orth of the 3rctic 4ircle, of course, there are su&&er days when the sun doesn%t set at allH it Sust kind of di's toward the #orth Pole, then starts back u' again. /f you%re right below the 3rctic 4irclesay, in 8inlandyou have one really short night at the su&&er solstice where the sun Sust barely flits below the hori.ondirectly north" own in $eattle, during the long days and short nights surrounding the su&&er solstice, the sun sets and rises 'retty far north. Those two half2truths co&bined to give &e &y northern sunset. ,Thanks to ?illia& 4alvin for this co&&onsense 'roof of northern sunsets.-

413PT5! T1!55 V/!6$5$ /&agine that there is a nickelodeon in the local bar which, if you 'ress buttons ==26, will 'lay a song whose lyrics go this way9 Put another nickel in, in the nickelodeon, 3ll / want is ==26, and &usic, &usic, &usic. ouglas 1ofstadter, *Ydel, 5scher, Bach :ong ago, 'ossibly billions of years ago, there arose through evolution a new ty'e of organis&if it can even be called an organis&. The new thing had the unusual 'ro'erty that it could invade the re'roductive facilities of other organis&s and 'ut the& to use &aking co'ies of itself. ?e call this creature a virus. Viruses e+ist in three universes that we know of9 The first is the universe of biology, of organis&s . . . of 'eo'le, 'lants, and ani&als. /t%s where viruses were first discovered9 tobacco 'lants get the&, and so do we. There are countless varieties of biological viruses on 5arth and countless co'ies of each. They re&ain the cause of so&e of our &ost deadly and least curable or understood diseases, ranging fro& the co&&on cold to 3/ $ or worse. The second universe where viruses e+ist is the &an2&ade world of co&'uters, networks, data, and 'rogra&&ing. Viruses weren%t discovered in this worldH rather, they were invented'rogra&&ed. /n one of the best2known incidents of inventing a co&'uter virus, !obert Morris, )r., a student at 4ornell 6niversity, tried an unauthori.ed e+'eri&ent on a govern&ent2funded nationwide co&'uter network in #ove&ber =ENN. 1e wrote a 'rogra& designed to &ake co'ies of itself and install one on each co&'uter in the network. 3 s&all error in the 'rogra&, however, caused it to kee' going after it was su''osed to sto', clogging u' the entire network with &illions of co'ies of itself and cri''ling the network for hours. *overn&ent officials considered this bit of hacking so serious that they charged the astonished student with federal cri&es. 1is 'rogra&, which beca&e known as the /nternet wor&, was a for& of co&'uter virus. 1e had ta''ed into the al&ost li&itless 'ower a virus has once unleashed, and at the sa&e ti&e e+'erienced the loss of any control over the virus by its creator. By now the ter& co&'uter virus is well known. But this electronic for& of virus 'roves to be al&ost as difficult to cure as the biological kind. 3n antivirus industry has s'rung u' around it, ca'itali.ing on the fact that co&'uter 'rogra&s are &uch easier to understand than #3. !egular u'dates of 'rogra&s with na&es like Vaccine, r. Virus, and 3ntiVirus kee' co&'uters free of all the known strains, but vandals continue to create &ore and &ore. The high s'eed, e+cellent co&&unication, and large storage ca'abilities of co&'uters &ake the& an attractive target for delinIuents and a welco&ing environ&ent for viruses. The third universe is the &ain subSect of this book9 the universe of the &ind, of culture, of thought. This is the universe in which the 'aradig& shift is taking 'lace. 8ro& an old &odel of cultural evolution based on innovation and conIuest, we are shifting to a new &odel based on &e&etics and viruses of the &ind. Mind viruses are both discovered and invented9 they can evolve naturally or be created consciously. Viruses occur in three different universes9 biology, co&'uters, and the &ind. This table shows the corres'ondence between words used to talk about evolution and viruses in each of the three universes. /n =EMN, in a s&all village in *uyana, a closely knit co&&unity of 'eo'le 'ur'osely killed the&selves by drinking a &i+ture of cyanide, Valiu&, and 8la2Vor23id. They knew they would die. 3s to what else they knew, we can only s'eculate. id they know that a far greater reward awaited the& in the ne+t lifeT id they know that obeying the orders of )i& )ones, their leader, was their dutyT id they know that if they Sust followed their faith, everything would turn out all rightT /t%s 'retty clear what they knew

hurt the&9 they didn%t drink that 'oison out of instinctthey were following the 'rogra&&ing of so&e &e&es that resulted in their deaths. ?hy has Pe'si s'ent &illions of dollars broadcasting co&&ercials that show 'eo'le drinking their 'roduct while endlessly re'eating 6h2huhT ?hy do so&e outlandish stories get endlessly 'er'etuated as urban legendsT ?hy do so&e chain letters travel around and around the world, see&ingly unsto''ableT The answers to those Iuestions all have to do with viruses of the &ind. The &ind has all the 'ro'erties a virus needs to e+ist, Sust as do cells and co&'uters. /n fact, our society of instant co&&unication and access to infor&ation is i&'roving daily as a gracious host to &ind viruses. ?hat /s a VirusT 0ee'ing in &ind that the virus conce't a''lies to all three real&sbiology, co&'uter, and &indlet%s start by looking at the workings of biological viruses. ?e can%t talk about viruses without talking about co'ying. That%s what a virus does, after all9 it &akes co'ies of itself. That wouldn%t be of &uch &ore than intellectual interest to us if it were not for one fact9 a virus uses us as its laboratory for &aking co'ies of itself, freIuently leaving a &ess behind. 3 virus is &ore than a 'arasite, &ore than an infiltrator, &ore than an unchecked self2 co'ier. 3 virus is all of these at the sa&e ti&e. 3 virus is anything that takes e+ternal co'ying eIui'&ent and 'uts it to work &aking co'ies of itself. 7ne reason to take viruses seriously is that &aking co'ies of yourselfself2 re'licatingis the &ost 'owerful force in the universe. U ?here there was once =, now there are >, O, N, =G, J>, GO, =>N, >KG, K=>. . . . *rowth by doubling is called e+'onential growth, and it works very Iuickly to fill u' whatever s'ace is available. 3n ato&ic bo&b works that way9 7ne fissioned ato& causes others to s'lit, which in turn cause &ore ato&s to s'lit, all releasing energy. ?hen the s'ace available inside the bo&b is filledkablooey" /n the case of a ty'ical biological virus, the co'ying eIui'&ent it co&&andeers is in the cells of the organis& being attacked. 4ells use that eIui'&ent in the nor&al course of their affairs to &anufacture 'roteins, du'licate nucleic acids, and 're'are to divide in two. The virus infiltrates the cell and fools the co'ying eIui'&ent into co'ying the virus in addition to, or instead of, its usual workload. / always conSure u' a &ental 'icture of a syringe2like virus 'oking its needle into a cell and inSecting its own genetic 'rogra& so the cell &achinery starts going to work 'roducing &ore syringes. There%s so&e artistic license with this &ental 'icture, but it hel's &e get the idea. 3nywhere there is co'ying &achinery, there can be viruses. Modern co&'uter networks, designed s'ecifically to co'y and trans&it data, were a natural target for &alicious or &ischievous hackers to create &an2&ade viruses, which they in fact did relatively Iuickly. 6nlike their biological counter'arts, all known co&'uter viruses are &an2&ade, which is to be e+'ected since co&'uters are designed es'ecially to &ini&i.e &utations, or corru'tion of data. 3 &utation is an error in co'ying. /t 'roduces a defectiveor 'ossibly i&'roved in so&e senseco'y instead of an e+act du'licate of the original. $ince hu&ans designed co&'uters with the e+'ress intention of &aking the& easy for us to 'rogra&, it%s not too sur'rising that we%ve found it easy to create viruses that e+ist in that &ediu&far easier, for e+a&'le, than we%ve found it to engineer any kind of #32based organis&. But #3 wasn%t designed by hu&ans for the 'ur'ose of 'rogra&&ing9 it doesn%t have a rational instruction set, &ulti'ur'ose registers, or internationally a''roved in'utLout'ut interface standards. My guess is that it will be a long ti&e before we learn to create an organis& fro& scratch out of #3 the way

co&'uter 'rogra&&ers create software fro& scratch out of 'rogra&&ing languages. U

$o&e biological viruses work by 'enetrating the cell%s defenses as a syringe needle 'enetrates skin. They inSect instructions into the cell so that its du'licating &achinery &anufactures &ore syringe2like viruses. 5ventually the cell bursts, and the new virus co'ies s'read to other cells. 3 virus can e+ist anywhere there is co'ying going on. 8or billions of years, the only significant co'ying going on was that of #3 and associated &olecules. ?e%ve learned a lot about the 'hysical &echanis& by which #3 gets co'ied, but it%s still Iuite a lea' to understand how the infor&ation in the #3 causes a hu&an being to self2asse&ble fro& a single cell to an adult. /t%s the difference between understanding how the 5ncyclo'edia Britannica is 'rinted and understanding the co&'lete functioning of the world described in its volu&es. 3 virus doesn%t change the way in which #3 gets co'iedH a virus inserts new infor&ation to be co'ied along with, or instead of, the rest. ?hat ha''ens, then, to the cell containing that new infor&ationT There are three 'ossibilities9 =. The infor&ation &ay be unintelligible to the rest of the cell and have &ini&al effect on its workings other than 'erha's to decrease its efficiency at all the other work it has to do. >. The infor&ation &ay confuse or sabotage the workings of the cell and cause it to &alfunction, at least fro& so&e 'oint of view. ,8ro& the virus%s 'oint of view, the new functioning &ay be fine.J. T he infor&ation &ay i&'rove the cell%s functioning by giving it so&e kind of new ability or defense &echanis&. )ust 7beying 7rders 3 virus takes advantage of the fact that the co'ying &echanis& doesn%t have a good screening syste& to ensure that it is only co'ying a''roved data. /n the case of a cell, the co'ying &echanis& co'ies instructions to the cell%s inner workings about which 'roteins to &anufacture. Those 'roteins, in turn, control the various che&ical reactions that chart the course of a cell%s life9 a ti&e to store sugars, a ti&e to &anufacture o+ygen, a ti&e to s'lit, a ti&e to die. The virus%s sneaky tactics are like the insane officer%s orders to the bo&ber sIuadron in r. $trangelove to launch an un'rovoked attack on Moscow9 the cell, or bo&ber crew, Sust obeys its new instructions and off it goes. 7ne of the instructions that the virus gives is to &anufacture &ore viruses and in so&e

way s'read the& to other hosts. This 'articular instruction is essential or the virus would Iuickly die out. The s'reading can be direct, as a cell that fills so full of viruses that it burstsH or indirect, as a virus that induces snee.ing and a virus2rich runny nose. 4o&'uter viruses work the sa&e way. 8irst the vandal 'rogra&&er inserts the virus code into so&e other 'rogra& that she e+'ects will be run by unsus'ecting users. ?hen it is run, the virus code Iuickly co'ies itself into so&e or all of the other 'rogra&s it detects on the co&'uter. 3s soon as one of those infected 'rogra&s gets co'ied, by hu&ans or auto&atically, onto another co&'uter and is run, the new co&'uter beco&es infected and the 'rocess begins anew. Putting aside the social i&'lications of this for& of vandalis&, let%s look at the co&&on ele&ents between biological and co&'uter viruses9 C $o&ething foreign gets inserted into an environ&ent. C 4o'ying takes 'lace in that environ&ent. C There is so&e kind of instruction2following going on in that environ&ent. C The foreign body gets co'ied, 'ossibly issues new instructions, and s'reads to new environ&ents so the 'rocess can continue. ?hat Makes a *ood VirusT 3 successful virus &ust let its host live long enough to s'read the virus. That%s odd, thoughwouldn%t it follow that the &ost successful viruses would let the host kee' living and s'reading the& as long as 'ossibleT ?ouldn%t that &ean we should e+'ect viruses to be on our side in general, since our health is linked to their survivalT That de'ends on what you &ean by on our side. The success of a virus in the long run de'ends on its ability to re'licate without killing its hosts. 7f course, that doesn%t hel' you if you%re killed by one that hasn%t evolved to be successful yet. 3s )ohn Maynard 0eynes 'ointed out, in the long run we%re all dead. 3 virus that s'read to ten other 'eo'le and killed you in the 'rocess would be Iuite successful enough, short ter&. 3 virus that i&&ediately killed every host wouldn%t be successful, Sust as a co&'uter virus that instantly crashed every co&'uter it infected wouldn%t last long. But longevity of the host is Sust one 'ossibility for a virus%s &ission9 3 virus%s &ission is to &ake as &any co'ies of itself as 'ossible. ?ait a &inutewhy is that the virus%s &issionT o we really believe that viruses have so&e kind of guiding 'ur'ose to their livesT ?hat does it even &ean to say that a virus has a &issionT ?hy couldn%t a virus Sust be content with infecting one cell, retiring, and kicking back and watching the endo'las&ic reticulu& for the rest of its daysT The short answer is9 if it did, it wouldn%t be a virus as it%s defined here. /%& only using the word virus to refer to things that 'enetrate, co'y, 'ossibly issue instructions, and s'read. But waving &y hands and clinging to the definition is the easy way out. There%s a very subtle 'oint here, one that%s i&'ortant to understand because it runs through this entire book9 ?hen we look at life fro& the 'oint of view of a virus, we%re not saying the virus is alive, can think, or even has a 'oint of view. U :ooking at things fro& the 'oint of view of a virus Sust gives us insight into what%s interesting about viruses9 how and why they s'read.

?hen / say a virus%s &ission in life is to s'read, / &ean only that when we e+a&ine viruses, the interesting thing about the& is that they s'read. /f they didn%t s'read, we wouldn%t call the& viruses and we wouldn%t be interested in the&. ?e are interested in viruses because their 'enetrating, co'ying, issuing of instructions, and es'ecially s'reading is a 'owerful force in our universe. /t%s fascinating, e+citing, and even scary to discover so&ething that, once released, goes off on its own and s'reads itself to the world with no further effort on the 'art of its creator. $aying a virus has a &ission in life is a trick to &ake it easy to understand how it works. /t would be eIually correct to reverse 'oints of view9 The universe contains &any &echanis&s for co'ying and dis'ersing infor&ation, and viruses are so&e of the things that are often co'ied and dis'ersed. $o&e of these co'ying &echanis&s are straightforwardH others are roundabout. But the viruses we see the &ost co'ies of are the ones that those &echanis&s ha''en to latch onto and co'y. $o given that we%re only studying successful viruses, the one thing we know about the& is that they are good at s'reading. The #3 viruses have found effective ways to s'read via the co'ying &echanis&s of our cells. The cri&inals who create co&'uter viruses have found effective ways to s'read the& via the co'ying &echanis&s of co&'uters. 3ll of which brings us to the &ost interesting co'ying &echanis& of all9 the hu&an &ind. The Mind 7ur &inds e+cel both at co'ying infor&ation and at following instructions. !e&e&ber the four characteristics of a virus9 'enetration, co'ying, 'ossibly issuing instructions, and s'reading. 3s horrifying as the thought &ay be initially, our &inds are ideally susce'tible to infection by &ind viruses. They can 'enetrate our &inds because we are so ade't at learning new ideas and infor&ation. They are co'ied by us co&&unicating with each other, so&ething we are getting better and better at. Mind viruses issue instructions by 'rogra&&ing us with new &e&es that affect our behavior. They s'read when the chain of events ste&&ing fro& that new behavior reaches an uninfected &ind. 5+a&'les of viruses of the &ind range fro& fashion fads to religious cults. They can be any bit of culture whose e+istence touches 'eo'le, causing the& to shift their thinking and thus their behavior, eventually causing reinforce&ent or 'roliferation of that sa&e bit of culture. 4ha'ters E, =@, and == are full of e+a&'les of viruses of the &ind. 3t this 'oint / want to introduce a distinction between &ind viruses that arose s'ontaneously and ones that were invented by hu&an consciousness. /%ll call the naturally arising ones cultural viruses and the hu&an2crafted ones designer viruses. 3 designer virus is carefully crafted to infect 'eo'le with a set of &e&es that influence the& to s'read the virus throughout the 'o'ulation. esigner viruses and cultural viruses can be eIually da&aging to your 'ursuit of ha''iness, although for &any 'eo'le it doesn%t feel as bad to have your life ruined by a natural set of circu&stances as it does to have so&e &ani'ulative no2goodnik get the best of you. But des'ite the difference in 'erce'tion, the effect of these two kinds of &ind viruses is the sa&e9 you unwittingly have a 'ortion of yourself diverted fro& what you &ight otherwise be doing with your life, and instead devoted to doing the work of the &ind virus. Me&etics 'rovides new insight into the way our &inds, societies, and cultures work. !ather than looking at the develo'&ent of culture as a seIuence of ideas and discoveries that build u'on one another, what would it be like to view culture as a &e&e 'ool, where the ideas in our heads are sha'ed and trans'orted by various forces, including &ind virusesT 1ow &any of these viruses are already with usT 3re they hel'ing or har&ing usT 4an we control the&T 4an our ene&ies create new ones and

infect us with the&T The outer reaches of this line of thought are dark and scary. 1owever, / see &uch, &uch &ore 'otential for hel' than har& through understanding the &ind virus. 3nd even though it involves thinking about things in unfa&iliar ways, / suggest we do whatever it takes to understand it, ta&e it, and 'ut it to work for our best interests and the best interests of our childrenand our children%s children. To begin that, let%s take a look at one of the &ost &isunderstood of all scientific theories9 evolution by natural selection.

U/f you had the thought that 'erha's *od is the &ost 'owerful force in the universere&e&ber9 1e created us in 1is own i&age. $elf2re'lication" U?hen it does ha''en, though, it will 'robably be through the use of higherlevel languages that co&'ile a genetic engineer%s intentions into #3 strands the way the 4 co&'uter2'rogra&&ing language co&'iles a co&'uter 'rogra&&er%s intentions into &achine language, the actual instructions the co&'uter e+ecutes. ?hen we figure that out, that%s when we%ll start seeing ?al&art sell living vacuu& cleaners that scurry about our houses at night eating dirt off the floors and car'ets. 3nd the 'ossibilities for the adult2entertain&ent industry are endless, if &orally disturbing. UThis viral view'oint is what evolutionary biologists call the teleological fallacy9 the tendency to attribute co&'le+ evolutionary &otives to du&b ani&als or bio&olecules. ?hat we%re seeing is knowledge hardwired into these creatures through billions of years of evolution, not &e&etic thoughts like we have.

413PT5! 876! 5V7:6T/7# /t is al&ost as if the hu&an brain were s'ecifically designed to &isunderstand arwinis&, and to find it hard to believe. !ichard awkins There is no scientific theory that is both so well known and so dis'uted as the theory of evolution. Perha's / should say theories of evolution, because even a&ong res'ected scientists there is significant disagree&ent over Sust how evolution works. 7utside of science, of course, we find even &ore disagree&ent, fro& religious funda&entalists whose faith conflicts with the evolutionary &odel, to #ew 3ge inter'retations of evolution as a 'ur'oseful striving toward s'iritual 'erfection, to 'eo'le who Sust have a gut sense that evolution is too far2fetched to e+'lain the lush variety of life on this 'lanet. The reason for all the disagree&ent, / believe, is a cloudy understanding of Sust what is involved in evolution. 7ur gut sense isn%t designed to understand what ha''ens over &illions or billions of years, so it%s natural to be ske'tical of so&ething that only o'erates over that long a 'eriod. 7ur funda&entalist religions o'erate out of faith in a certain belief syste&, and until now evolution was 'resented in a way that was difficult to reconcile with those beliefs. 7ur scientists s'end their lives develo'ing and discussing co&'le+ &odels of the way things work and naturally resist anything that doesn%t fit into those &odels. 6nderstanding evolution reIuires so&e fresh thinking. 5volution and 5ntro'y /n the broadest sense, evolution si&'ly &eans that things change over ti&e. 3s things change, the things that are good at sticking around and re'licating the&selves do so, while the other things don%t. The things that are good at sticking around and self2re'licating are called re'licators. The two &ost interesting re'licators in the universe todayinteresting both because they involve us and because they are evolving the fastestare the gene, which is the basic re'licator in the universe of biology, and the &e&e, which is the basic re'licator in the universe of the &ind. /n the world of co&'uters, you could look at &achine instructions or 'rogra&s as re'licators, but at this 'oint software is &ore a 'roduct of intentional crafting by hu&an &inds than of evolution by natural selection. 6ntil we start letting software loose to evolve on its own, it%s Sust another ty'e of &e&e. U ?hen we use the word evolution, as in the evolution of s'ecies by natural selection, we%re &aking a distinction between the winners of that battle, which continue to e+ist, and the losers, which don%t. #atural selection &eans that the forces of nature are doing the selecting, as o''osed to the artificial selection of breeding 'edigreed dogs, for e+a&'le, in which 'eo'le do the selecting. The things that are not good at sticking around eventually disa''ear through entro'y, the tendency of things to rando&i.e and level out over ti&e, like sand castles on a beach or a decaying log. 5volution is a scientific &odel of how things beco&e &ore co&'le+H entro'y describes how things beco&e si&'ler. They are the creative and the destructive forces of the universe. The two forces o'erate not only in the 'hysical universe, but also in the real& of the &ind. 8or e+a&'le, as the 5nglish language changes through ti&e, certain new words and usages evolve to enco&'ass new distinctions that have beco&e wides'read. Through entro'y, less2used words often lose distinctions such as subtleties of &eaning or irregular s'elling or 'ronunciation. Making 4o'ies The study of evolution is the study of &aking co'ies. 3 re'licator is anything that gets

co'ied. $o&eti&es a re'licator see&s to do &ore than Sust get co'ied 'assivelyH it see&s to take a &ore active role. Perha's it could be said to &ake co'ies of itself. The difference is &erely a &atter of 'oint of view. $o&eti&es it will see& &ore natural to think of a re'licator as &aking co'ies of itself, as when cells s'lit and #3 du'licates. 3t other ti&es, it will &ake &ore sense to think of a re'licator as so&ething that Sust ha''ens to get co'ied, as when 'eo'le hu& a catchy tune or the idea of de&ocracy s'reads throughout the world. /n all cases, the co'ying ha''ens, which is what evolution needs. 3nything at all that gets co'iedno &atter what the co'ying &echanis&, and whether or not there is a conscious intention to co'yis a re'licator. $o&eti&es &istakes get &ade in co'ying. That%s necessary for evolution to take 'lace. /f the fidelity of the co'ies is too high, nothing ever changes. /f it%s too low, you don%t really have a re'licator9 soon the Iuality that &ade the thing good at re'licating will be lost, Sust as a co'y of a co'y of a co'y of an office &e&orandu& beco&es illegible. 5volution reIuires two things9 re'lication, with a certain degree of fidelityH and innovation, or a certain degree of infidelity. 8itness 7f course, if only one or two co'ies ever get &ade of a re'licator, it%s not a 'articularly interesting one for the 'ur'ose of understanding evolution. ?e%re interested in re'licators that 'roduce enough high2fidelity co'ies of the&selves that those co'ies in turn beco&e re'licators, and the resultant e+'onential growth Iuickly 'roduces a large nu&ber of co'ies. ?hen we talk about survival of the fittest, we &ean survival of the thing that%s best at re'licatingat having co'ies of itself &ade. 8itness, in evolution, &eans the likelihood of being co'ied. The fitter so&ething is, the greater its chances of being co'ied. The word fit, in our &odel of how evolution works, &eans nothing &ore than that. There is no connotation of strength, agility, longevity, or e+traordinary intelligence. /f a re'licator is fit, it is good at re'licating. That%s all. /t%s te&'ting to think that a durable, long2lived re'licator &ight co&'ete successfully against a shorter2lived one that is better at being co'ied, but &athe&atics shows that this is not the case. /&agine two re'licators9 Methuselah lives =@@ years and &akes a co'y of itself every year, for a total of =@@ childrenH Thu&'er lives only one year but &akes three co'ies of itself before it dies. This table shows how the total 'o'ulation of each would look after each year9

#ow =@J@a one with J@ .eros after it&ay see& like a lot of Methuselahs. 1owever, after =@@ years, there would be a''ro+i&ately =@=N ti&es &ore of the 'rolific Thu&'ers than the longlived Methuselahsthat%s =,@@@,@@@,@@@,@@@,@@@,@@@ Thu&'ers for every Methuselah. 3nd that%s assu&ing the Thu&'ers don%t start eating the Methuselahs for dinner. The fittest re'licators &ake the &ost co'ies of the&selves and therefore beco&e &ore abundant than the rest. $urvival of the fittest is Sust a bit &isleadingH it%s &ore like abundance of the fittest. 7f course, if resources are scarce, the gain of the fittest re'licators is at the e+'ense of those less fit. The $elfish *ene 3ll this brings us to awkins%s selfish gene. The selfish2gene theory, in one flash of insight, answered so &any sticky Iuestions and 'u..ling details of evolution that it

'aralleled the astrono&ical discovery that the earth was not the center of the universe. ?hile awkins 'o'ulari.ed the selfish2gene theory in the sa&e =EMG book in which he introduced the word &e&e, credit for the first 'ublication of the idea goes to British biologist ?illia& . 1a&ilton in =EGJ. Prior to 1a&ilton%s work, &ost scientists had assu&ed evolution revolved around us, or individuals of whatever s'ecies we are discussing. The arwinian idea was that evolution 'roceeded by the fittest individuals surviving and re'roducing &ore individuals like the&selves. arwin%s brilliant insightthe theory of evolution by natural selectione+'lained the facts well enough that it held on for a long ti&e. But arwin had never heard of #3. The selfish2gene theory shifted the evolutionary s'otlight fro& the fittest individuals onto the fittest #3. 3fter all, it is the #3 that carries the infor&ation 'assed fro& one generation to the ne+t. The individuals of a s'ecies don%t, strictly s'eaking, re'licate co'ies of the&selves. Parents don%t clone the&selves to 'roduce children who are e+act co'ies. /nstead, they cause co'ies of 'ieces of #3 to be re'roduced in a new individual. The 'ieces of #3 that are best at causing the&selves to get re'licated beco&e &ost nu&erous, and it is they that 'artici'ate in survival of the fittest, not whole individuals. T hose 'ieces of #3 that 'lay this ga&e, causing the&selves to be re'licated by whatever &eans, are called genes. The fact that evolution see&s to revolve around their well2being rather than ours &akes the& selfish genes. Parado+ically, one way that scientists confir& the selfish2gene theory is by noticing unselfish behavior in ani&als. 8e&ale worker bees have evolved to labor all their lives to su''ort their &other, the Iueen, and have no children the&selves, because by a genetic Iuirk their &other%s offs'ring share &ore #3 with the& than their own offs'ring would. /t serves their selfish genes better to behave that way than to go off on their own. Mothers, throughout the ani&al kingdo&, will take great risks to save their children. $u''ose a &other confronts a 'redator that she, but not her two children, could esca'e fro&, and there%s a K@ 'ercent chance of getting herself and her brood killed and a K@ 'ercent chance of saving herself and her children. $ince each child inherits at least halfU of the &other%s #3, &athe&atics tells us that the #3 res'onsible for that tendency will have an advantage over co&'eting #3 that would direct her to abandon the kids and save herself. 4onfronting the 'redator will, on average, leave &ore co'ies of the Protect the kids gene in the world than running away leaves of the $ave yourself gene. 3ll of biological evolution has been a contest between 'ieces of #3 to see which genes could &ake the &ost co'ies of the&selves. 8ro& a gene%s 'oint of view, a hu&an being is Sust a way of &aking &ore genes. 3nother Point of View The trick to understanding genetic evolution, then, is to look at it fro& the 'oint of view of the 'ieces of #3 co&'eting for re'lication. To hel' do that, let%s take a look at life fro& the 'oint of view of so&e arbitrary #3 re'licator. :et%s call hi& an. #ow when / talk about an and about looking at life fro& an%s 'oint of view, /%& not i&'lying that an has a consciousness, eyes, a soul, or anything like that. /%& Sust suggesting that we, as intelligent hu&an beings, take a look at a &odel of evolution that centers around an, Sust as astrono&ers found that a &odel of our solar syste& that revolves around the sun was &ore useful than one that revolved around the earth. an%s situation in life is &uch like a university 'rofessor%s9 'ublish or 'erish. /n an%s case, what he%s 'ublishing are co'ies of everyone%s favorite subSect9 hi&self. oes an care if he 'ublishes or 'erishesT 7nly in so&e &ystical, &eta'hysical sense. an is Sust a lu&' of carbon and a hank of a&ino acids. /t wouldn%t be fair to say he cares about anything. ?e &ay care, having grown to love and cherish hi& now that we%ve

given hi& a na&e, but in reality an%s de&ise would si&'ly &ean that the ato&s of the universe would be arranged in a slightly different way. The #3 re'lication &echanis& would chug away, 'ublishing co'ies of on, iane, enise, oug, and 3rturo. :ife would go on. But let%s assu&e an is one of those #3 chunks that fares Iuite well at re'lication, so well that you can find an in =@@ 'ercent of the hu&an race, not to &ention Iuite a few chi&'s, baboons, and a'es. /n fact, you can trace an back to the earliest &a&&als, and even back to fish. ?ow" an &ust be a gene for so&ething 'retty i&'ortant, rightT an &ust be the genetic reci'e for our backbone or bloodstrea& or central nervous syste&, rightT1ow else could an have survived so long, without being a gene for so&ething e+tre&ely i&'ortant to our survivalT 3h. Back u'. / was looking at things fro& &y own 'oint of view. / can forgive &yself for that, since it%s hu&an nature, but let%s get back to an%s 'oint of view. /t turns out that all an does is 'roduce an en.y&e that s'lices &ore co'ies of an into #3 strands. That%s it. 3ll an does is 'rotect his own Sob. ,3t this 'oint any rese&blance to university 'rofessors is 'urely coincidental.an is not a gene for anything that enhances the survival of hu&an beings. 1e doesn%t need to be, any &ore than hu&an beings need to do anything to kee' the sun shining. an lives in a #3 factory and si&'ly has the right stuff to re'licate in that environ&ent. 3s / write this, research continues to show that vast stretches of #3 in our own chro&oso&es see& to have no effect on our develo'&ent. $ur'rising if we believe that evolution revolves around us, but fro& an%s 'oint of view it%s no &ore sur'rising than the fact that &uch of what we hu&ans do does nothing to benefit the survival of the earth. an is nothing &ore than a 'iece of #3 that is good at re'licating in his environ&ent. That environ&ent consists of9 The cells of our body and all the &echanis&s within those cells that are set u' to re'licate #3. The other #3 that ha''ens to reside in the sa&e cell as an. ?ithout that other #3, so&e of which does cause our bodies and &inds to develo' and re'roduce, an would 'erish with us. 6s, living our lives and doing what we do. ?e don%t live Iuite as long as ele'hants, which also host an, but we%re &uch &ore 'rolific . . . and we%re great hosts, at least until we cure cancer, which, by wildly re'licating great Iuantities of an, was one of his little 'leasures in life.

*enes, encoded in #3, can be thought of as a co&'uter 'rogra& running on the hardware of a cell. The 'rogra& out'uts an organis&, whose &ission is to s'read co'ies of its #3 'rogra& by &ating with other such organis&s. 7ur environ&ent. an was having great success with dinosaurs until so&ething ha''ened out there. 8ortunately, he had hedged his bets, holding shares in so&e other organis&s at the ti&e, but a few of his genetic friends had too &any eggs in one basket and got wi'ed out with the dinosaurs. These all work together to create an environ&ent for an. !eally, the whole universe is an%s environ&entH his fitness as a re'licator is influenced in a s&all or large way by everything else that e+ists. 3s the 'oet )ohn onne said, no &anor anis an island. 3nd so we bid farewell to an, one heck of a fit re'licator. 5volution has treated hi& well. But before we leave the to'ic of genetic evolution, let%s look at one Iuestion . . . . . . ?hat 5+actly /s 5volution 5volving TowardT Most of us who have taken high2school biology assu&e that evolution is guiding usand other ani&als, of courseto be fitter and fitter hu&an beings, steadily i&'roving the Iuality of life on 5arth and in the universe. 3s ti&e goes by, we co&'lacently assu&e, the fittest of us will surviveH re'roduceH and create a bigger, better, and stronger hu&an race. 3ni&als will evolve, too, and it won%t be long before the 0entucky erby is run in under a &inute or our dogs get s&art enough to housebreak the&selves. ?e say to ourselves, ?hat a wonderful world" 7r &aybe this notion of survival of the fittest is una''ealing to you. ?hy should evolution steer us toward greater fertility and strengthT ?hy should we evolve to a race of overse+ed and over&uscled &onstersT ?hy shouldn%t the $te'hen 1awkings and 1elen 0ellers of the world have a chanceafter all, we have the technology to overco&e so &any disabilities now. Perha's evolution will favor greater and greater intellect, or even greater and greater contributions to the world" There%s no need to argue the two 'oints, because evolution isn%t favoring either one of the&. *enetic evolution favors the re'lication of the fittest #3.3nd by fittest, / &ean the best at getting re'licated. $o as long as we%re good soldiers for #3 re'licators and kee' &ulti'lying and e+'anding, genetic evolution will favor us. But it also favors insects, which vastly outnu&ber us, and of course viruses, which 'arasitically insert the&selves into whatever re'lication &echanis& they can find, such as us, and do Iuite

well at it. ?hether we%re winning, or the insects are, or the viruses are, is si&'ly a &atter of fra&e of reference. /t%s the #3 that%s evolving, and we si&'ly 'lay a 'art in it. 5volution, #ot 5ngineering 5volution, of genes or &e&es, reflects the ha'ha.ard and baroIue result of an ongoing struggle, not the 'roduct of a brilliantly engineered design. ?hat%s the difference between evolution and engineeringT 5ngineering is the designing of a whole out of 'arts suited to their individual 'ur'oses. 5volution is the 'rocess of tiny incre&ental changes, each &aking so&e s&all or large i&'rove&ent in the ability of the thing to survive and re'roduce. 3 good engineer avoids the klugeSargon for the use of a 'art not 'articularly suited to its 'ur'ose. But evolution favors, even cherishes, the kluge. $uddenly finding a new 'ur'ose for a 'art without significantly di&inishing its old function is a sta'le of the evolutionary 'rocess. 3 classic e+a&'le of an evolutionary kluge is the hu&an eye. The nerves that connect the light2sensing cells to the brain actually co&e out the front of the retina rather than the backthe wiring 'rotrudes out into the eye%s field of vision. /t%s difficult to i&agine an engineer, let alone *od, designing so&ething this way. But evolution took what it had to work with and, kluge by kluge, built an eye. ;ou can i&agine a 'ri&itive creature having a light2sensing cell that evolved over &illions of years into a better and better source of vision. Back when the light2sensing cell was si&'le, there was no advantage in having it oriented one way or the other. By the ti&e it had develo'ed through kluges into a co&'le+ eye, with a focusing lens, there was no way to redesign it so the wires would co&e out the back. /t%s the klugy nature of evolution that &akes it so difficult to deci'her #3. /f #3 worked as a co&'uter 'rogra&, with its billions of lines of code divided neatly into functions and subroutines, we would have reverse engineered it by now. Politicians would be vying for votes based on their views on the &orality of our 'roducing genetically engineered creatures fro& scratch. /f #3 worked like that, genetic engineers could design ,and 'resu&ably 'atent or co'yright- any ani&al or organis& they could envision9 we would create, or 'erha's 'ass laws against creating, livestock that could be slaughtered for co&'letely healthy foodH s'ecial bacteria that could be inSected into our bloodstrea& and re'air cancerous tu&ors or eat the 'laIue out of arteriesH even house 'ets that co&e 'retrained to fetch sli''ers, bark at intruders, bring in the news'a'er, cook dinner . . . T 8ortunately or not, the &oral debate over such &anufactured bio2a''liances see&s still Iuite a few years in the future.

/n a classic e+a&'le of the klugy nature of evolution, the hu&an eye has wiring that runs in front of the retina rather than behind it, as an engineer &ight run the wiring if designing an eye. The co&'le+ity of the eye was once thought to be evidence of a su'ernatural 4reator, as it see&ed difficult to believe that such a co&'le+ organ could evolve by natural selection. Biologists now have evidence that eyes have evolved inde'endently, through natural selection, do.ens of ti&es in different s'ecies. That%s because #3 and evolution do not work like a software engineer writing a co&'uter 'rogra&. #3 evolves by &utation, by little 'ieces of it reversing, crossing over, inserting in one 'lace, deleting fro& another 'lace, resulting in so&e s&all or large difference in the develo'&ent of the e&bryo and finally the full2grown organis&.

But with &inor e+ce'tions, there is no one2to2one connection between any 'articular 'iece of #3 and a 'articular 'iece of the resultant adult organis&. The #3 is not a blue'rint, contrary to a 'o'ular &eta'hor. There is no 'lace in the hu&an #3 that re'resents the right inde+ finger, the left little toenail. True, scientists have found a few stretches of hu&an #3 that, to the degree they differ between individuals, see& to &a' to corres'onding changes in the individuals% a''earance, such as eye color, blood ty'e, or susce'tibility to various diseases. But the nu&ber of these stretches is &inuscule co&'ared to the total a&ount of hu&an #3, and, as / wrote earlier, scientists see& to be co&ing to the conclusion that there are huge strings of genetic &aterial in hu&ans that a''ear to have no effect whatsoever on their host. /s this sur'risingT 7nly if we look at #3 fro& the old ani&al2centric view of its function. /f we look at #3 as an ani&al%s &eans of re'roducing itself, it &akes no sense to have vast stretches of #3 that don%t do anything. /t%s Sust e+cess baggage. 8ro& the #3%s 'oint of view, however, it &akes 'erfect sense. 8ro& the 'oint of view of genetic &aterial, the hu&an being that results fro& the 'resence of #3 in &ale and fe&ale se+ cells is si&'ly the &ost effective way nature has found of 'roducing &ore of the sa&e. The #3 &akes use of the safety of the &other%s wo&b to &anufacture cell after cell containing co'ies of itself, and finally a new individual ,or &aybe twins- ready to go forth and hel' the #3 &ulti'ly yet again. ?e used to wonder why it was necessary for each cell to contain a co&'lete co'y of the #3 when it didn%t see& to use it in any way. ?ell, it%s not necessaryH we were Sust being insufferably egocentric" 8ro& the #3%s 'oint of view, having co'ies of itself is our whole 'oint for e+isting. T here%s no head2to2head co&'etition a&ong #3 for food or &ateswe take care of all the co&'etition for itso there%s little incentive for nature to re&ove any e+cess baggage fro& the #3 itself. /t Sust sits in safe little nuclei, inside safe little cells, inside safe little bodies thatwith the e+ce'tion of hu&an beings, who see& to have reached a new stage of evolutiondevote their entire little lives to finding suitable &ates that will hel' their host #3 re'licate co'ies of itself. oes that sound like an e+aggerationT #ot if you kee' in &ind that s'ecies evolved as a result of the fittestbest at re'licating #3 being selected and co'ied, selected and co'ied, over and over and over again over &illions of years. $o&e odd characteristics and behaviors can be e+'lained as the result of selfish2gene evolution. The 5volution of $'ecies / was reading one of those collections of answers to nagging Iuestions U such as ?hy do books have blank 'ages at the end of the&T and ?hy doesn%t the Vclose door% button in elevators ever do anythingT when / ran across the Iuestion ?hat is the 'ur'ose of the oil in the head of s'er& whalesT The author Iuoted several authorities, each giving a credible guess at what the 'ur'ose could be. They all 'ro'osed different ways in which the oil sac &ight benefit the survival or re'roduction of the whale, although they tended to s'eak as if the oil2storage &echanis& were designed by an engineer rather than evolved through the natural selection of #3. The overall 'ur'ose of any trait develo'ed through evolution is to &ake co'ies of so&e re'licatorthe #3 that causes that trait to develo'. 6sually that &eans the trait hel's the ani&al do one of two things9 survive or re'roduce. /n the case of the s'er& whale%s oil sac, it 'robably does hel' the whale survive, and 'erha's evolved fro& whales without an oil sac, or with Sust a little oil sac, or with a sac in so&e other 'art of the bodywe don%t know. But there are other 'ossibilities. ?hile the alliance between #3 re'licators and their host ani&als is a strong alliance, it%s not a 'erfect one. $o&eti&es the best interest of the #3 is not the best interest of the host. /%ll use the s'er& whale for a hy'othetical

e+a&'le. $u''ose that years ago s'er& whales had no oil sacs. $uddenly, through &utation or variation, one &ale whale was born with an oil sac that &ade his head a bit larger, but at the e+'ense of taking u' so&e brain s'ace and reducing his swi&&ing s'eed, both of which &ade hi& &ore susce'tible to 'redators and less able to find food, and therefore lowered his life e+'ectancy. 1owever, this oil2sac &utation had an interesting side effect. 7ne of the features of &ale whales that fe&ale whales were se+ually attracted to had been the &ale%s larger head. ?hen this oil sac showed u', even though it was a slight hindrance to that whale%s survival, it attracted &ore than his share of fe&ale whales. 4onseIuently, he s'ent his life doing lots of &ating and 'assed the oil2sac gene on to half his children. The sa&e thing ha''ened with his children, and very Iuickly the 'oor s&aller2headed &ale whales were left to the bachelor life, while the larger2headed but stu'ider and slower ones got all the whale babes. /n this hy'othetical case, if it really ha''ened this way, evolution favored the selfish #3 re'licator that was res'onsible for the oil sac over the i&'rove&ent of the whale s'ecies% survival ability. / have never heard anyone hy'othesi.e anything like this about whales, and / used a co&'letely &ade2u' e+a&'le Sust so as not to get into any argu&ents with evolutionary biologists, but scientists have seriously advanced si&ilar theories about 'eacock feathers. ?hy do so&e s'iders, for e+a&'le, have such elaborate rituals to deter&ine the e+act right &e&ber of the o''osite se+ to &ate with, even though fertile offs'ring with no a''arent reduction in fitness could be 'roduced by a &ating with any of several available varieties of s'iderT 3gain, we%re looking at it fro& the s'ider%s 'oint of view, which doesn%t reflect what ha''ened in the course of evolution. Those elaborately finicky &ating dances are the #3%s way of ensuring that the &ate will have the sa&e stretch of #3 that caused the dancing behavior. T he s'ider%s dance is the genetic eIuivalent of #intendo 'utting a s'ecial device in their ga&e2'laying &achines that 'revents other co&'anies% ga&e cartridges fro& working in their 'layers. There &ay be &any other brands of ga&e cartridge that you as a custo&er &ight even 'refer. But there%s only one brand that ensures 'rofits for #intendo, Sust as there%s only one s'ecies that guarantees #3 re'lication for the organis& &anufacturerthe #3 itself. 5volution always works for the benefit of selfish re'licators. 6sually, an ani&al%s survival and re'roduction contributes to the sa&e end as the re'licator%s co'ying and s'reading, but when there%s a conflict, the re'licator always wins. The 5nd of an 5ra That%s the story of genetic evolution, the success story of #3, in which we 'lay but a s&all su''orting role. But don%t des'air9 our stardo& awaits" 7ther than our intellectual fascination with it, genetic evolution has little effect on our everyday lives. ?orrying about genetic evolution is a little like worrying about being run over by a glacier9 unless you%re 'lanning to stand still for the ne+t few thousand years, it%s Sust not going to have &uch i&'act. 3s far as our individual lives are concerned, genetic evolution is over and done with. ?ith luck, neither your #3 nor &ine will evolve during our lifeti&es. /t%s the end of the #3 era, but it%s not the end of the story. 8or us, it%s Sust the beginning. / &entioned before that hu&ans see& to have reached a higher stage of evolution. ?hen / say that, /%& not si&'ly saying we%re &orally su'erior or *od%s chosen creatures or anything like that, true although it &ay be. ?hat / &ean is that our &inds, lives, and cultures are affected by the evolution of so&ething besides #3. Because while genetic evolution ha''ens so slowly that it even takes a lea' of faith to believe in it, there%s a new kind of evolution ha''ening so fast that it leaves #3 in the arwinian dust. /t%s the evolution of so&ething even nearer and dearer to us than #3. 6ntil a few thousand years ago, #3 was the fore&ost &ethod in the known universe

for storing and re'licating infor&ation. That%s why you can%t talk about evolution without talking about #39 evolution is about the re'lication of infor&ation, and al&ost all the infor&ation on 5arth was stored in #3. Today we have another &ediu& for storing infor&ationone that re'licates, &utates, and 'ro'agates far, far faster than #3. ?e have a &ediu& so effective at evolution that new re'licators can be created, tried, and s'read wildly all in days or even hours, as co&'ared to thousands of years for #3. The new &ediu& is so &uch &ore interesting and i&'ortant than #3 to our daily lives that genetic evolution is virtually none+istent by co&'arison. ?hat is the na&e of this new, ri'e, 'rolific &ediu& for evolutionT /t%s called the &ind, and the re'licator that evolves in our &inds is called the &e&e.

U 5+'eri&ents in &odeling evolution through co&'uters are 'art of the fascinating new field known as artificial life. !ead $teven :evy%s e+cellent book 3rtificial :ife ,Vintage Books, =EEJ- to learn &ore about it. U$ince the father shares so&e of the sa&e #3, the child &ay in fact have &ore than half. U8eld&an, avid. ?hen id ?ild Poodles !oa& the 5arthT ,1ar'erPerennial, =EE>-. Books have blank 'ages at the end of the& because 'resses 'rint &any 'ages at a ti&e on a single sheet called a signature. /f the book doesn%t co&e out to an even nu&ber of signatures, there are blank 'ages. The close door button on elevators is 'ri&arily for use by firefighters during e&ergency o'eration. 3lthough it occasionally does close the door during nor&al o'eration, often it si&'ly has no effect.

413PT5! 8/V5 T15 5V7:6T/7# 78 M5M5$ 3n invasion of ar&ies can be resisted, but not an idea whose ti&e has co&e. attributed to Victor 1ugo 7nce our brains evolved to the 'oint where we could receive, store, &odify, and co&&unicate ideas, there suddenly a''eared a new environ&ent that had the two characteristics needed for evolution9 co'ying and innovating. 7ur brains, which arose out of increasing usefulness in the 'rocess of kee'ing #3 hosts ,that%s us- alive and breeding, suddenly were thrust into the s'otlight of evolution. The brand2new innovation of the hu&an &ind was not Sust another arena for evolution besides the cell, it was a far better arena, si&'ly because evolution takes 'lace far &ore Iuickly. The biological forces that evolved our brains to the 'oint where we had &inds were now outdone a &illion ti&es over by the new &e&etic forces evolving our thoughts, our society, and our culture. 5volution of the &e&e was assured. 3 &e&e is a re'licator that uses the &ediu& of our &inds to re'licate. Me&e evolution ha''ens because our &inds are good at co'ying and innovatingideas, behaviors, tunes, sha'es, structures, and so on. The $elfish *ene for Minds ?e evolved, genetically, to the 'oint where we had &inds because of a selfish gene for &inds, or for so&e 'recursor of &inds that gave 'eo'le with that gene a survival advantage. ?ith that advantage, we survive and &ulti'ly, re'licating the selfish gene for &inds. T he #3 that causes us to have &inds is, of course, not Iuite as fit as the #3 that &akes insects s&all, fast, and hard2shelled. There are far &ore insects than 'eo'le, and we%re not even that good at winning battles with insects over who gets to live where. But our &inds are certainly an advantage to us, and therefore to our host #3, so here we are thinking dee' thoughts and 'retending we run the 'lace. $o be it. 8ro& the #3%s 'oint of view, of course, we%re still here for one reason only9 to go forth and &ulti'ly. But the #3%s only way to achieve its 'ur'ose is through the glacially slow 'rocess of genetic evolution, one ste' every >@ years or so, co&'ared with the breakneck 'ace of &e&e evolution in which an idea &utates in the ti&e it takes to read a sentence. Because &e&etic evolution ha''ens so &uch faster, &ost of what we do with our brains has little to do with genetic evolution. Being a geniusadvancing the state of science or technology, creating art, writing 'laysall these are klugy uses of our brain layered on to' of the uses that &ade brainy 'eo'le go forth and &ulti'ly. /%& not saying we can co&'letely ignore genes fro& now on. There have been alar&ing re'orts of the lowering of the general intelligence level because s&art 'eo'le have fewer babies. U /f there are any genes that give 'eo'le the tendency to take on &e&es that li&it their nu&ber of offs'ring, they will die out in a few generations in favor of co&'eting genes that give 'eo'le a tendency to acIuire childbearing &e&es. $o, &aking a note to kee' an eye on our &ental rearview &irror to check on the 'rogress of genetic evolution every once in a while, let%s shift into the fast lane for the rest of the book and run with the &e&es. The )ust2as2$elfish Me&e 6nderstanding the evolution of &e&es reIuires Iuite a bit of sideways thinking. 8or instance, it%s not useful to talk about 'ur'ose when it co&es to evolution, as in the Iuestion ?hat was the evolutionary 'ur'ose of the &indT because 'ur'ose de'ends on 'oint of view. The &echanis& of evolution has no 'ur'ose in itselfH it is si&'ly the ine+orable battle of

re'licators for access to whatever re'lication &echanis&s are available. /f Minerva is the na&e of the #3 strand that &ade the difference between &ind and no &ind, then fro& Minerva%s 'oint of view, the 'ur'ose of our &inds is to ensure the safety and re'lication of Minerva. 8ro& our 'oint of view, the 'ur'ose of Minerva is to give us our &inds. /t%s a &atter of 'ers'ective. /nstead of looking at &e&e evolution fro& our own 'oint of view as we nor&ally do, we need to look at it fro& the 'oint of view of the &e&e, as if the &e&e were acting in its own selfish interests and doing whatever it takes to re'licate and beco&e wides'read. The selfish &e&e conce't does not, of course, ascribe any consciousness or &otivation to the &e&eH it si&'ly &eans we can understand better by looking at evolution fro& the &e&e%s 'oint of view. The evolution of ideas, culture, and society revolves around the selfish &e&e Sust as the evolution of s'ecies revolves around the selfish gene. 3gain, this is not the Truth, Sust a useful &odel. 3nd viewing life in this way &ay be a big 'ill to swallowafter all, we%re used to thinking of ourselves as brilliant, freethinking individuals, not 'layers in the &e&e%s ga&ebut it%s a 'ill that relieves &uch of the headache of understanding how culture works. 3 Me&e%s2 5ye View 8ro& a &e&e%s 'oint of view, our &inds e+ist for the sole 'ur'ose of &aking co'ies of the &e&e. /%& not saying a &e&e has a 'oint of view, Sust that if it did have one, that%s what it would be. The selfish &e&e is Sust as selfish as the selfish gene, and the conce't is Sust as void of any literal &eaning. The only 'oint of going through this &ental 'ret.eling of looking at the world fro& the 'oint of view of &indless re'licators is that it brings a great deal of clarity to a confusing situation. $o fro& a &e&e%s 'oint of view, not only our &inds and brains but also our whole bodies, cities, countries, and certainly television sets e+ist for that sa&e selfish 'ur'ose. That%s i&'ortant to understand. /f television sets did not aid in co'ying &e&es ,one obvious candidate is the 7wn a TV strategy2&e&e-, we would have no television sets" They certainly didn%t evolve biologically" The &ost 'o'ular and 'revalent 'arts of our culture are the &ost effective at co'ying &e&es. 5very 'art of our culture beyond what we see in ani&al culturesand &aybe even thatis a 'roduct of &e&e evolution. The &ost 'o'ular ideas are the ones that s'read the easiest. The &ost 'o'ular art is the art with the fittest &e&es. Television is a crucible for &e&e evolution9 shows that don%t attract re'eat viewers or word2of2&outh reco&&endations die Iuickly, re'laced by an endless su''ly of &utations and variations. /deas for running your business, &anaging your finances, and i&'roving your life beco&e 'revalent not because they are the best for you, but because they are the best at s'reading. The two are so&eti&es related, but often not. ?hat &akes a &e&e good at s'readingwhat &akes it a good re'licatorT ?e have &any ways to s'read &e&ess'eech, writing, body language, &onkey2see2&onkey2 do, televisionbut why do so&e &e&es, such as the 'roverbial bad news, travel fast . . . while other &e&es, such as the ones in un'o'ular TV shows, die IuicklyT ?e can start to get an answer to that Iuestion by s'eculating about the very beginnings of &e&e evolution, back when genetic evolution had &ore influence u'on the contents of our brains than &e&e evolution did, back when natural selection 'icked #3 for s&art brains over the alternatives. The Pur'ose of 7ur Brains /nitially, the only 'ur'ose of our brains was to hel' our #3 &ake co'ies of itself. The chief way we hel'ed it do that is by surviving, &ating with other 'eo'le who shared &ost of that #3, and having as &any children as 'ossible live to re'roduce. 7riginally, the 'ur'ose of our brains was one or &ore of the following9

C T o increase our chances of surviving to the age of re'roduction and beyond C T o increase the nu&ber of children we had C T o increase our chances of &ating with a good &ating 'artner, so&eone who would likely 'roduce the &ost co'ies of the #3 res'onsible for the brain

Television sets aid in co'ying &e&es, including the 7wn a TV set &e&e. /n other words, our brains &ade us better at 'ursuing the four basic drives ani&als have, fondly referred to by .oologists as the four 8%s9 fighting, fleeing, feeding, anderfinding a &ate. There were Iuite a few brain &echanis&s already working for these drives even before the evolutionary ste' that gave us conscious &inds. ?e share those &echanis&s with other ani&als9 fear, sending and receiving verbal and visual signals, &e&ory, and an instinct for belonging to a grou'. 3ll of these &echanis&s aid in the re'lication of #3. The three classes / divided &e&es into in 4ha'ter > co&e fro& so&e very early uses of our brains, uses that su''orted survival and re'roduction. 5ven ani&al brains can be 'rogra&&ed with distinctions ,a &other%s face, a 'redator, edible food-H strategies ,'aths to travel, ways to uncover food-H and associations ,&e&ories of 'leasant or dangerous e+'eriences, of who%s a friend and who%s an ene&y-. Me&es build on these basic brain functionsH these brain functions are 'art of the hardware design for the software called &e&es. The 5volution of 4o&&unication 3s ani&als evolved, those that had a su'erior ability to co&&unicate certain infor&ation tended to survive and re'roduce better than the others. ?hat kind of infor&ationT Back to the four 8%s9 infor&ation about danger, about the location of food, and about the fact that they are ready to &ate. 7ur &inds &ake it &uch easier for us to co'y ideas9 strategy2&e&es, distinction2 &e&es, and association2&e&es. /t%s hard to overstress the i&'ortance of co'ying in the evolution of our culture and body of knowledge. /f our &inds didn%t have the ability to co'y ideas fro& each other, all of us would be li&ited to the knowledge we could gather for ourselves in a single lifeti&e. 3t so&e 'oint, our &inds evolved to the 'oint that we develo'ed language. :anguage &ade &e&e evolution e+'lode. /t revolutioni.ed co&&unication by &aking it 'ossible to create new conce'ts, new distinctionsH to associate one thing with anotherH and to share strategies. :ower ani&als couldn%t do that. The battle was on now for constant

i&'rove&ent of co&&unication to enhance survival and re'roduction. There are two basic ways to i&'rove co&&unication9 talk louder or listen closer. ?e can certainly e+'ect natural selection to favor ani&als that brag verbally, visually, or otherwise about their own se+ual 'rowess over ones that shyly wait for Mr. or Ms. !ight to co&e along. /t%s a bit &ore difficult to see why selfish selection would favor a tendency to give a shout and let others know about danger or food location, but it &akes sense when we reali.e that the shouting gene is 'robably shared a&ong the shouter and the listeners. !e&e&ber that genetic evolution selects for genes, not individuals. 7n the listening end, natural selection will tend to choose an ani&al that%s ready to dro' everything and 'ay attention to i&'ortant infor&ation over another with a tendency to ignore it. 8ro& a gene%s 'oint of view, i&'ortant infor&ation is whatever will 'rotect, and increase the nu&ber of co'ies of, that genethat is, infor&ation about danger, food, and se+. /f Ba&bi%s &o& had 'ricked u' her ears Sust a touch sooner, she &ight be alive today to tell her story of how she heard the twig breaking under the hunter%s boot in Sust the nick of ti&e. U 4o&&unication evolved in order to co&&unicate very s'ecific things9 danger, food, and se+. Therefore, we, as the 'roduct of the evolution of ani&als, find ourselves with the tendency both to talk about and to 'ay attention to danger, food, and se+ in 'reference to other subSects. Me&es involving danger, food, and se+ s'read faster than other &e&es because we are wired to 'ay &ore attention to the&we have buttons around those subSects. The 7rigin of Me&es ?hat were the original &e&es so i&'ortant to our survival and re'roduction that co&&unicating hu&ans 'roliferatedT ?e can i&agine9 4risis. The Iuick s'reading of fear saved &any lives by alerting 'eo'le Iuickly to danger. ?e see nonconscious ani&als e+hibit co&&unication of the crisis &e&efor e+a&'le, in sta&'edesbut co&&unication of the distinction2&e&e crisis along with s'ecific details had &ore survival value. Mission. 4o&&unicating a &ission such as fighting an ene&y, building shelter, or finding food allowed 'eo'le to survive in ti&es of adversity or scarcity. *rou's of 'eo'le who evolved to be good at sending and receiving the &ission &e&e had fitter #3 than those who were not, because they were able to work together for a co&&on goal. Proble&. /dentifying a situationsuch as lack of food, co&'etition for 'otential &ates, and so onas a 'roble& to be solved &ade each individual better eIui''ed to survive and &ate. anger. /n 'articular, knowledge about 'otential dangers, even if not i&&ediate crises, was valuable. 0nowing where 'redators hunted or where water was 'oisoned enhanced survival. 7''ortunity. 3cting Iuickly to avoid &issing out on a rewardhistorically, food, 'rey, or a 'otential &atethat 'resented itself was of benefit to evolving hu&ans.

3ll of these &e&es are very &uch with us today. /t would be sur'rising if they were not, since, on a #32evolutionary scale, it was Sust recently that our brains evolved to give us consciousness and thereby the ability to co&&unicate &e&es on a large scale. But it would be a challenge to find any culture or subculture on 5arth today that did not concern itself with crises, &issions, 'roble&s, dangers, or o''ortunities, although there &ay be great disagree&ent over the nature of those. :et%s run a Iuick check to see if we s'end an inordinate a&ount of our co&&unication bandwidth on those subSects, s'rinkled in with our old friends danger, food, and se+9 8li' through a few channels on your TV. :eaf through a few 'ages of your daily news'a'er. 3s / write this, the national fiction bestseller list is 'o'ulated with thrillers and love storiesH and the nonfiction list has books about deadly diseases ,viruses"-, i&'roving your se+ life, eating better food, and 'olitical crises, with only the occasional self2i&'rove&ent book to offer a twinkle of ho'e. 3nd 'eo'le 'robably only read those because they%re scared of the danger they%ll encounter if they don%t" / always thought the book The octor%s Ruick ?eight :oss iet &ust have sold a &illion co'ies on the &e&es in the title alone. ?hat an o''ortunity to have so&eone you trust address the 'roble& of your se+2a''eal crisis over food" To illustrate the effectiveness of the crisis, &ission, 'roble&, danger, and o''ortunity &e&es, read the following two 'aragra'hs, both accurate descri'tions of a book about &e&es. The first 'aragra'h doesn%t have these &e&es in it9 /ntroduction to Me&etics is a co&'ilation of ideas on the science of &e&etics. 5ach cha'ter su&&ari.es a different to'ic in this field. /ncluded are e+a&'les of how &e&etics i&'acts 'eo'le%s lives, illustrates historical data, and offers choices for the future. The second is chock2full of all five of these key &e&es9 Virus of the Mind e+'oses the i&&inent crisis of the dangerous new technology known as &e&etics. ?hat is it, and how can we guard against its har&ful effectsT 7ur only chance is to have everyone read Virus of the Mind before it is too late" 3 co&&on reaction would be to fall aslee' halfway through the first 'aragra'h and to 'ay &uch &ore attention to the second. ;ou have little control over that tendency9 your brain is hardwired to res'ond that way. ;ou &ay have noticed so&e ske'ticis& kicking in while reading the second 'aragra'h. The ske'ticis& strategy2&e&e 'rotects the e+isting set of &e&es your &ind is holding to so&e degree. 6nfortunately, it resists beneficial and har&ful &e&es eIually. Pushing 7ur Buttons #ow it gets &ore co&'licated, so hold on tight. !e&e&ber, our brains were not engineered for a s'ecific 'ur'oseH they were kluged together by natural selection, different things being tried out, strengthened, weakened, and co&bined, until so&ething interesting ha''ened that caused the genes res'onsible for that thing to re'licate better than the others. That%s how our brains, and those of other ani&als, evolved to 'ay close attention to infor&ation involving danger, food, and se+. 3nd when &e&e evolution started to take off, the &e&es that initially succeeded were ones involving danger, food, and se+, a&ong others. 3&ong othersT $ure, because our brains have a natural tendency to 'ay attention to so&e other things, too. :aughter and yawning, for instance, are both contagiousour brains tend to re'licate the& when they%re around. But &ost of the things to which our brains are attentive evolved in order to su''ort our survival and re'roduction. The co&'le+ity co&es because genetic evolution didn%t Sust sto' at the 'oint where we were eIui''ed to notice a tiger running toward us, a ready2 to2eat &eal, or an eyelash2batting &e&ber of the o''osite se+. 5volution naturally 'rogressed to select for a diversity of clever, sneaky, and indirect ways of avoiding danger, finding food, and wooing &ates.

Before consciousness, we had no way of co&ing about these strategies logically or rationally, but we did have feelings, instincts, and drives, as we sus'ect other ani&als do, too. 3ll ani&als have four basic instinctual drives9 fighting, fleeing, feeding, and &ating. $o in addition to 'aying attention to danger, food, and se+, our brains co&e eIui''ed with two ways of dealing with danger and one each for food and se+, with no conscious thought necessary. These drives work by firing u' a''ro'riate 'arts of our brains, which, if we don%t consciously intervene, will drive us to satisfy the need. 5ven if we do consciously refrain fro& acting on i&'ulse, we can feel this all going on Iuite easily and in fact have na&es for the distinct feelings that go along with the drives to fight, flee, feed, and &ate9 anger, fear, hunger, and lust. These four feelings are wired so directly into our brains that, civili.ed though we &ay get, we e+'erience fro& ti&e to ti&e so&ething or so&eone 'ushing our buttonssaying or doing so&ething that generates one of these basic feelings in us. The 'hrase is usually associated with anger, but we%ve got buttons for fear, hunger, and lust that are Sust as big and Sust as 'ushable. 3s civili.ed hu&an beings, of course, we know we don%t have to give in to i&'ulse and act when our buttons are 'ushed, but it%s very, very difficult to avoid 'aying attention when it ha''ens. 3nd where there%s attention, there are &e&es. The idea of 'aying attention 'lays a central role in understanding &e&es. 3 &e&e that lots of 'eo'le 'ay attention to will be &ore successful than a &e&e that few notice. $o over the &illions of years necessary for &aSor genetic evolution to take 'lace, we aren%t sur'rised to find that &ost ani&als, including ourselves, have a genetic tendency to 'ay attention to the things that were i&'ortant in getting us where we are today9 danger, food, and se+. /n our search for &ind viruses, then, our first candidates will be situations that 'ush one or &ore of these four buttonsanger, fear, hunger, and lustand thus draw our attention, our 'recious attention, to a use of our consciousness for which, u'on reflection, we would not choose to s'end it. 4onsciousness 5nhanced co&&unication had huge survival value in the evolution of hu&an beings. But the innovation that &akes us hu&an is consciousness. /t%s the sa&e innovation that &akes us such a wonderful environ&ent for &e&e evolution. /nitially, consciousness &ust have served the sa&e 'ur'ose as all these other brain &echanis&s9 hel'ing our #3 &ake co'ies of itself through our survival and re'roduction. 1ow did consciousness assistT /t%s not difficult to s'eculate. 1ere are a few ideas9 C /t allowed better co&&unication and coo'eration between 'eo'le for finding food and for self2defense. C /t allowed 'lanning for the future. C Proble&2solving ability &ade it easier to find food and &ates. C 3 greater ability to understand the world led to increased success in all as'ects of life. /t%s i&'ortant to understand what the brain%s 'riorities are, because our thoughts are naturally biased toward these things.

The dee' thoughts we think and the elegant intellectual &odels we build are all kluged on to' of these advanced survival and &ating functions of the brain, which in turn are kluged on to' of the 'ri&itive survival and &ating functionsfear, anger, hunger, and lust. $econd27rder Buttons id genetic evolution sto' there, with those four basic drivesT #o, evolution continued. 7ur brains evolved countless secondary strategies to &ake us better not only at survival and re'roduction, but also at satisfying those four first2order urges. 1ere are a few second2order instinctual drives so&e 'eo'le see& to have that are all o''ortunities for &e&es to take advantage of9 Belonging. 1u&ans are gregariousthat is, they like co&'any. There are any nu&ber of evolutionary reasons for the e+istence of this drive, including safety in nu&bers, econo&ies of scale, and si&'ly the 'resence of &ore 'otential &ates. Me&es that give 'eo'le a feeling of belonging to a grou' have an advantage over &e&es that don%t. istinguishing yourself. 3 drive to do so&ething new, innovative, or significant &akes an individual &ore likely to find food or shelter and &akes hi& stand out fro& the crowd as a 'otential &ate. 3ny &e&es that &ake 'eo'le feel distinguished, s'ecial, or i&'ortant have an edge in &e&e evolution. 4aring. $ince hu&ans share the great &aSority of their #3 with all other hu&ans, it &akes sense that we evolved a drive to care about the welfare of other 'eo'le. U Me&es that take advantage of 'eo'le%s caring natures have an advantage in the battle for a share of our &inds. 3''roval. 3 drive to do what others, or you yourself, a''rove of. 3s ani&als and hu&ans evolved into societies, individuals fulfilling whatever their roles were did a better Sob of 'er'etuating their genes, and 'resu&ably the genes shared by others in their co&&unity, than those who didn%t 'lay by the rules. $uccessful &e&es hook into 'eo'le%s drive to get a''roval and 'lay on the guilt, sha&e, and hurt that result if they don%t get it.. 7beying authority. /t was in an individual%s genetic interest that is, in the interest of his #3to recogni.e the authority of so&eone &ore 'owerful or wiser than he is. *oing along with that authority would increase his #3%s chance of survival and re'lication, while fighting the authority &ight get hi& killed or left out in the cold. The way these second2order drives work is si&ilar to the way the 'ri&ary drives work9 you get so&e kind of good feeling when you%re doing the thing that the drive drives you to do, or you get a bad feeling when you%re not. These second2order feelings often aren%t as clear2cut as anger, fear, hunger, and lustH and we don%t even know if everybody has the sa&e kinds of feelings for the sa&e kinds of drives. #evertheless, 'eo'le who have the drive to belong, or the drive to distinguish the&selves, know what /%& talking about. The i&'ortant 'oint is9 Peo'le have &any secondary drives connected to various strong feelings, and &e&es that activate these feelings have the evolutionary advantage. ?e will si&'ly 'ay &ore attention to &e&es that 'ush our buttons because that is our

nature. 7ur tendency to 'ay s'ecial attention to these &e&es &akes the& &ore likely to re'licate and beco&e e&bedded in our culture. Me&es that 'ush our 'ri&ary and secondary buttons have an evolutionary advantage over &e&es that don%t, even if those other &e&es &ight be &ore accurate or &ore su''ortive of our Iuality of life. !e&e&ber9 Iuality of life is not what natural selection is aboutH Iuantity of re'lication is. )ust as #3 re'licates when the organis& it generates survives and re'roduces, &e&es re'licate when the behavior they cause attracts attention. Pushing our buttons is a great way to attract attention to a &e&e, so &e&es that annoy, seduce, enrage, or scare us tend to beco&e wides'read. More 8it Me&es Me&e evolution ha''enedand continues to ha''enfast. Practically the instant we beca&e ca'able of co'ying &e&es, they started to evolve. They evolved away fro& those basic ty'es that our brains were designed to s'read and toward ones that for whatever reason were better at s'readingwere fitter &e&es. Me&es evolved through cultural organis&s in the environ&ent of the society of hu&an &inds, Sust as #3 evolved through organis&s in the environ&ent of the earth. /n addition to the survival2oriented &e&es that are still with us, there are so&e &ore ty'es of &e&es that don%t see& to 'articularly hel' or hurt our survival, but by their very nature are fit to s'read effectivelythese are &e&es that are fit si&'ly because they are variations on the idea $'read this &e&e9 Tradition. 3 strategy2&e&e to continue what was done or believed in the 'ast is auto&atically self2'er'etuating. /t doesn%t &atter whether the tradition is good or bad, i&'ortant or irrelevant. $ay you have two adult service clubs, the 0angaroo 4lub and the $lug 4lub. The $lug charter stresses traditionconducting &eetings on $aturday &ornings, e&'loying a little ritual of e&'tying the saltshakers before lunch, and so onH the 0angaroo charter stresses novelty and variety. /n >@ years, the $lugs% tradition &e&e is still likely to be around, carrying with it the Meet $aturday &orning &e&e and the 5&'ty saltshaker &e&e. The 0angaroos% original &e&es will have died in the na&e of variety. 7nce a tradition gets started, it auto&atically continues until so&ething &ore 'owerful sto's it. Peo'le infected with tradition &e&es are 'rogra&&ed to re'eat this &e&e in the future and s'read this &e&e to future generations" Traditions die hard. 5vangelis&. 3ny &e&e that e+'licitly involves s'reading itself to other 'eo'le has an added advantage over other &e&es. 5vangelis& is often co&bined with the &ission &e&e, &aking it even &ore 'owerful. /t &akes little difference whether the thing being evangeli.ed is true or false, good or badH evangelis& works so well that it has beco&e one of the &ost 'revalent &e&es on 5arth. 5vangelis& tells us to s'read this &e&e as &uch as you can" Then there are &e&es that beco&e entrenched in 'eo'le%s &inds and are e+tre&ely resistant to attack9 8aith. 3ny &e&e that entails believing in it blindly can never be dislodged fro& your belief syste& by any attack or argu&ent. 4o&bined with evangelis&, faith &akes for a 'owerful &ind2virus envelo'e that can be stuffed with Sust about any content.

 $ke'ticis&. Ruestioning new ideas is a defense against new &e&es. The o''osite of faith, ske'ticis& actually has a very si&ilar effect on the &ind 'rogra&&ed with it. $ke'tics are resistant to new ideas Sust as the faithful are. 3 faithful and a ske'tic can argue forever and never learn anything. 7ther &e&es are fit because of the nature of co&&unication. /&agine a grou' of 'eo'le 'laying the ga&e of tele'hone. 7ne 'layer starts by whis'ering a sentence in the ne+t 'layer%s ear. That 'layer whis'ers whatever she hears to the ne+t 'layer, who continues the 'rocess until the &essage, usually garbled beyond recognition, finally &akes its way back to the originator, who bursts out laughing at the way his &essage has evolved. This is &e&e evolution in a &icrocos&" ?hat kinds of &e&es survive the ordealT 8a&iliarity. 6nusual words or 'hrases Iuickly &eta&or'hose into fa&iliar ones9 'ZtX de foie gras &ight Iuickly beco&e 'utty defogger in one ga&e. The fa&iliar s'reads &ore Iuickly than the unfa&iliar because 'eo'le have distinction2&e&es for fa&iliar things already and therefore notice the& &ore. Making sense. Me&es that &ake sense s'read &ore Iuickly than ones that don%t. Peo'le are Iuick to acce't flawed e+'lanations that &ake &ore sense over &ore accurate ones that are harder to understand. ;ou see this ha''en all the ti&e when fa&ous Iuotations get distorted through evolution9 does &usic have char&s that soothe the savage beast or breastT Playwright ?illia& 4ongreve said the latter. My favorite e+a&'le of &e&e evolution through the universal ga&e of tele'hone is 5&erson%s Iuotation fro& his essay $elf !eliance9 3 foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little &inds. This one gets &angled so &uch that / even have a book, about Iuotations and facts co&&only &isIuoted, that &isIuotes 5&erson in its su''osed correction" U 5&erson%s Iuote 'oints out the danger of falling into the Truth Tra'. The hobgoblin of little &indswhat kee's 'eo'le fro& &aking the &ost of their livesis allowing the rando& &e&etic 'rogra&&ing you got since you were born to direct your life consistent with itself. 6nderstanding &e&etics gives you a chance to look inside at what 'rogra&s you are running and, if you choose, to re'rogra& yourself 'owerfully and consciously to 'oint your life in whatever direction you desire. 7f course, then you have to look at what 'rogra&s are governing your evaluation of how you%re 'rogra&&ed, at what 'rogra&s are governing what you think you desire, then at what 'rogra&s are governing your &otives for re'rogra&&ing yourself, and . . . " $oon you find yourself dee' into the real& of 'hiloso'hy. The science of &e&etics does not carry with it a value Sudg&ent of how you should live your lifeH it Sust gives you a lot of 'ower over living it however you choose. 4onsciously. The theory of &e&eticsthe &e&etics &eta&e&esalthough invented decades ago, has had difficulty s'reading. /n writing Virus of the Mind, / have the goal of 'ackaging as &any fit &e&es as 'ossible with the &e&etics &eta&e&e so that it will s'read as Iuickly and widely as 'ossible. oesn%t that &ake senseT 7ld Brain, #ew ?orld Me&etics is not the only scientific idea that isn%t widely known. Many such ideas are difficult for 'eo'le to gras'. /n fact, science, including &e&etics, is Sust one as'ect of &odern culture that our brains are ill eIui''ed to understand. But why would we e+'ect

our brains to be good at dealing with &odern cultureT ?ould we e+'ect a co&'uter to understand its own 'rogra&T #o" /t Sust needs to run the 'rogra&, not understand it. 3nd our brains evolved not to understand the&selves, but to 'erfor& very s'ecific tasks. /t takes a lot of hard work for 'eo'le to use those brains, which were not designed for that 'ur'ose, to understand science" The wiring in our brains evolved over &illions of years. uring that ti&e, our environ&ent changed very little, as we can verify by e+a&ining archaeological digs. /t is only very, very recently in the ti&escale of genetic evolution that our environ&ent started to change so fast that day2to2day routines could be altered significantly within a single lifeti&e. To understand &e&es, we need to reali.e that our brains, which evolved to su''ort our survival in a relatively unchanging world, re&ain essentially the sa&e even though we have transfor&ed our world &any ti&es over since we evolved to the 'oint of consciousness. Me&e evolution selects for the ideas, beliefs, attitudes, and &yths that we 'ay the &ost attention to and broadcast the loudest. 3nd without conscious intervention, what we 'ay attention to and broadcast the loudest is deter&ined by that co&'le+ web of feelings and drives, cravings and fears, that evolved to kee' us alive and &ating. The word 'ay in 'ay attention is Iuite a't. 3s we are conscious beings, attention is our &ost 'recious co&&odity. 3ttention is a 'iece of our consciousness, a slice of our hu&an life. ?hen we direct our attention at so&ething, we are s'ending a 'iece of our conscious life. 1ow &any of us consciously direct our attention toward whatever is &ost i&'ortant to usT / for one hate the fact that &y attention tends to get sucked in by 'eo'le and events that 'ush &y survive2and2re'roduce buttons, relics of &y ani&al 'ast. Those buttons &ake &e unconsciously waste large 'ortions of &y life. The 'oint is that danger, food, and se+ are the 'riorities of your genes, not necessarily your own 'ersonal 'riorities. ?hen you feel your attention being 'ulled away fro& what is &ost i&'ortant to you by an a''arent crisis, the latest and greatest 'i..a fro& o&ino%s, or an attractive 'asserby, your genes are cons'iring to steal your &ost valuable 'ossession9 your consciousness. /deas are infectious. ?e catch the& fro& other 'eo'le%s behavior, fro& the little bits of culture all around us. That%s great if the ideas we catch are good ideasones that hel' us with whatever we%re u' to in life. The 'roble& is, as you%ve Sust seen, ideas s'read according to how good their &e&es are, not so &uch according to how useful they are to our lives or even according to how true they are. 3s nice as it &ight be to i&agine that we are evolving toward a better, &ore civili.ed, &ore co&'assionate world, what we%re really evolving toward is a world full of &e&es and &ind viruses that re'licate better. 5ver wonder why life can be such a struggle so&eti&esT There%s a fantasy 'eo'le have that an ideal life would &ean Sust rela+ing and doing what co&es naturally. ?ell, / hate to be the one to break the bad news, but what co&es naturally is so far re&oved fro& our &odern life as to be irrelevant. Because of the s'eedy evolution of culture, technology, and society, we can%t even say any&ore that what co&es naturally leads us to re'licate as &any co'ies as 'ossible of our genes. Today, what co&es naturally is a horrendous &is&atch between the old wiring of our brains for 'rehistoric ti&es and the co&'letely different challenges and o''ortunities of the &odern world. 7ur brains are still wired to 'ay attention to, and generate feelings for, situations that were i&'ortant to us in 'rehistoric ti&esand i&'ortant only in the sense that they hel'ed our genes &ake as &any co'ies of the&selves as 'ossible. The ideas that s'read the easiest, and therefore 'ervade society, are the ones that easily 'enetrate that old $tone 3ge brain of ours. The whole of science has been a concerted effort to foil that natural selection of $tone 3ge ideas by our brains and instead select ideas that are useful, that work, that are accurate &odels of reality. But science is way ahead of

the rest of culture in that sense. /n the :ong !un #ow wait a &inute. Me&es are an evolutionary ada'tation of hu&an beings. oesn%t that &ean that, whatever &adness there is in their &ethods, we can be certain that &e&es have our best interests at heartT 3ren%t we guaranteed that, eventually, they will contribute to our beco&ing better and better ada'ted to our environ&entT /n the long run, whatever goes on with this &e&e business, we%ll land on our feet, because, well, s'ecies Sust ada't auto&atically to whatever the environ&ent throws at the&. on%t theyT /t would be nice to think that, but it won%t ha''en that way unless the way evolution handles it is to eli&inate &e&es altogether, and us along with the&. Me&es have their own evolutionary 'ath. They do not evolve to su''ort the re'lication of our genes. /f you don%t believe &e, look at the fact that the cultures we consider &ost advanced have the s&allest 'o'ulation growth but the &ost effective cultural i&'erialis&. They%re s'reading &e&es, not genes. 7kay, so &e&e evolution won%t auto&atically contribute to our se+ lives or our fa&ily si.e. But at least it will contribute to our survival, won%t itT /n the long runT oesn%t it have toT 3fter all, &e&es live in our &inds, don%t theyT #o'e. 3s we s'eak, infor&ation is finding &ore and &ore ways to re'licate and survive. /deas that would once be forgotten without a trace are now available instantly through infor&ation2retrieval syste&s. 4o&'uters now back the&selves u' auto&atically, re'licating all the infor&ation in the&selves. The e2&ail chain letter is an early e+a&'le of a virus hosted by both co&'uters and &inds. U 3s co&'uters get s&arter, co&'uter2based re'licators will beco&e co&&on&utating re'licators that not only s'read but also evolve. 3nd as co&'uter2based re'licators start to overtake &ind2based &e&es as the 'ri&ary re'ositories and co&&unicators of infor&ation, these new re'licators could have &ore influence on the sha'e of the world than &e&es do, Sust as &e&es overtook #3 as sha'ers of the global environ&ent. Maybe non2hu&anbased re'licators will evolve to the 'oint where we fade into the background, &ere asterisks in the stat book of the universe" 3nd if we should start getting in the way of these new co&'uter2based re'licators, as so &any s'ecies of #32based re'licators have gotten in our way and beco&e endangered or e+tinct, thenT" /f we do survive, what about our Iuality of lifeT /s it evolving for better or worseT $o&e &ight intuitively feel that if we Sust let cultural evolution run its natural course, all the co&'eting 'olitical, religious, co&&ercial, and scientific ideas will eventually &elt together in a kind of free2enter'rise syste& of the &ind and evolve into a uto'ian state, a return to 5den or arrival at #irvana. This was the idea behind social arwinis&, a 'o'ular 'olitical 'hiloso'hy in the days of the robber barons. 7n the other hand, we &ight look at the fact that &e&e evolution ha''ens with lightning s'eed co&'ared to the genetic evolution of hu&an beings and conclude that, unchecked, &e&e evolution will have us devote &ore and &ore of our &ental resources to re'licating &e&es. ?e &ight worry that &ore and &ore effective &ind viruses will evolve and leave us as unsus'ecting and unha''y hosts, our lives devoted to their service. $u''osing such &ind viruses grudgingly kee' us alive and co&&unicating, they still have no reIuire&ent to hel' us enSoy life or even kee' us free fro& 'ain. The &ass of &en would lead lives of Iuiet des'eration. ?here is &e&e evolution taking usT #irvanaT 3 living hellT #owhere in 'articularT /s there anything we can do to direct itT /f there is, should weT $ubSect9 83$T 43$1 8ro&9 3nony&ous

8ollow these instructions 5A34T:;, and in >@ to G@ days you will have received over K@,@@@.@@ dollars /# 43$1. [=\ /&&ediately &ail ]=.@@ to the first K na&es listed below, starting at nu&ber = through nu&ber K. $5# 43$1 7#:;. ,Total invest&ent9 ]K.@@- 5nclose a note with each letter stating9 Please add &y na&e to your &ailing list. /nclude your na&e and &ailing address. ,This is a legiti&ate service that you are reIuesting and you are 'aying ]=.@@ for this service.[>\ !e&ove the na&e that a''ears as nu&ber = on the list. Move the other E na&es u' one 'osition ,#u&ber > beco&es nu&ber =, nu&ber J beco&es nu&ber >, and so on-. Place your na&e, address, and .i' code in the nu&ber =@ 'osition. [J\ ?ith your na&e in the nu&ber =@ 'osition, u'load this 5#T/!5 file to =K ,8ifteendifferent bulletin boards. ;ou &ay 'ost it to the BB$%s &essage base or to the file section. #a&e it 83$T43$1.TAT, and use the file descri'tion co&&ents to draw attention to this file and its great 'otential for all of us. [O\ ?ithin G@ days you will receive over ]K@,@@@.@@ in 43$1. 0ee' a co'y of this file for yourself so that you can use it again and again whenever you need &oney. 3s soon as you &ail out these letters you are auto&atically in the &ail order business. Peo'le will be sending ;76 ]=.@@ to be 'laced on your &ailing list. This list can then be rented to a broker that can be found in your local yellow 'ages listings for additional inco&e on a regular basis. The list will beco&e &ore valuable as it grows in si.e. #7T59 Make sure that you retain 5V5!; na&e and address sent to you, either on co&'uter or hard co'y, but do not discard the na&es and notes that 'eo'le send to you. This is P!778 that you are truly 'roviding a service, and should the /!$ or so&e other govern&ent agency Iuestion you, you can 'rovide the& with this 'roof" !e&e&ber, as each 'ost is downloaded and the instructions carefully followed, five &e&bers will be rei&bursed for their 'artici'ation as :ist evelo'er with ]=.@@ each. ;our na&e will &ove u' the list geo&etrically so that when your na&e reaches the nu&ber K 'osition you will be receiving thousands of dollars in cash. !5M5MB5!2T1/$ P!7*!3M 83/:$ 7#:; /8 ;76 3!5 #7T 17#5$T2P:53$5"" P:53$5 B5 17#7!3B:5.../T 75$ ?7!0" T13#0 ;76. [list of na&es deleted\ The following letter was written by a 'artici'ating &e&ber in this 'rogra&. UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU To those with the 47MM7# sense to 'artici'ate in this easy &oney o''ortunity9 3bout si+ &onths ago / received the enclosed 'ost in letter for&. / ignored it. / received about five &ore of the sa&e letter within the ne+t two week. / ignored the& also. 7f course, / was te&'ted to follow through and drea&ed of &aking thousands, but / was convinced

it was Sust another gi&&ick and could not 'ossibly work. / was wrong" 3bout three weeks later / saw this sa&e letter 'osted on a local bulletin board in Montreal. / liked the idea of giving it a try with &y co&'uter. / didn%t e+'ect &uch because / figured, if other 'eo'le were as ske'tical as /, they would not be too Iuick to 'art with ]K.@@. But, / B6; :7TT5!; T/405T$ ?550:; /# M; P!7V/#45 3# 13V5 #7T1/#* T7 $17? 87! /T B6T T/405T $T6B$" This week / decided to look at this as &y weekly lottery 'urchase. / addressed the envelo'es and &ailed out ]=.@@ in each as directed. Two weeks went by and / didn%t receive anything in the &ail. The fourth week rolled around and / couldn%t believe what ha''ened" / can not say that / received ]K@,@@@.@@, but it was definitely well over ]JK,@@@.@@" 8or the first ti&e in =@ years / got out of debt. /t was great. 7f course, it did not take &e long to go through &y earnings, so / a& using this e+cellent &oney &aking o''ortunity once again. 87::7? T15 /#$T!64T/7#$ 3# *5T !53 ; T7 5#)7;" Please send a co'y of this letter along with the enclosed letter so together we can convince 'eo'le who are ske'tical that this really does work" 7ne 'ersistent /nternet electronic chain letter is an e+a&'le of a re'licator hosted by both co&'uters and &inds. 7ne key to answering these Iuestions lies in the controversial new field of evolutionary 'sychologythe study of how and why our &inds evolved to be the way they are today. ?e already started to e+'lore evolutionary 'sychology in the discussion of our four basic drives and the nature of co&&unication. #ow let%s take a detailed look at the subSect that for&s the core of evolutionary 'sychology and eternally one of our favorite to'ics9 se+.

U7ne &e&ber of Mensa, the international society for 'eo'le with an /R in the to' > 'ercent of the 'o'ulation, has been known to take out the following advertise&ent, a''arently in an atte&'t to 'reserve the fitness of whatever #3 causes high intelligence9 The s&arter you are, the &ore children you should have. 3lthough an a''eal like this &ay see& a far cry fro& 1itler%s genocidal drea& of 'o'ulating the earth with a &aster race, there are few things &ore controversial than suggesting the selective breeding of hu&an beings for any 'ur'ose whatsoever" U eer, of course, haven%t had &uch ti&e to ada't to the recent invention of firear&s, but generations fro& now we should not be sur'rised to see &ost deer with color visionH thick hidesH or even ugly, &issha'en heads that no one would want for a tro'hy. 3lready in 'arts of the southwestern 6nited $tates, the &ost co&&on variety of rattlesnake is silent9 it rears u' and shakes its tail as usual, but no sound co&es out. !attling out loud, it see&s, gets you shot. U/n fact, since we share a lot of #3 with &a&&als, it &akes sense that we care about the&. /t would be interesting to see a study correlating how &uch 'eo'le care about various ani&al s'ecies with how &uch #3 those s'ecies have in co&&on with hu&ans. / bet dogs and cats would beat out chi&'s, though, des'ite the fact that chi&'s share &ore #3 with us. ?hyT $ee '. =GN. U=,@@= 8acts $o&ebody $crewed 6' by eane )ordan ,:ongstreet Press, =EEJ-. The author e&barrassingly states9 5&erson!al'h ?aldodid not say, V/nconsistency is the hobgoblin of little &inds.% 1e said, V3 foolish inconsistency is the hobgoblin of little &inds.% Big difference. ;e'. UThe evolution of chain letters is an interesting study in itself. 3 recent 'osting on /nternet co&'uter bulletin boards warned there was a &essage going around that you

should not read because it contained a virus. #aturally, the author reIuested that 'eo'le co'y and re'ost the warning so as to 'rotect others fro& the danger. Thoughtful #et users wondered Sust how a &essage could contain a co&'uter virusco&'uters need to run a 'rogra& to get infected with a virus, not si&'ly dis'lay te+t. But for a week or so, co'ies of the warning &essage were everywhere" ?hich electronic &essage contained the virusT

413PT5! $/A $5A9 The !oot of 3ll 5volution $cience is a lot like se+. $o&eti&es so&ething useful co&es of it, but that%s not the reason we%re doing it. !ichard 8eyn&an The &ost fascinating discovery of the new field of evolutionary 'sychology is the central role that se+ 'lays, and has 'layed, in sha'ing our &odern behavior and culture. ?eaving a twisted 'ath connecting 8reud, &ale chauvinis&, 'uritanis&, and wo&ani.ing, evolutionary 'sychology e+'lains the co&'le+ity and contradiction inherent in hu&an behavior as never before. 3s you read this, re&e&ber9 evolutionary 'sychology is about tendencies'redis'ositions and historical artifacts of evolution. /t &ay be true that &en are fro& Mars and wo&en are fro& Venus, but that doesn%t &ean we have to live there. Peo'le are co&'letely ca'able of growing in any direction they choose. ?hat you%re about to read is neither a fatalistic 'reordain&ent of 'eo'le%s futures nor an e+cuse for behaving like an ani&al. /t%s Sust interesting to know how we got where we are today. 3nd we got here, every one of us, as the result of successful &atings. This is the obvious insight, the seed out of which grows this whole beautiful new theory9 ;ou are the result of an unbroken chain s'anning thousands of generations of &ales and fe&ales who were all successful at finding a &ate. ?hen we look at it that way, is it any wonder that our se+ drives are so strongT That 'eo'le are willing to lie, cheat, and steal for se+T That 6.$. senators risk and lose their careers rather than 'ass u' an o''ortunity to have se+ with a teenage 'ageT That wo&en stay in abusive relationshi's rather than lose the 'otential 'rotector of their childrenT 3s bad as these decisions see& if we think about the& 'urely rationally, we &ake the& anyway because of our tre&endously strong genetic tendencies relating to se+. 7ver and over again, since the beginning of se+ual re'roduction, genes that gave 'eo'leand ani&als before the&a &ating edge over their 'eers were the ones that got 'assed down. :ikewise, natural selection was unforgiving of individuals who, by choice or destiny, failed to &ate successfully. Their #3 died with the&. The Battle for $e+ The battle for se+ was the 'ri&e fighting ground in the war of #3 to co'y itself. 8or any se+ually re'roducing creatures, including us, natural selection worked with incredible s'eed to wi'e out any #3 that &ade its host less likely to have children and to reinforce any #3 that increased its host%s 'robability of re'roducing. T here are innu&erable ways in which #3 can influence its host%s success in &ating, but the &ost straightforward is to enhance whatever a''eals to the o''osite se+9 accentuate the 'ositive and eli&inate the negative. $ince the &ost attractive individuals will re'roduce &ore than the rest, we would e+'ect attractiveness to be selected fornot si&'ly good looks, but every Iuality that a''eals to the o''osite se+. 3s a result of genetic evolution, individuals evolve to be &ore and &ore se+ually attractive. ?ell, isn%t that nice" oesn%t that Sust give you a s&ug, co&'lacent feelingT /t%s about ti&e so&ething good ca&e out of this evolution business. ;ou can Sust sit back and watch, and look forward to an endlessly increasing su''ly of 'otential &ates" 3hh. /f you want, Sust 'ut this book down for a while and daydrea&. :ife is good. 6nfortunately, though, what is true for the hu&an race as a whole is not true for every individual &an or wo&an. 3lthough the s'ecies &ay be evolving wondrously, we Sust get the #3 we%re dealt and &ake do with it. 3nd &ake do we do" The industries that have s'rung u' in order to enhance 'eo'le%s se+ual attraction ,and attractiveness- are

enor&ous9 fashion, cos&etics, diet 'rogra&s, and fitness clubs are Sust a few of the cultural institutions that have e&erged to feed 'eo'le%s drive to be &ore a''ealing. $hort of re'lacing our current syste& of re'roducing with test tubes and cloning, we%re stuck with it9 se+ual re'roduction is where survival of the fittest ,genes- gets down to the nitty2gritty. $o like it or not, &any of the genetic tendencies we are born with revolve around se+ and &ating. :et%s take a ste' back now and see how genetic evolution got us where we are today. This is all s'eculation, since we don%t have &uch historical data about how 'eo'le behaved in 'rehistoric ti&es, but it all falls out fro& understanding the selfish2 gene conce't. $e+9 The 5arly ays /&agine it%s the early days of se+ual re'roduction in ani&als. Males and fe&ales 'retty &uch &ate with each other at rando&, with who&ever is convenient. /n fact, &ales atte&'t to &ate with other &ales, and fe&ales with other fe&ales, having not yet figured out how to tell the difference. ,/ said these were the early days.- /n fact, they%re &ating with rocks, trees, &ushroo&s, other s'ecieswhatever they can find. /t%s very &uch like the way 'lant s'ores and 'ollen blow about in the wind, &ost of the seed being s'illed, but a bit falling in Sust the right 'lace on the fe&ale 'lant for fertili.ation to occur. /t%s not a 'articularly efficient syste&, but it works. 7ver the course of ti&e, the genes of the ani&als that tend to be a bit &ore discri&inating in their choice of &ates'assing u' the rocks, trees, and other s'eciestend to be a bit &ore successful in re'licating the&selves. $o ani&als evolve to be &ore discri&inating. 1ow do they do itT !e&e&ber, this is not a conscious 'rocess or even a 'rocess of ever2i&'roving design. /t%s a rando& 'rocess of kluge u'on kluge. $u''ose one s'ecies has develo'ed a keen sense of s&ell as an ada'tation against 'redators. The individuals that use that sense of s&ell to tell the difference between &e&bers of their own s'ecies and rocks have the advantage. Pretty soon, the s'ecies evolves toward using its sense of s&ell to discern &ates, although its &e&bers still can%t tell the difference between &ales and fe&ales. #ow su''ose it turns out that fe&ales have a hor&one that &ales don%t have, and there%s a discernible odor 'roduced by that hor&one for no 'articular reason, but one that &ales can s&ell. The &ales that tend to use that infor&ation to be 'icky about their &ates are &ore successful than the ones who si&'ly ignore it, and 'retty soon the ani&als evolve to be even &ore discri&inating. This ste'2by2ste', inch2by2inch 'rocess continues constantly, the &ore discerning &ales having better success at re'roduction and therefore filling the gene 'ool with &ore co'ies of their #3 than the others. 7 kay, let%s look at the fe&ale end. #ow that the gene 'ool is filled with sniffing connoisseurs of fe&ale odors, any fe&ales that tend to 'roduce &ore of that odor have the advantage in attracting &ates over the rest. 3t this 'oint, &ales will start evolving to 'ick u' on other differences between &ales and fe&ales9 coloration, si.e, sha'evive la diffXrence" The &ore discerning &ales will be &ore successful, and the fe&ales that accentuate those features will also be &ore successful. This brings us back to where we started the discussion, with individuals evolving to be &ore and &ore se+ually attractive. This works in the other direction, too9 fe&ales can reIuire stricter and stricter standards for their &ates, so long as they are 'hysically able to resist their advances. /t%s co&&on a&ong birds to see &ales with brilliant 'lu&age courting dull fe&alesH in these cases the fe&ales evolved to be &ore discri&inating, and the &ales evolved to have &ore and &ore 'ronounced se+ characteristics. /t%s i&'ortant to re&e&ber that this evolution of se+ characteristics is not ha''ening by 'lan or design, Sust by the interaction between the chaotic force of rando& variation and

the organi.ing force of evolution. :ike a self2winding watch, evolution harnesses the disorgani.ed &ove&ents and changes in the environ&ent to &ake slow but steady 'rogress, the ratchet locking the winding gear%s &otion in the forward direction, through the course of the eons. 7ne way in which evolution ha''ened to &ake 'rogress was by s'eciali.ing the roles of &ales and fe&ales, a distinction known as se+ual differentiation. 5volutionary 'sychology shows that there really are significant differences in &en%s and wo&en%s drives and tendenciesin general. ?hen these differences beco&e stereoty'ed and used as wea'ons against individuals, we use a less2kind ter&9 se+is&. The 7rigin of $e+is& The 'sychological differences between &en and wo&en began when &a&&als evolved to 'ut all their eggs in one basket, so to s'eak9 inside the fe&ale. 3ctually, se+ual differentiation started even earlier than that, 'ractically at the origin of se+, when fe&ales evolved to 'roduce big, relatively e+'ensive ova and &ales evolved to 'roduce s&all, chea' s'er&. The s'litting a'art of the behavior of &ales and fe&ales ste&s fro& the fact that fe&ale #3 has a big co&&it&ent to and invest&ent in each fertili.ed egg, while &ale #3 has nothing to lose and everything to gain by giving its host the tendency to fertili.e every fe&ale in sight, then 'rowl around looking for the ones that aren%t in sight. /f this sounds like a shallow caricature or an 3ndy 4a'' co&ic stri', re&e&ber9 we inherited &any of our drives and tendencies fro& ani&als and 'rehistoric hu&ans, before conce'ts such as &arriage and &onoga&y arrived. The #3 of &ales who &ated with only one fe&ale had a terrible disadvantage9 the other &ales who are going around s'reading their #3 as widely as 'ossible were going to have a lot &ore children. ?ithout considering any other factors, &ales evolved to re'roduce as &uch as 'ossible. !e&e&ber9 it%s all about #3. 8e&ales, on the other hand, having only a few chances 'er lifeti&e to 'ass on their #3 and &any eager suitors, evolved to be a bit &ore selective. 1ow did they selectT 3 cou'le of factors were i&'ortant. 8irst, they wanted a &ale with good #3, whatever that &eans. /t &ight have &eant a strong, healthy body, which would be 'assed on to the offs'ring and give the& a better shot at survival. /t &ight have &eant having certain #3 in co&&on with the&, as evidenced by si&ilar body features or behavior, since that doubled the chances that the offs'ring would carry that #3. $econd, they wanted a &ate who would invest his ti&e and resources in the children while they were i&&ature and vulnerable, thus increasing their chance of survival. /t wasn%t essential, of course, that the genetic father be the one who sticks around and raises the kidsH in fact, an ideal situation for a 'rehistoric fe&ale &ight have been to have a he2&an ty'e with good genes as the biological father and a househusband ty'e who%s willing to raise the kids, if she could trick the guy into doing it so&ehow. #ow it was the &ales% turn to fight back. *iven the 'riorities of fe&ales, &ales evolved in one of two directions9 either beco&ing stronger and &ore handso&e, or beco&ing a convincing 'otential husband and father. ?hile both would benefit fro& having as &uch se+ as 'ossible, the he2&en could be a lot &ore overt about it, even 'hysically over'owering unwilling fe&ales, since their offs'ring had a better chance of survival even without the& sticking around. The househusband ty'es, however, evolved to beco&e good at finding a fe&ale who wasn%t going to cheat on the&. They &ight even 'refer less2attractive fe&ales, or at least fe&ales who are less attractive to the he2&an ty'e, to increase their chances of being the biological father. They still wanted to have as &uch se+ as 'ossible but needed to be a bit &ore surre'titiousthe big, strong he2 &en weren%t going to take the co&'etition lying down, and the fe&ales weren%t 'articularly thrilled with having a &ate who was already co&&itted to so&eone else. Ti&e2out"

Ti&e for two re&inders9 =. /%& talking about general tendencies in evolution, not about s'ecific individuals. $'ecific individuals &ay have niche strategies, which /%ll discuss later in the cha'ter. #ot everybody is like this" Peo'le behave differently and are attracted to different ty'es of &ates, in different circu&stances. 3nd what about ho&ose+ualsT ,There%s no agree&ent a&ong scientists about how evolution could 'roduce ho&ose+uals, but /%ll ha.ard a guess later in the cha'ter.>. 3ll this ha''ens unconsciously. #o doubt 'eo'le tend to read this cha'ter and, about once a 'age, say to the&selves, That%s ridiculous" / don%t think like that" $he doesn%t think like that" 1e doesn%t think like that" This is not about thinking. 3ll this clever, klugy 'rocess of &ate selection ha''ens unconsciously. The result of the unconscious calculation is that you have feelings of attraction for so&eone. 7f course, if having certain thoughts increased your chances of &ating, evolution would have selected for your having those thoughts. There is nothing in the universe as co&'licated as this 'rocess of se+ual selection, which has evolved over &illions of generations to incor'orate every kluge that ca&e along. Back to the 5volution of $e+ The eons 'ass, and the 'ivotal role of se+ in evolution causes things to get &ore and &ore co&'licated and involved. These two roleshe2&an and househusbands'lit off into &any sub2roles, with &ale do&inance hierarchies, fe&ale territorial dis'utes, and all &anner of deceit and subterfuge beco&ing &ore and &ore 'revalent for one and only one reason9 it works. The behaviors that evolved around se+, u' until the very recent 'ast when &e&es a''eared on the scene, did so because that%s what got #3 'assed down. /n the harsh reality of genetic evolution, there was no concern for love, sensitivity, or fairnessH the only thing that &attered was how &any children you hadchildren who the&selves grew u' to re'roduce. #ow here%s the ne+t bo&bshell. 3 co&&on 'aradig& 'eo'le have about life 'laces se+ as a s&all, if confusing, 'art of a grand culture based on values, &orals, traditions, and *od2given rights. Viewed through &e&etics, all values, &orals, traditions, and ideas with res'ect to *od and rights are the result of &e&e evolution. 3nd &e&e evolution is guided by our genetic tendencies, which in turn evolved around se+. The &ale2do&inated hierarchical syste&, so&eti&es called the 'atriarchy, is a 'erfect e+a&'le. $o&e fe&inist writers have cautioned wo&en against buying into this syste&, and with good reason9 the whole thing evolved so that the #3 of &ales could be 'assed down &ost efficiently. /s that any way to design an econo&yT ?hy are &en so obsessed with do&inance relationshi's, with who%s above and below the& on the 'ower ladderT The best theory is that it was an ada'tation to establish which &ales had se+ual rights to which wo&en without constantly fighting about it, which didn%t do anybody any good. Because of that, &ales see& to have a si+th sense that tells the& what their 'osition is relative to other &ales in any situation. The ty'ical fe&ale sense of status is based &ore on attractiveness or 'o'ularity than do&inance. Most businesses, the govern&ent, the &ilitary, and even the 4atholic 4hurch are set u' as overt hierarchiesit%s e+'licitly clear who re'orts to who&, and who takes and gives orders. 7n the surface of it, these organi.ational hierarchies now have little to do with access to fe&ales, but the behavior and feelings &en have in the& are still the sa&e. Making the hierarchy e+'licit avoids &any face2to2face battles for 'ositionH however, it can be e+tre&ely frustrating for &en with brains evolved to do whatever they can to rise

in the hierarchyto have access to &ore and better fe&alesbut who see no way to i&'rove their 'osition. But wait a &inutedon%t so&e &en ,and wo&en- like 'ower for its own sakeT on%t they enSoy the control it gives the& over their destiny, the freedo& to live their lives, andwell, Sust the 'ower rushT ;es, that%s all true. But the reason that 'ower is such a rush is that we have evolved to have wiring in our brains that &akes us crave that 'ower. Through the course of evolution, the &en who enSoyed and hungered for 'ower, for a to' rung in the do&inance hierarchy, 'ushed harder for it and therefore got &ore &ates" #ot only did they get &ore &ates, but they also got &ore resources to give to their children, enhancing their chances of re'roducing. The &ost unforgiving force in genetic evolutionse+ual re'roductionscreened out those &ales who didn%t enSoy 'ower. They didn%t re'roduce nearly as &uch, their children didn%t have as good a chance of re'roducing, and their genes faded away as the genes res'onsible for the 'ower lust grew &ore and &ore 'revalent. Men don%t consciously think, *ee, /%d better seek and dis'lay 'ower so / can &ani'ulate wo&en into &ating with &e. 5volution has &ade the& seek and dis'lay 'ower instinctively. The 4ivili.ing 5ffect of ?o&en Throughout history, while &ales have been 'ushing culture in the direction of e+'ansion, conIuest, and increased 'ower, fe&ales have been the so2called civili.ing force, striving for security and safety. These drives are direct offshoots of the different 'riorities of the &ale and fe&ale genes9 &ales% genes tend to win by encouraging their hosts to &ate with as &any fe&ales as 'ossible, while fe&ales% genes tend to win by giving their hosts the tendency to create a safe and secure environ&ent to raise the children. ?hyT Because &ales had relatively little invest&ent of their ti&e and energy in a 'articular fetus, while fe&ales couldn%t 'roduce &ore than one a year or so and needed to 'rotect their genetic ca'ital. id &ales have an invest&ent in any given child surviving to re'roduceT ;ou bet. ?as their invest&ent as great as a fe&ale%sT #ot if they were high enough on the do&inance hierarchy that they could i&'regnate a whole bunch of wo&en. 3nd those &en were the ones who 'assed down the &ost genes. $o it fell to the fe&ales, in order to 'rotect their invest&ent, to set certain standards for acce'table &ale behavior. Because wo&en%s genes had &ore to gain by being 'icky about &ates, evolution &ade wo&en the ones who usually chose fro& a&ong suitors. Men had to co&'ete to be chosen. $o wo&en could afford to be selective, &uch &ore so than &en. They could afford to 'ut &en through so&e tests to see if they were serious about the relationshi'. By holding out until a &an invested a substantial a&ount of ti&e and resources, they lessened the 'ossibility that their suitor was &erely toying with their affections. They increased the 'robability that the guy was indeed 'laying the husbandLfather role and not Sust looking for so&e chea' thrills. /f all this sounds ho'elessly cold and calculating, re&e&ber once again that this &ale testing is not necessarily conscious on the 'art of the fe&ale. ?e have evolved to be this way9 *enes that favored this testing tendency in fe&ales got 'assed down successfully over genes that did not. The result is that it Sust feels right to get a certain degree of certainty about a &an%s intentions before &ating. 4heating / don%t want to give the i&'ression that / could describe the se+ roles of &en and wo&en accurately and co&'letely even if / devoted the whole book to it. The general roles of he2&an, husbandL father, and suitor tester describe so&e of the basic ways

&en and wo&en behave with each other. But in evolution, anything goes" /n fact, we should e+'ect certain individuals to evolve to e+'loit, &ani'ulate, lie, cheat, and steal in their genes% unsto''able Iuest to re'roduce the&selves. 7ne class of such &ani'ulation is surre'titious &ating. 8or &ales, this often takes the for& of e+tra&arital se+. /nterestingly enough, there%s not &uch genetic reason for fe&ales to get u'set about this other than the 'ossibility that the &an will fall in love with the other wo&an and leave the wife and fa&ily. U 8or fe&ales, the cheating &ight have involved being secretly i&'regnated by a he2&an with better genes, while not letting the househusband find out. This is not nearly as big a win for the wo&an%s genes as a &an%s cheating, since it only involves the 'otential slight i&'rove&ent of the child%s survival against the risk that the husband will leave, so we shouldn%t e+'ect the drive to be nearly as strong. The unfortunate conclusion is that the 'ayoff, and hence the drive, is &uch greater for &en cheating with other wo&en. 8or the&, every additional 'regnancy is another 'otential gene2carrying child at virtually no cost to the father. Ti&e2out 3gain9 5volutionary Motives Ti&e2out, ti&e2out, ti&e2out" Back u'" Peo'le having affairs usually don%t want 'regnancies, do theyT 1ow can / say that the whole 'oint of cheating is to have &ore babies when we know 'eo'le don%t want to have babies as a result of affairsT 7nce again, the trick is to re&e&ber that there%s a difference between our conscious thoughts today and the forces of natural selection on #3 in 'rehistoric ti&es. The unconscious tendency to have affairs in certain circu&stances is hardwired into 'eo'le%s &inds as a result of evolutionas a result of the fact that our ancestors with those tendencies &ated to have us" !egardless of today%s &orals, values, or thoughts, we%re still stuck with that 'rehistoric 'rogra&&ing that works by &aking us attracted to, infatuated with, fall in love with, certain other 'eo'le. ?e have incredibly strong se+ drives as the result of natural selection. 7nce we evolved to have those strong se+ drives, new klugy uses were able to evolve on to' of the&. 8or instance, anthro'ological studies suggest that one &ain goal of fe&ale infidelity is not getting 'regnant but getting other favorssuch as &ore &eat for her kidsfro& the he2&an. 4onversely, this is why the he2&an goes out hunting. #ot because it%s an efficient way to get 'rotein ,it isn%tgathering is &uch &ore reliable-, but because a big score lets hi& trade &eat for se+ all over the village. 3nd then, of course, there%s nothing to sto' 'eo'le fro& engaging in 'urely recreational se+ual activity in their leisure ti&e. $ince natural selection evolved se+2for2re'roduction to be so 'leasurable, it &akes sense that se+2for2its2own2sake, if Sust a little less 'leasurable, would still be a favorite activity as long as it didn%t interfere with survival or re'roduction. The 5volution of 4heating 3s the tactics and countertactics of &ating strategies evolved, cheaters beca&e better and better at cheating and &ates beca&e better and better at detecting or 'reventing it. But the genetic 'ayoff is so large that cheating re&ains a big factor in the way genes are 'assed down. 8aking a role is another way of increasing one%s chances of genetic 'ayoff. /t%s tough to fake a he2&an role when there are &ore2do&inant &en around, because they will tend to 'ut you back in your 'lace Iuickly, but we could e+'ect a &an who Iuickly notices he%s the &ost do&inant &ale around and gets tough to win genetically. 8aking the husbandLfather role offers &uch &ore chance for creativity. The &ost co&&on ruse for a husband is 'retending he%s not already &arried in order to acIuire another &ating o''ortunity. 8or a bachelor, the classic sca& is 'ro&ising eternal love and co&&it&ent but leaving after a few ro&'s in the hay. 7f course, the wo&en who

evolve to be sus'icious and discover such behavior have an advantage, so once again we can e+'ect the strategies of cheaters and detectives to have i&'roved over the eons. This is why bird &ating dances are often so long and drawn out, ta+ing both 'arties literally to e+haustion. The fe&ale bird knows ,in the evolutionary sense- that no &arried &ale will go to that e+tre&e for a one2night stand, at the risk of his real fa&ily elsewhere, so she &akes hi& 'rove he%s really single by de&anding every ounce of energy he%s got to give. 8inding a #iche /f everyone had e+actly the sa&e &ating strategy, the less2attractive 'eo'le would always lose outthey would never &ate. $o so&e suitors evolved niche strategies that &ight attract fewer 'otential &ates, but &ates who& there was less co&'etition for. They got a larger &arket share of a s&aller &arket, but overall the niche strategy &ade it &ore likely for their #3 to be 'assed on. #iche &ating strategies are why we have different strokes for different folks. ?hile the bulk of &en 'ursue wo&en under J@, who genetically have the &ost childbearing value, so&e &en 'refer older wo&en. ?hile &ost 'eo'le are attracted to those with si&ilar facial features, indicating si&ilar #3, so&e 'ursue e+oticlooking &ates. ?hile &ost fe&ales test suitors before having se+ with the&, so&e are e+tre&ely 'ro&iscuous, 'erha's resulting in the offs'ring getting at least so&e resources fro& a slew of 'otential fathers. #iche &ating strategies are a shotgun a''roach, and the goal is to scatter the #3 as widely as 'ossible. Mores and 1y'ocrisy 7ne way for #3 to increase its chances of winning in the hu&an2re'roduction ga&e, aside fro& doing everything 'ossible to get its own host to re'roduce, is to &ake it &ore difficult for others to re'roduce. /n the 're2&e&e days, 'owerful &ales could 'hysically inti&idate other &ales and kee' &any fe&ales for the&selves. Males lower on the do&inance ladder would be &ost likely to 'ass on their #3 by 'retending to res'ect the sanctity of the do&inant &ales% hare& but secretly taking advantage of whatever &ating o''ortunities they could find. $tudies show chi&'an.ees engaging in Sust this behavior. ?hen &e&es arrived on the scene, it beca&e in the genetic interest of &ales to s'read &e&es that would decrease the likelihood of other &ales% &ating. /t was in the interest of fe&ales% #3 to s'read &e&es 'ro&oting good behavior in their suitors. /t was in the interest of grand'arents to s'read &e&es that would result in the successful rearing of their grandchildren. Thus were born the conce'ts of se+ual &ores. $e+ual &ores are rules of the ga&e, so to s'eak. They are strategy2&e&es saying on%t do this thing you have a desire for. They kee' you fro& &ating with so&e class of 'otential &ate. Peo'le get 'rogra&&ed with the& as they are being raised. The interesting thing about se+ual &ores is that when you get 'rogra&&ed with one, you &ay actually be behaving counter to the interest of your selfish #3. /t%s easy to tell what your #3 wants9 Sust notice who you%re se+ually attracted to. That%s a good indication that, genetically, &ating with that 'erson would be useful in 'assing down your #3. $o&e of the first known se+ual 'rohibitionsthose in the Ten 4o&&and&entsfit right into this &odel. Two of the co&&and&ents forbid a &an having se+ with, or even coveting, another &an%s wife. Men who 'ut that big invest&ent into a ho&e and fa&ily only to beco&e cuckoldedreferring to the cuckoo bird, which &ani'ulates other birds into raising its younglose big in the evolutionary ga&e, and so &ight be e+'ected to s'read &e&es discouraging other &en fro& having affairs with their wives. But following se+ual &ores &akes you behave in the interest of everyone else%s #3, not your own. $o the o'ti&al selfish2gene strategy, before 'eo'le beca&e conscious

and had the 'ossibility of a life about so&ething other than s'reading their #3, was to 'artici'ate in s'reading &ores but to secretly ignore the& whenever an o''ortunity arose to &ate counter to the&. That is the evolutionary e+'lanation for hy'ocrisy. ?e should e+'ect to see the &ost hy'ocrisy around se+, since it%s si&ultaneously in everyone%s #3%s advantage both to s'read antise+ &e&es and to selfishly ignore the&. 8ro& ifferent Planets 3lthough so&eti&es it see&s like &en and wo&en are fro& different 'lanets, given how we often have trouble co&'rehending each other, the basic differences all co&e fro& this battle of the se+es /%ve Sust talked about. Men, generally, tend to be interested in 'ower, in their 'lace in the hierarchy, in sei.ing o''ortunities for se+ as Iuickly and effectively as 'ossible. *enerally, they are &ost attracted to wo&en who have the &ost re'roductive 'otentialwho are young and healthy. Ty'ically, they are 'ossessive of their wo&en, guarding against being cuckolded.

5volutionary 'sychology can hel' e+'lain why 'eo'le are hy'ocritical about se+. ?hile s'reading &e&es that decrease others% 'ro&iscuity, such as 3dultery is wrong, the hy'ocrite takes advantage of the very &ating o''ortunities he s'eaks against. The #3 of 'eo'le who do that s'reads faster than the #3 of honest folk. ?o&en, generally, tend to value security, co&&it&ent, and &en who are willing to invest in the&. 3s a rule, they are &ost attracted to two ty'es of &en9 the strong and 'owerful, and the co&&itted and generous. *enerally, they guard against their &an being stolen away by another wo&an and are on the lookout for any evidence that a &an &ay be losing interest and do anything 'ossible to correct the situation. 5ver wonder why &en tend to sneak 'eeks at attractive wo&enT /t was evolutionarily i&'ortant for the& to si.e u' and react to &ating o''ortunities Iuickly. 8or the sa&e reason, &en get Iuickly aroused by visual sti&uli, which is why today 'ornogra'hy is &uch &ore 'o'ular with &en than with wo&en. Men naturally try to i&'ress wo&en with their strength and 'ower. 3nd it works. 5ver wonder why a wo&an gets u'set if a &an doesn%t call her for a weekT To her, it endangers the safety and security of the day2to2day relationshi' that she has been genetically bred to crave, and her defense &echanis&s kick into action. 5ven if she is &ature and confident, she%s still likely to feel u'setit%s a 'owerful, 'ri&al feeling. ?o&en naturally test &en to &ake sure they%re really co&&itted and not Sust faking it. 3nd it works. 7ver the last few centuries, these se+ roles have been affected greatly by &e&e evolution, so we find &en and wo&en being less successful at re'roducing, &ore frustrated in their relationshi's, and all around &ore confused as the 'ri&itive societies

we evolved to live in have been su''lanted by incredibly co&'licated and 'owerful cultural forces. But these drives we have been bred with are still with us, and &ind viruses take advantage of the&H they hook us. ifferent cultures today have evolved different sets of se+ual &ores, resulting in differences in &ale and fe&ale behavior. /n $weden, a social de&ocracy where wo&en have great econo&ic inde'endence, we see a high degree of se+ual freedo& a&ong wo&en. ?ithout needing to de'end on &en for their security, $wedish wo&en need not be concerned so &uch with testing 'otential &ates for co&&it&ent and generosity. The result is greater 'ro&iscuity a&ong wo&en9 a study showed $wedish &en 'ri.e a 'otential &ate%s virginity very little co&'ared with other cultures. $wedish &en, in turn, are a&ong the least violent of any culture9 with wo&en &ore available, &en need not engage in the violent, risky he2&an behavior that co&es fro& a genetic drive to rise in the hierarchy and therefore have greater access to wo&en. 1arsh 'unish&ent for violent cri&e isn%t necessary. /n se+ually strict $audi 3rabia, we see the o''osite. ?o&en are highly de'endent on &en for econo&ic security. 3ccess to se+ is greatly restricted for $audi wo&en. Men 'ri.e virginity in their 'otential &ates. Violence is highan artifact of 'rehistoric ti&es when engaging in such behavior increased a &an%s chances of &atingand 'unish&ent for violent cri&e is severe in reaction to that. 3ccess to se+ is the driving force behind &any as'ects of culture. Through a chain of cause and effect, the availability of fe&ales for &en to &ate with can sha'e 'revailing &ores, the a&ount of violence, and the laws and 'unish&ents of a culture. There has been a shift in se+ual &ores in the 6nited $tates fro& the free2love era of the %G@s, when a baby2boo& sur'lus of young wo&en did their own thing se+ually, to the 3/ $2fearful %E@s, when young wo&en were ad&onished to Sust say no and abstain fro& se+. This shift has been acco&'anied by an increase in violent cri&e a&ong &en, as would be 'redicted by this &odel. $e+ Buttons :et%s reca' the buttons we have that ste& fro& the &ating drive and its associated roles. The first three are 'ri&arily &ale buttons, and the second three 'ri&arily fe&aleH however, the klugy nature of evolution and the i&'ortance of niche &ating strategies see& to scra&ble these on occasion, and it%s not unco&&on to see &en with fe&ale buttons and wo&en with &ale ones. 3fter all, we%re &e&bers of the sa&e s'ecies" Power. Men 'ay s'ecial attention to o''ortunities for 'ower. This includes controlling territory, be it 'hysical land or a conce'tual landsca'e such as the software &arket or the 6.$. $enate. /n 'rehistoric ti&es, this would &ake the& &ore attractive to wo&en. ?hile 'rehistoric wo&en &ight seek 'ower to enhance their survival ability, their attractiveness was 'ri&arily based on youth and healththeir re'roductive 'otentialso they had less selection 'ressure to develo' a 'ower button. o&inance. Men are concerned with their 'lace in the do&inance hierarchy. Prehistorically, a higher 'lace in the hierarchy would give access to wo&en without the necessity of a 'hysical fight, costly to the survival of both suitors. ?o&en had less need for this drive, as they were the ones doing the 'icking and choosing. ?indow of o''ortunity. Men had little to lose and &uch to gain, #32wise, by sei.ing &ating o''ortunities as often as 'ossible. This ability to recogni.e a window of o''ortunity carries over into other areas. ,/f you order before &idnight tonight, you%ll also get a free *insu knife"- 8or wo&en, since having a child is a nine2&onth

invest&ent, they instead evolved 'atience. $ecurity. ?o&en look for security. Prehistorically, this drive added to the likelihood of their children surviving to re'roduce. /t%s interesting that virtually all of the 6.$. govern&ent 'rogra&s having to do with financing 'eo'le%s security were 'assed in the relatively brief ti&e since wo&en have had the right to vote. ?hile &en value security, they are &uch &ore likely to take risks that will increase their status in the hierarchy. 4o&&it&ent. ?o&en are attracted to &en who dis'lay co&&it&entwho show u' re'eatedly over a 'eriod of ti&e. This button gets 'ushed by advertisers &ercilessly to create brand loyalty. Men evolved to be interested in &ating with a variety of wo&en. /nvest&ent. ?o&en 'ay attention to &en who invest in the&. That%s what kee's the flower industry going. Men can 'retty &uch de'end on the universal fe&ale tendency to nurture the young, and so didn%t evolve to look for this in wo&en. $e+ual re'roduction is the nu&ber one force behind genetic evolution. ?e evolved instincts and tendencies that su''orted &a+i&u& success in &ating back before our culture started evolving. #ow here we are in the >=st century, and still hardwired for cave&an days. #o wonder the self2hel' section in the bookstore is overflowing with titles" The 8uture of $e+ 3ll these instincts and drives evolved to increase the likelihood of wo&en getting 'regnant and having babies. But as / &entioned earlier, our conscious thoughts are often oriented in the other direction" Men Sust want to have se+, rightT They don%t want the wo&en to get 'regnant. 6nder this &odel, why do 'eo'le use birth controlT ?hy do &en get vasecto&iesT /t%s not to su''ort our #3" The answer is9 The &illions of years of genetic evolution that 'roduced these instincts did not count on our figuring out that we could have se+ and not get 'regnant. ?e%ve thrown a huge &onkey wrenchor 'erha's a rubber sheath would be a better figure of s'eechinto the genetic works. ?e%ve figured out how to have se+ without having babies, and as a result, the act of &ating is no longer the genetic 'ri.e it was for &illions of years. 7ur instincts still think &ating eIuals re'roduction, and that%s why our se+ drives are still so strong. But now everything has changed. ?hat really benefits our selfish #3 now is the baby2 &aking drive9 choosing to have a baby. /n future generations, through genetic evolution, choosing to have babies will beco&e &ore and &ore co&'elling. /f we were really res'onsible about use of birth control and never having un'lanned 'regnancies, the now2useless se+ drive would even atro'hy" / wouldn%t count on it, though. #atural selection works Iuickly to 'unish lack of re'roduction. ?ith govern&ents now guaranteeing the health and well2being of all children, we should e+'ect that seg&ent of the 'o'ulation to grow who don%t use birth control. That includes 'eo'le who think they have good genes and want to re'roduce the&, but it also includes the irres'onsible and the uneducated. 3nd so&e religions forbid birth control9 a genetically winning strategy" :ike it or not, we only live a few years, and the #3 of those of us who have a tendency not to have children will soon die out. Those of us who have only a few children will be swa&'ed by those who have &any. $o if we were living unconsciously, our drives would direct our behavior to &a+i&i.e our

#3%s chances of s'reading. :iving with the 'rogra&&ing of society%s &ores, we don%t even get that. ?hat about those of us who don%t have childrenT ?hat about ho&ose+ualsT 1ow can ho&ose+uality survive natural selectionT That%s one of the toughest Iuestions evolutionary biologists have had to face in a''lying arwinis& to hu&an beings. 7ne theory is si&'ly that evolution is in a state of flu+ right now. 3s &e&es have recently beco&e &ore i&'ortant than genes, our #3 hasn%t yet caught u'. /f this is the case, it will certainly catch u' soon, and we%d e+'ect to see higher birthrates over &ost of the 'o'ulation. 3nother 'ossibility is that those of us who don%t have children have beco&e in effect genetic slaves of those of us who do. The child bearers have s'read the right co&bination of &e&es, infected us with the right viruses of the &ind, to kee' us ha''ily working to &ake the world a better 'lace for their children. That%s one 'ossibility if we look at life fro& the 'oint of view of s'reading #3. But life doesn%t have to be about s'reading #3 at all. 3ll these buttons and tendencies can be recogni.ed and overco&e. :ife can be about so&ething bigger. But unless we understand how we%re wired, we can%t begin to 'rogra& ourselves for whatever 'ur'ose we want for our lives. The co&'le+ and varied evolution of our se+ drive gives us &any of the &ost 'owerful buttons and tendencies that &ind viruses use to 'rogra& us. The nu&ber two drive, right behind se+, is survival. That%s where we%ll look for the ne+t set of buttons that viruses of the &ind e+'loit.

U avid Buss discusses several studies in his book The 5volution of esire ,Basic Books, =EEO- that show strikingly different causes for Sealousy in &en and wo&en. /n one study 'erfor&ed by Buss hi&self, G@ 'ercent of &en said they would rather their &ate develo' a dee' e&otional attach&ent to another &an than have e+tra&arital se+. /n contrast, NJ 'ercent of the wo&en said they would 'refer se+ual infidelity to e&otional.

413PT5! $5V5# $6!V/V3: 3# 853! ?e will now discuss in a little &ore detail the struggle for e+istence. 4harles arwin /n 'rehistoric ti&es, the &ost effective way to stay alive was to have a good, healthy relationshi' with two things9 food and danger. The 'art of our brains that evolved to be attentive to danger was a huge hel' in the days when we had lots of threats to our survival in everyday life. / wonder how long it was, though, after the invention of language that the first con artist se'arated the first sucker fro& his savings by &aking u' a lie about so&e danger9 1ey, 7g" Me saw saber2toothed tiger go in cave where you left food" Better stay away" 1eh2heh. Many &yths and religions have so&e kind of threat of retribution fro& their god or gods, and their doctrines warn of the dangers of doing various forbidden things. ?hyT Because &e&es involving danger are the ones we 'ay attention to" 3s oral traditions develo'ed, our brains were set u' to a&'lify the dangers and give the& greater significance than the rest. 7nce again, &e&e evolution took off the instant that co&&unication of danger started taking 'lace. Today, having eli&inated &ost day2to2day threats to our survival, we find that our lives are still filled with danger &e&es. The &ore dangerous, the &ore we 'ay attention to the&. )ust look at all the attention we 'ay to, and the si.e of the industries built around, horror fil&s and insurance against loss. There are safety fil&s, of course, but who wants to go see the&T The &ost effective safety fil& in &y high2school driver%s2ed course was called Mechani.ed eath. /n contrast to all the boring fil&s outlining nor&al, safe driving habits, Mechani.ed eath showed several gory accident scenes, gra'hically de'icting the danger inherent in driving unsafely. 3lthough it was only one class 'eriod out of >K or so, it%s the one / re&e&ber, 'robably because danger was the only thing 'owerful enough to distract &y attention fro& its nor&al high2school 'riorities9 lunch and girls. anger, food, and se+. The 5volution of 8ear Because evolution favored safety, we have a lot &ore fear than we need. ?hy did evolution favor safetyT $i&'le9 safety was a 'ri&e factor in re'roduction. /f we stayed safe, we lived to 'ossibly re'roduceH if not, we didn%t. *enetic evolution wasn%t interested in the Iuality of our lives, only the Iuantity of our offs'ring. #aturallyand / literally &ean naturally, through the course of natural selectionstaying safe beca&e a &ore and &ore i&'ortant drive in us and other ani&als. 3s with our other drives, it has a feeling associated with it9 fear. U 8ear is highly ada'tive to whatever the current situation is. The fact that one 'erson &ight be scared witless to walk down the sa&e dark street that ins'ired *ene 0elly to sing in the rain shows that s'ecific fears are far fro& universal a&ong hu&an beings. /n fact, since / used to be 'etrified of 'ublic s'eaking and now / look forward to it, / can say with confidence that fears change even within a single 'erson%s lifeti&e. 1u&an fear is generated by hardware instincts viewing life through &e&etic software 'rogra&&ing. That 'rogra&&ing consists of all the distinction2&e&es, strategy2&e&es, and association2&e&es you got fro& everything you%ve ever e+'erienced, heard, thought, or been taught. /t%s an incredible genetic lea' that allowed us, and whatever other ani&als 'ossess the ability, to 'rotect ourselves against dangers we learn about only after we are born and our genes are fi+ed. /&agine the genetic 'rocess that resulted in the evolution of fear9 :et%s say there are so&e 'rehistoric ani&als, $'ot and !over, who have figured out how to co&&unicate the conce't of danger. $'ot has seen a tiger in a cave over yonder. 1e says to !over,

as he runs like the dickens in the other direction, !over'ant, 'antold fellow, there%s danger in the'ant, 'antcave over yonder. !over then acts Sust like he would have if he had seen a tiger, and runs like the dickens. This &akes hi& less likely to be eaten and is generally a favorable evolutionary ada'tation. By the way, si&'ly noticing $'ot running like that &ight have been the only co&&unication necessary. But all that running is a bit of a waste of energy, which is going to wear $'ot out and &ake hi& hungry, which will reIuire food. Poor $'ot 'robably does better than his 'redecessors, who had no ability to even beco&e aware of the danger, but there%s still roo& for i&'rove&ent. $o $'ot%s &ate has a litter or si+, and one of those offs'ring$'ot, )r.has a slightly different reaction9 heightened awareness of danger, but not actually running until there%s a better reason. $ince he achieves the sa&e benefit as $'ot without the cost of tuckering hi&self out and therefore &aking hi&self hungry, thirsty, and &ore vulnerable to attack, the genes res'onsible for the $'ot, )rs., of the world, over ti&e, will dis'lace the genes of $'ot. Ti&e 'assed, genes evolved, and we found ourselves with several very identifiable feelings all having to do with danger. That heightened awareness of so&e nons'ecific danger is called an+iety.*ood old fear is associated with a danger that we have the instinct to run away fro&. /f instead our reaction is to stick around and fight, we feel anger. Then we%ve got &i+tures and shades of these feelings, all with their own na&es9 nervousness, worry, sus'icion, tre'idation, and so on. )ust as the 5ski&os have lots of words for snow, the richness of our danger vocabulary illustrates the evolutionary fact that the conce't is a central one to our lives. 3s if we needed 'roof. ?hat ?ent ?rongT ?hy has fearthis wonderful, co&'le+, ada'tive res'onse to dangerbeco&e such a burden on our &odern livesT ?hy are so &any 'eo'le in thera'y, so &any &ore reading self2i&'rove&ent books, and, sadly, so &any &ore still Iuietly des'airing, all because their lives are filled with unwanted fearT ?hy did our res'onses to danger, which served us well for so long during our genetic evolution, suddenly turn against us and beco&e the &ain roadblock in reali.ing our full 'otential in lifeT /t%s a co&'licated subSect, 'erha's rivaling se+ in its ubiIuitous intertwining in the fabric of our lives. The co&&on thread, though, is this9 we now live in an environ&ent so far re&oved fro& the &illennia during which our genes evolved that the fearL angerLdanger &echanis& is no longer a''ro'riate to the task. 7ur lives today are about Sobs, societies, and ideasnot lions, tigers, and bears. But 'eo'le treat cultural failure as if it were as har&ful as 'hysical failurebeing eaten" The instinctive reactions and e&otions that evolution eIui''ed us with are frankly bad for anyone who is interested in &ore than survival. /t is an area where the #ew 3ge truis& Trust your instincts fails us. $uccess in life de'ends u'on 'erseverance in the face of failure, yet our instincts about cultural dangers send us in Sust the o''osite direction. Today%s environ&ent is largely the invention of our &inds. 7ur fear sensors have gone haywire" /&agine that the 'art of our &inds that 'roduces fear is like a su'er&arket bar2 code reader installed in our heads. ?hen it sees so&ething it recogni.es as scary, it bee's and rings u' a 'ricehow scared we get by any situation. 3 &illion years ago, the scanners worked great9 everything we looked at had nice neat 6P4 codes 'rinted on it. But the situations the scanners were built to recogni.e no longer e+istnow we%re ai&ing our bar2code readers at stri'ed neckties, )ackson Pollock 'aintings, and 'sychedelic light shows. /t%s a wonder we get along as well as we do" 3ctually, we don%t get along that well. ?e live in an age of great confusion and stress. 3nyone who%s ever had the desire to get away fro& it all has felt the 'ull of a si&'ler, less confusing environ&ent9 one that our senses were designed to &ake sense of.

8ear and 0inshi' ?e don%t Sust 'ay s'ecial attention to our own dangers. $ince our genes are shared by our relatives, we also find our attention attracted to situations where we &ight hel' 'eo'le sharing our genes at little cost to ourselves. ?e call this altruis&, and interestingly society see&s to s&ile as surely on altruis& as it frowns on 'ersonal indulgence. Both, however, evolved fro& the fittest genes% survival. 1ere are so&e button2'ushing &e&es relating to altruis&9 1el'ing children. The best thing you can do for your selfish genes, ne+t to surviving and re'roducing, is hel'ing your children or other children who share those genes survive to re'roduce the&selves. $cientists aren%t through by any &eans with their investigation of behavior toward children in hu&ans, which runs the ga&ut fro& hel'ing children of other races to killing one%s own children. 3s a general rule, though, &any 'eo'le have an instinct for hel'ing children. Birds of a feather. *rou's of 'eo'le with like genes who hang out together and hel' each other have a better chance of survival, and also of kee'ing their gene 'ool fro& being diluted by outsiders. 3t last" $o&e nice &e&es" ?e%re not Sust base, vile creatures after all, are weT But the fact that genes evolved to care &ore about the&selves than individual 'eo'le has a nasty side, too. 1ow about these &e&es9 !acis&. 5+cluding or even fighting 'eo'le with obviously different genes, the sea&y side of birds of a feather, has the effect of 'reserving the status Iuo of the gene 'ool. This is currently frowned u'on by &ainstrea& 3&erican society, although until the >@th century it was well acce'ted in &ost cultures that had e+'osure to other races. 5litis&. 3ny grou' of 'eo'le who share and act on the belief that they deserve better resources, 'rivileges, or treat&ent than others are &ore likely to survive and 'ro'agate their genes in ti&es of scarcity. 1el'ing children, birds of a feather, racis&, and elitis& are all &e&es that 'ush our buttons. 3long with crisis, danger, and so&e &ore co&'licated fear2based &e&es /%ll discuss later in the cha'ter, these button2'ushing &e&es are 'ri&e candidates for &ind viruses to take advantage of in attracting our attention and 'enetrating our defenses. 3nd the danger doesn%t have to be realwe Sust have to think it &ight be. To get along in the &odern world, we need to ignore our senses to a degree and live by the ideas, custo&s, and beliefs that e+ist solely in our &inds. The fear reaction, though, see&s to be one of the &ost difficult instincts to ignore. 8or that reason, &e&es that invoke a fear reaction, and the attention we 'ay along with it, have done very well indeed. 1ere are so&e of the ways &e&es have evolved to take advantage of our fear buttons. $ave the 4hildren" before it%s too late . . . 4hildren all over the world are in danger" ?ithout a firsthand understanding of &e&etics, they are 'rone to infection by &ind virusesinfections that could literally destroy the Iuality of their lives.

?hat can you do to hel'T Teach the& &e&etics. But ti&e is short. ;our hel' is needed now. /f you know any children in high school or college, don%t wait for so&eone else to hel' the&. Be the one friend they can count on. Make a difference in their lives and the lives of the ne+t generation. /nvest in their future now. *ive the& a co'y of Virus of the Mind today. By fra&ing so&ething as a cultural danger, advertisers can &ake 'eo'le at least 'ay attention to their ads. Viruses of the &ind often include fear2inducing &e&es. The Psychology of *a&bling ?hen / was Sust beginning to get interested in how the &ind works, one of the to'ics &ost fascinating to &e was the 'sychology of ga&bling. ?hy do 'eo'le ga&ble against the house, knowing full well that the house has the advantageT More to the 'oint, how could / &ake &oney by taking advantage of the fact that other 'eo'le so&eti&es &ade bad betsT The secret is that ga&blers% instincts ste& fro& 'rehistoric ti&es and give the& bad advice in a world deliberately designed to fool the&. $o&e of those false instincts are9 7vervaluing a long shot. /n 'rehistoric ti&es, engaging in a low2risk, high2reward activity such as searching for food was of survival benefit, even if the reward a''eared only occasionally. /n ga&bling ga&es with huge 'ayoffs such as lotto and keno, the true odds can be absolutely abys&al. Peo'le will still 'lay because of the low risk and high reward. 4hea' insurance. 3nother low2risk, high2reward &e&e is chea' insurance. That &eans 'utting forth so&e s&all effort in order to reduce the risk of danger, like ca&ouflaging your cave entrance before going to slee'. /n &y blackSack2'laying years, &any ti&es / heard the co&&on wisdo& that you should always buy insurance&ake an additional bet that the dealer has blackSackwhen you have blackSack yourself. 3nalysis of the ga&e shows that insurance is a bad bet, blackSack or noH but the chea' insurance &e&e &akes it intuitively a''ealing. Playing the streaks. /n life, des'ite the disclai&ers of certain &utual2fund advertise&ents, 'ast 'erfor&ance is usually a 'retty good indicator of future results. /f deer have been gathering at the watering hole every day at dawn for the last week, chances are that they will again to&orrow. /n &ost ga&es of chance, though, each 'lay is co&'letely inde'endent of the 'ast. $treaks are Sust rando& events, yet 'eo'le ga&ble as if they had so&e significance. Playing against the streaks. /n a wonderful e+a&'le of the basic inconsistency of the hu&an race, so&e 'eo'le have develo'ed the instinct to go against the flow, contrary to &ass o'inion. /t%s easy to see how this &ight have survival advantages in finding food or &ates, since it auto&atically lessens one%s co&'etitionH however, in ga&bling on rando& events, it%s Sust as useless a strategy as going with the flow or streak. Being stingy when you%re down, generous when you%re u'. The survival instinct to conserve scarce resources and be &ore lavish when resources are abundant is the e+act o''osite of the o'ti&al &oney2&anage&ent strategy. 4o&'uter &odeling shows that you will last the longest before going broke if you bet &ore when you%re behind, less when you%re ahead.

 Playing a hunch. 7ccasionally trying a new strategy or a creative a''roach was and is useful for survival. /t%s not useful for &ost ga&bling ga&es, though, es'ecially blackSack9 there%s e+actly one way to 'lay each hand that will result in the best odds of winning. 4asinos &ake &illions on blackSack 'layers% hunches that deviate fro& that so&ewhat boring strategy. /t%s not Sust that 'eo'le ga&ble 'oorly because of these false instincts9 ga&bling ga&es have evolved to e+'loit these tendencies" The casinos &ade &oney on the ga&es that best fooled us, such as blackSack, and re'licated the&. 7ver ti&e, weaker ga&es such as faro faded out, not bringing in as large a 'rofit to the house.

/nsuring blackSack is a bad bet unless you%ve been counting cards and know there are unusually &any tens left in the deck. But the chea' insurance &e&e te&'ts 'eo'le to &ake the bet anyway. Me&es that e+'loit these tendencies have found their way into other 'arts of our culture, too. Being conscious of these tendencies could not only i&'rove your success as a ga&bler, but also enhance the Iuality of other areas of your life. 6rban :egends /t%s te&'ting to think that &yths, 'roverbs, legends, and oral traditions are 'assed down because of either their factual truth or their 'articular usefulness in our liveslessons, 'erha's, or the wisdo& of the ages. Being e+'erts on &e&es, though, we now know that the stories, &yths, and co&&on wisdo& that survive are the ones withyou guessed itgood &e&es. :et%s take a look at so&e of our &odern urban legends, those stories that won%t die no &atter how &any ti&es they%re refuted. ?hy won%t they dieT Because a boring news'a'er story saying nothing interesting or dangerous is actually ha''ening at all cannot ho'e to co&'ete with a scary urban legend full of Suicy &e&es" 1ere are so&e of &y favorites, with the buttons 'ushed by the &e&es inserted in brackets9 3 boy is dying of leuke&ia [crisis\. Before he dies, he wants to see if he can &ake it into the *uinness Book of ?orld !ecords [&ission\ by setting the record for collecting the &ost get2well cards [distinguishing yourself\. Please hel' hi& [hel'ing children\ by sending hi& a card [low risk, high reward\. 3 cou'le goes to a garage sale and argues over whether to buy a beat2u' chair for ]K [o''ortunity\. They decide to buy the chair. ?hen they get it ho&e, the dog starts sniffing and scratching at the u'holstery [danger\. They e+a&ine the torn corner of the seat cover and discover a 'lain brown bag with ]JN,@@@ in ]=@@ bills in it [low risk, high reward\.

$oa' giant Procter < *a&ble has been receiving co&'laint letters for decades fro& 'eo'le who have heard that their century2old &an2in2the2&oon logo is actually a satanic sy&bol [danger\ and want the& to change it in the na&e of *od [&ission\. $o&ebody found a ,your favorite nasty substance- [danger\ in their ,your favorite food ite&- [food\ at ,your favorite fast2food restaurant- [fa&iliarity\. They sued the& and got ]> &illion [low risk, high reward\. $u'erstition 3re you su'erstitiousT 5ven if you%re not, you 'robably can na&e &ore things that su''osedly bring good or bad luck than you can na&e Presidents of the 6nited $tates. 3ssu&ing for the &o&ent that there is no real2world validity to these clai&s ,knock on wood-, why do we all know so &any su'erstitionsT 1int9 this will have so&ething to do with fear and &e&es. Most su'erstitions are based on the chea' insurance &e&e. 8or the a''arently low cost of avoiding black cats, staying ho&e on 8riday the =Jth, or tossing a bit of salt over your left shoulderand it &ust be the left shoulderyou get chea' insurance against so&ething bad ha''ening. $o&e su'erstitions throw in other &e&es, es'ecially 'laying the streaks. 4ra's 'layers want a successful shooter ,the one who rolls the dice- to continue rolling until his winning streak ends. They get &ore and &ore e+cited with each rando& victory. 3thletes co&&only don%t change their underwear during a winning streak. Baseball 'layer ?ade Boggs ate chicken before every ga&e. 1e says he didn%t eat it once and went hitless with three errors at third base. 4an you bla&e hi&T My friend *reg 0usnick, who& you%ll re&e&ber fro& the conversation in the Microsoft cafeteria where / first heard about &e&es, has a habit of getting u' each &orning and glancing at the news'a'er headlines on his way out the door. )ust a glance, that%s all. 7ne day he didn%t do it, and the Po'e died. 7f course, the Po'e had already died long before 0usnick failed to look at the news'a'er, but rational thought has little to do with su'erstition" 3s 0usnick recalls9 / couldn%t esca'e the s'ooky feeling that it was so&ehow &y fault. / failed in &y duty . . . and when the dust settled, the Po'e was dead. 3re su'erstitions badT 7nly in the sense that if you are 'aying attention to salt and cats, you &ay &iss out on so&ething you would find &ore worthwhile. 7r if you think your bad luck is being caused by that &irror you broke last year, you &ight not search hard enough for so&e real causes that you &ight be able to do so&ething about. Maybe you have bad breath" 1ow do su'erstitions get startedT 3ll different ways. Peo'le &ake the& u' as a Soke or 'rank, so&eone notices a see&ing 'attern in chance eventsthe initial origin doesn%t &atter so &uch as why they get 'er'etuated. $u'erstitions get 'er'etuated because they have what it takes fro& a &e&e%s 'oint of view9 the chea' insurance co&'onent of su'erstitions Sust 'resses our button. ?e 'ay attention to the&. 3nd since there are few things we love to talk about &ore than danger, we 'ass these su'erstitions around freely. $o su'erstitions beco&e viruses of the &ind, diverting our attention, affecting our behavior, and 'rogra&&ing us to s'read the& to others. / ran into 'erha's the origin of a new su'erstition on &y national tour to 'ro&ote &y first book, *etting Past 70. /n three se'arate cities, / heard a ru&or going around that youth gangs had a new rite of initiation. 3 grou' of the& would ride around after dark in a car with its headlights turned off. The first *ood $a&aritan to flash his or her lights as a friendly re&inder would be hunted down and killed. anger" 4risis" 3nd, of course, chea' insurance9 Sust don%t flash your lights and you%re safe. The story see&s to have been a hoa+, the result of a series of 'lanted fa+

&essages to radio and TV stations around the country, but it has every ele&ent of a good urban legend or su'erstition. / would not be sur'rised, K@ years fro& now, to see 'eo'le avoiding flashing their headlights &uch as they avoid ste''ing on a crack in the sidewalk, with only the vaguest notion of the origins of the su'erstition. The genetic tendency we have to 'ass the word about dangerous situations served us well a long ti&e ago. But once that &echanis& was established, it o'ened the gates for individual su'erstitions to have a field day inhabiting so&e choice real estate in our &inds. There is one big danger in living life with this outdated reverence we have for fear and its associated &e&es9 &aking bad decisions based on fear. Because our instinctive reaction is to give this e&otion &uch &ore weight than it deserves in &odern life, we often &iss out on great o''ortunities. *etting Past 8ear 7ur tendency to overreact to cultural dangers a''lies not only to su'erstitions but to &any things we fear in everyday life9 'eo'le%s disa''roval, failing to &eet a goal, reSection, and so on. /t all boils down to the fact that our fear2reaction &echanis&s are still calibrated for a ti&e when the world was full of real threats to our survival and re'roduction. There used to be lots of good reasons to be afraid. #ow there aren%t. 7verco&ing fear reIuires you to train yourself to think every ti&e you feel fear, rather than Sust reacting instinctively. The thought 'rocess / go through goes like this9 /%& scared. /s it 'hysical dangerT #o. ?ell, when / &ake a decision based on fear, it%s often a bad one, so /%& going to 'ut the fear aside and ask &yself, ?hat is &y 'ur'ose in this situationT /%ll &ake &y decision consciously based on what hel's achieve &y 'ur'ose better, rather than unconsciously on &y instinctive desire to run away fro& fear. $ound kind of awkward and nerdyT That logical thought 'rocess was essential to &y overco&ing &y stage fright and beco&ing a 'ublic s'eaker. 3fter a while, it beca&e second nature and / didn%t need to think all the words any&oreH / Sust see&ed to have created a new unconscious thought 'atterna strategy2&e&ethat su''orted &y agenda rather than so&e 'rehistoric #3%s. :ogic is a wonderful thing. 3 boring truth seldo& taught in success se&inars is that clear, logical thinking and si&'ly 'lodding ahead with a 'lan are great tools for success in life. *enetic evolution gave us the tendency to 'ay attention to certain &e&es. #ote that / said tendency, not &andate. ?e have the ability to consciously override our genetic 'rogra&&ing and even over ti&e to re'rogra& ourselves to unconsciously 'ay attention to other things, if we decide other things are &ore i&'ortant. $o if the effect on you of your ani&al heritage ended there, it wouldn%t be too bad. ;ou could go through life, chuckling every once in a while as you noticed your attention being diverted in one of these genetic directions. ;ou%d at least be secure in the knowledge that even though you were si'honing off so&e of your consciousness, you were contributing to evolution. This assu&es you care to have so&e 'ur'ose to your life other than Sust surviving. /f you Sust want to survive, you%re in great sha'eyou will indeed survive until you dieand you can sto' reading now. #atural selection will select your genes or not, as it wishes. By the way, if you do choose to devote your life to the service of your genes, /%ll give you a hint9 they want you to have as &any kids as 'ossible. 8or the rest of us, though, it doesn%t end there. !e&e&ber, we%ve still got these viruses of the &ind to deal with. 3nd now that we know what the buttons are that &e&es can 'ush, let%s take a look at how we get 'rogra&&ed.

UThere is another drive associated with safety, too, that / &ight call revulsion. /n another e+a&'le of the klugy nature of evolution, and for no 'articular reason, we feel revolted by certain dangers and afraid of others. / would guess that revulsion is an older, si&'ler &echanis& than fear. / say that because the things we tend to be revolted by are very old dangers such as visibly diseased bodies, no+ious fu&es, and 'oisonous tastes. #ature has se'arately evolved &any safety2oriented drives9 even the &ost 'ri&itive single2celled organis&s tend to &ove away fro& hostile environ&ents and toward &ore fruitful ones.

413PT5! 5/*1T 17? ?5 *5T P!7*!3MM5 There are two kinds of 'eo'le in this world9 those that enter a roo& and turn the television set on, and those that enter a roo& and turn the television set off. !ay&ond $haw, the 'rotagonist in the &ovie The Manchurian 4andidate 1ere%s the cha'ter you%ve all been waiting for. /t%s all about how to &ani'ulate 'eo'le, using &e&es and genetic buttons, into doing e+actly what you want the& to do. 1eh2 heh. ;ou know what a &e&e isa thought, belief, or attitude in your &ind that can s'read to and fro& other 'eo'le%s &inds. ;ou know that we hu&an beings are the &ediu& for the evolution of &e&es. ;ou understand how evolution works by natural selectionsurvival of the fittest. 3nd you%ve seen how our own genetic evolution gives us buttons9 tendencies to 'ay s'ecial attention to certain thingses'ecially danger, food, and se+which hel'ed us survive and re'roduce in 'rehistoric ti&es. #ow co&es the scary, u'setting 'art. Me&es enter our &inds without our 'er&ission. They beco&e 'art of our &ental 'rogra&&ing and influence our lives without our even being aware of it. /n this cha'ter, /%ll show how we get 'rogra&&ed by new &e&es and start to discuss what we can do to 'revent being infected by unwanted 'rogra&&ing. Me&e /nfection ?e get infected by new &e&es in three ways. /%ll introduce each of the ways now, then discuss each in &ore detail later. The first way we get infected is through conditioning, or re'etition. /f we hear so&ething re'eated often enough, it beco&es 'art of our 'rogra&&ing. 3dvertisers and sales'eo'le know this well. 3ny good book on sales will tell you that &ost custo&ers don%t buy until they have been asked five to seven ti&es. /t takes that &any re'etitions to i&'lant the Buy &e &e&e in the custo&er. The second way is through a &echanis& known as cognitive dissonance. ?hen things don%t &ake sense, our &inds struggles to &ake the& &ake sense. /&agine, for e+a&'le, that a friend is u'set with you, but you don%t know why. ;ou have two &e&es that conflictthat are inconsistent9 friend and u'set with &e. ;ou resolve the conflict, or dissonance, by creating new &e&es, by rearranging your &e&etic 'rogra&&ing so that things &ake sense again. 3h, Bill%s u'set because he%s 'aid for lunch the last three ti&es, you &ight conclude. !ight or wrong, you now have a new &e&e about Bill and lunch that will influence your future behavior. /%ve heard it said that geniuses develo' their &ost brilliant original thoughts through self2 i&'osed cognitive dissonance. 3s you &ight guess, then, as a 'rogra&&ing &ethod it is 'articularly effective with intelligent 'eo'le, because you actually believe that the new &e&e is your own idea. The third way new &e&es enter our &inds is by taking advantage of our genetic buttons in the &anner of the TroSan horse. 3s we have seen, because of our nature there are certain things we tend to 'ay s'ecial attention to, such as warnings of danger, cries of children, and se+ual attractiveness. ?e are susce'tible to bundles of &e&es that 'ush our buttons to get our attention and then sneak in so&e other &e&es along with the&. $i&'ly getting 'rogra&&ed by new &e&es isn%t the sa&e as catching a full2blown &ind

virus, but viruses of the &ind take advantage of one or all of these &ethods to &ake their initial inroads into our &inds. 3t the end of this cha'ter, /%ll 'ut it all together and show how these various ingredients co&bine to &ake viruses of the &ind. 4onditioning 4onditioning'rogra&&ing by re'etitionis the easiest way to acIuire &e&es that don%t 'ush any of your buttons effectively. 8or instance, if you want to learn 8rench, you listen to 'eo'le s'eaking that language as you study the le+icon. 3t first it Sust sounds like 'eo'le clearing their throats and &oaning, but after &any re'etitions, you begin to be 'rogra&&ed with distinction2&e&es. $oon you can begin to distinguish 8rench words and sentences where there was &eaninglessness before. !e&e&ber ele&entary schoolT :earning to read and writeT Me&ori.ing the &ulti'lication tableT / have two &e&ories fro& first grade. 7ne is being incredibly bored by doing arith&etic 'roble&s over and over and over again. The other is being incredibly frustrated by the teacher%s reading of the sa&e 'age of $ee $'ot run over and over and over again. 8rustrated or bored, it didn%t &atter9 conditioning by re'etition works. 5le&entary2school 'rogra&&ing by conditioning was not li&ited to reading, writing, and arith&etic. ?e 'ledged allegiance to the flag of the 6nited $tates of 3&erica every &orning. !e'etition. 4onditioning. 3nd there%s one thing all native2born 3&ericans know for sure9 the 6nited $tates is one nation, indivisible, with liberty and Sustice for all. !ightT That 'atriotis& didn%t s'ontaneously arise in each of us out of our s'iritual nature9 we were 'rogra&&ed" 3nd it wasn%t 'resented to us as a reasoned, logical argu&ent9 we Sust said it and heard it enough ti&es and'oof"it beca&e one of our beliefs, our values, our &e&es. :ong2ter& 'risoners can beco&e institutionali.ed they beco&e so conditioned to the culture inside 'rison that they no longer want to live outside. They try to get back in once they%re released. There%s no reason to think that the long2ter& conditioning of a bad Sob or a bad &arriage doesn%t have the sa&e effect. 4hildren ty'ically get 'rogra&&ed with religious beliefs through conditioning by re'etition. ?hatever the religion, children go fro& .ero beliefs to full2fledged faith, or as fledged as they get, by being told about the divinity of *od or )esus or avid 0oresh over and over again until it beco&es realthose &e&es beco&e 'rogra&&ed. /f you listen re'eatedly to religious s'eech, after enough re'etitions you will actually begin to notice *od and 1is works where there was Sust chaotic life going on before. ?hat was for&erly chance beco&es a &iracle. ?hat was 'ain is now kar&a. ?hat was hu&an nature is now sin. 3nd regardless of whether these religious &e&es are 'resented as Truth or as allegorical &ythology, you%re conditioned Sust the sa&e. ;ou can be conditioned, through re'etition, to acIuire new distinction2&e&es that &ake reality look different to you and 'rovide reinforcing evidence that kee's those distinction2&e&es in 'lace. /n 'sychology, the word conditioning often refers to i&'lanting association2&e&es. Pavlov%s dog was conditioned to associate the ringing bell with yu&&y food. ?hen the 4oca24ola 4o&'any 'ays &illions of dollars to show you young 'eo'le in bathing suits having a good ti&e drinking their 'roducts, they are conditioning you to associate good feelings with their brands. The re'etition of that co&&ercial creates association2&e&es in your &ind so that when you 'ush your sho''ing cart down the soft2drink aisle, you get an irrational urge to buy 4oke. /t%s 'ossible to override that urge through conscious intention or the fact that other &e&es are stronger, but the urge &akes a difference in their botto& line U or they wouldn%t be s'ending the &oney. There%s also a ter& for the use of re'etition to create strategy2&e&es9 o'erant conditioning. Viewing co&&ercials or listening to bells ring is 'assiveH it involves no

activity or strategy. ?hen you behave in so&e way and that behavior gets rewarded, that is o'erant conditioning. The reward creates and reinforces strategy2&e&es. The classic e+a&'le of o'erant conditioning is teaching a rat to run a &a.e. 3t first, the rat Sust wanders around. But soon he discovers there is a yu&&y 'iece of cheese tucked away in one cornera reward. Ruickly, the rat learns to run directly to the cheese rather than Sust wandering. ?e use o'erant conditioning on our children constantly9 grading their schoolwork, 'raising the& when they do things we like. The re'etition of these rewards conditions the children to behave in a certain way. /t creates and reinforces strategy2&e&es that, if we are good 'arents and teachers, will serve the& as adults in their 'ursuit of ha''iness. 1owever, o'erant conditioning can be used for &any other 'ur'oses besides training you to 'ursue ha''iness. ?henever you%re in a re'eated situation in which a reward is available for certain behavior, you are being conditioned. /f you%re in a situation where you%re being rewarded for so&e behavior, think about what &e&es that o'erant conditioning is 'rogra&&ing you with. o they serve your 'ur'ose in lifeT 4ognitive issonance 3nother 'rogra&&ing techniIue is creating &ental 'ressure and resolving itcognitive dissonance. ?hy do high2'ressure sales tactics e+ist even though 'eo'le universally des'ise the&T 3s with any why Iuestion in the world of &e&etics, the answer is9 because the &e&e for it is good at s'reading. $ales'eo'le get infected with the high2 'ressure sales &e&e and go about acting on it, regardless of whether it%s the &ost effective &eans at their dis'osal. There%s no Iuestion, however, that it does work on so&e 'eo'le so&e of the ti&e. 1igh2'ressure sales work by &aking you &entally unco&fortableby creating cognitive dissonance. ;ou enter the situation with so&e strategy2&e&es that &ake you resist buying9 'erha's they are so&ething like :ook before you lea' or $ho' around before you buy. The sales'erson 'rogra&s you with a &e&e &aking it attractive to buy i&&ediately9 /f / don%t buy now, /%ll &iss a window of o''ortunity or even si&'ly /f / buy now, the sales'erson will like &e. Those new &e&es conflict with your old ones, and a &ental tension is created. ;our &ind wants to resolve the conflict. /t does so by creating a new &e&e. There are two ways to release the 'ressure caused by cognitive dissonance9 buy in or bail out. /f you bail out, it%s likely to be because you%ve resolved the dissonance by creating a &e&e such as The sales'erson is a Serk. But so&e 'eo'le buy, creating instead a &e&e like / really want to buy this. 7nce you create that &e&e, it%s yours, and a s&art sales'erson will reinforce it by telling you what a s&art decision you%ve &ade and even calling a few days later and congratulating you on your 'urchase. 4ognitive dissonance can be used to create a &e&e of sub&ission and loyalty to whatever authority is causing the dissonance. 8raternity ha.ings, boot ca&', and so&e religious or s'iritual disci'lines 'ut 'eo'le through difficult tests and &ay de&and de&onstrations of loyalty before releasing the 'ressure. That creates an association2 &e&e between the de&onstration of loyalty and the good feeling caused by the release of 'ressure. ?ith cognitive dissonance, 'eo'le end u' believing they have received so&ething valuable, so&ething deserving of their loyalty, when in reality all that has ha''ened is that the 'eo'le who were torturing the& have sto''ed. Prisoners of war have been 'rogra&&ed to sub&it and be loyal to their ca'tors through this &ethod. 7ne interesting result of research in o'erant conditioning on 'eo'le is that it works bettercreates stronger &e&esto give the reward only occasionally than it does to

give it all the ti&e. That could be because withholding the reward adds cognitive dissonance to the o'erant conditioning. $o a truly &ani'ulative &e&e 'rogra&&er will withhold the reward &ost of the ti&e even if the subSect 'erfor&s flawlessly, knowing this will create stronger 'rogra&&ing. The ra&ifications of this research are interesting. Peo'le often say that the teachers who &ade the &ost difference in their education were the tough gradersthe ones who withheld the 3%s &uch of the ti&e. The occasional 3 reinforces the ?ork hard &e&e &ore than the constant 3 because it adds cognitive dissonance. Talk shows are filled with 'eo'le who stay involved in relationshi's they say are awful &ost of the ti&e'erha's the conditioning and dissonance of the occasional reward in a cruddy relationshi' reinforces the strategy2&e&e $tay together &ore than it does in a relationshi' that%s good &ost of the ti&e" TroSan 1orses The TroSan horse &ethod of 'rogra&&ing works by getting you to 'ay attention to one &e&e, then sneaking in a whole bundle of others along with it. /f you%re an intelligent, educated 'erson, you &ay be thinking, ?ow" ;ou &ust have to be 'retty gullible to fall for that" Tell that to the TroSans. There are any nu&ber of &echanis&s for doing the &e&e bundling. 8or one, a TroSan horse can take advantage of your instinctive buttons, 'ushing the& to get your attention and then sneaking in another agenda. The si&'lest e+a&'le of a button2'ushing TroSan horse is the advertising truis& $e+ sells. ?hy does se+ sellT Because the se+ 'ushes your button, draws your attention, and acts as a TroSan horse for other &e&es bundled into the advertise&ent. 7f course, danger, food, crisis, hel'ing children, and the other buttons all sell, too, if not Iuite as well as se+. Much &ore on this in 4ha'ter E. 3 TroSan horse can also take advantage of the strategy2&e&es you%re currently 'rogra&&ed with having to do with learning or believing. 8or e+a&'le, 'eo'le who have the strategy2&e&e /f / trust so&eone, believe what they say are susce'tible to new &e&etic 'rogra&&ing co&ing fro& 'eo'le they trust. Peo'le who have the strategy2 &e&e Believe things consistent with what / knowH be ske'tical of all else are susce'tible to new &e&etic 'rogra&&ing that see&s consistent with what they already know. /f you%re 'rogra&&ed to believe what A says because it is the voice of *odwhere A is a 'erson, a book, or even a 'ractice such as &editationyou%re easily 'rogra&&ed with any additional &e&es that co&e fro& A. The si&'lest bundling techniIue, one used freIuently by 'oliticians and trial lawyers, is si&'ly saying the &e&es one after the other, in decreasing order of believability. The credibility of the first state&ents see& to carry over to the unsu''orted ones. 8or e+a&'le9 ?e all want freedo&" ?e all want de&ocracy to work for everyone" ?e all want every 3&erican to have the o''ortunity to 'ursue the 3&erican rea&" 3nd we all want a national health2care syste& that &akes that 'ossible. #ow it%s a bit of a stretch to conclude that federal &anage&ent of health care has anything to do with freedo&, de&ocracy, or the 3&erican rea&, but Su+ta'osing the state&ents like that see&s to turn off 'eo'le%s natural ske'ticis&. The Iuestionable &e&es at the end of the bundle ride into your &ind inside the TroSan horse of the acce'table &e&es at the beginning. Bundling the state&ents together like that is one for& of a #euro2:inguistic Progra&&ing ,#:P- techniIue known as e&bedding, or 'ackaging &e&es to &ake 'eo'le &ore susce'tible to the&. 3 related #:P techniIue is anchoring9 taking so&e i&age, sound, or sensation and linking it to an unrelated idea. 8or e+a&'le, a 'olitical candidate who gestures at hi&self when talking about a rosy future and at his o''onent when 'reaching doo& and gloo&

is actually anchoring good feelings to hi&self and bad feelings to his o''onent. The re'eated bundling of the gestures with the good and bad feelings creates association2 &e&es in your &ind, which will later influence the way you vote. ;ou can use anchoring on yourself to Iuickly 'ut yourself in a good or enthusiastic &ood" 4lose your eyes and i&agine a ti&e when you were e+cited and &otivated. 4reate a vivid &ental 'icture. #ow, when you are i&&ersed in that &otivated feeling, lightly scratch the 'ad of your inde+ finger with your thu&bnail. ;ou%re anchoring that state of &ind to that sensation. 7'en your eyes and co&e back to the 'resent. !e'eat this a few ti&es over a 'eriod of days or weeks, and you%ll find that ne+t ti&e you want to &otivate yourself Iuickly, a gentle scratch of the 'ad of your inde+ finger with your thu&bnail will get you in the right &ood. 3s with &any of the techniIues in this cha'ter, e&bedding and anchoring are used a lot by so'histicated sales'eo'le. The whole 'oint of sales is to influence 'eo'le%s beliefsinfect the& with certain &e&esfor direct econo&ic gain. /t%s natural that we%d see &any effective &e&e2s'reading techniIues used by sales'eo'leH for that reason, &any of the e+a&'les in this cha'ter have to do with selling. $elling and Progra&&ing 3n effective for& of e&bedding often used in sales is the Iuestion2asking techniIue. 7ne of the first things you%ll learn if you take a good sales2training class is that you &ust be the one asking the Iuestions. ;ou need to control the interaction by asking the right Iuestions and leading the &arkercusto&er down the 'ath leading to the sale. ?hy is thatT ;ou do it for e+actly the sa&e reason a trial lawyer asks a witness very s'ecific Iuestions, rather than Sust saying, 6h, anything you want to tell us about the alleged cri&eT The attorney has a 'oint she wants to 'rove and does everything 'ossible to create a fra&ework su''orting that 'oint. /f you%ve watched :.3. :aw or Perry Mason, you know there are rules in court 'rohibiting lawyers fro& going too far in constructing that fra&ework. 3 Sudge wouldn%t allow a Iuestion like id you see the evil defendant, who was thinking to hi&self, 1ey, that looks like a good house to rob, skulking in the bushesT ?hy notT That Iuestion constructs a tad too &uch fra&ework. $i&'ly by asking it, the lawyer is creating &ental i&ages and attitudes in the &inds of the Sury. $he%s using e&bedding to create &e&es in so&eone else%s &ind without their being aware of it. 3nd that%s e+actly what the sales'erson, not constrained by rules of evidence, is doing toerwith you. 3sking Iuestions is a TroSan2horse &ethod for infecting 'eo'le with &e&es. !eal2estate sales'eo'le are trained to use you and your as &uch as 'ossible. ?ould you like to go u' and see your &aster bedroo&T they ask. $i&'ly by 'osing the Iuestion, they create and reinforce an i&age in your &ind of you owning the house. They 'rogra& you with an association2&e&e. Pretty sneaky, huhT 7f course, you don%t need to ask Iuestions to reinforce these &ental i&ages. 7h, lookhere%s your fire'lace. ;ou could knock this wall out and have a huge 'layroo& for your kids. 3nd through this door you%ve got a garage for both your cars. This is all still e&bedding. 3ll these hel' create &e&es, but wise sales'eo'le know asking Iuestions, es'ecially ones to which your answer is yes, hel's get the sale. $o another techniIue is to tag a little Iuestion on the end of these state&ents to 'rogra& you with the strategy2&e&e of saying yes9 This bedroo& is gorgeous, isn%t itT This is Sust what you were looking for, isn%t itT / Sust love this view, don%t youT The very act of asking 'eo'le a Iuestion can cause the& to create or reinforce a &e&e in their &inds. 3sking enough of the right Iuestions can actually change so&eone%s

belief syste&, and therefore influence the 'erson%s behavior. /nfluencing 'eo'le%s behavior, of course, is e+actly the 'oint of sales9 you want to influence so&eone to buy what you%re selling. /f you%re a sales'erson, you%ve 'robably been using these techniIues for years, without always knowing why they work. 4reating Value The key to effective sales is finding what the custo&er considers valuable about your 'roduct and reinforcing that &e&e in his &ind. #ow what the custo&er finds valuable &ay have nothing whatsoever to do with what the sales'erson finds valuable. /f you%re a good sales'erson selling a Picasso to so&eone who likes it because it &atches the china, you won%t tell hi& that%s not the right reason to like it" ;ou%ll sell hi& another Picasso fro& his Blue Period because it &atches the tablecloth. The sales'erson%s Sob is to create a &e&e in the custo&er%s &ind that says / believe /%& going to buy this. The best sales'eo'le don%t look u'on the sale as an adversarial relationshi' but as a genuine win2win situation. The custo&er gets so&ething she wants, and the sales'erson gets the co&&ission. $o the sales'erson will be trying to get you to figure out why you want the 'roduct and trying to have you create &e&es reinforcing your belief in the 'roduct%s value. The Iuestion2asking techniIue works well here once again. $o&eone browsing in a store &ay easily wander around and leave without buying anything. But if a sales'erson co&es u' and asks, May / hel' you find so&ethingT there%s a good chance the custo&er will identify so&ething he%s looking for. $i&'ly saying /%& checking out the la&'s reinforces the idea in the custo&er%s &ind that he wants a la&'. #ow the sales'erson follows u' with, 3re you looking for a floor la&', a table la&', or a wall fi+tureT ?hatever the answer, the custo&er now has a bit clearer 'icture of what he wants, and his sense of value in actually &aking a 'urchase continues to increase. 3s the Iuestions beco&e &ore and &ore s'ecific, and as the custo&er gets a clearer 'icture of what he wants, the likelihood of a sale increases. #ow the sales'erson can start fishing for other bits of value. ?hich roo& is the la&' forT 3re you looking to re'lace a la&' you have there nowT /%ve noticed that beautiful wo&en are attracted to &en with nice la&'s, haven%t youT 3while ago, / got a call fro& a local radio station clai&ing to be doing a survey. / went along with it, and it went so&ething like this9 o you enSoy listening to &usic fro& the %M@s, %N@s, and %E@sT $ure. ?ere you aware that 0A;^ 'lays the to' hits of the %M@s, %N@s, and %E@sT 6h . . . no, but / guess / a& now. $ince you enSoy listening to the to' hits of the %M@s, %N@s, and %E@s, will you be listening to 0A;^ &ore often, the sa&e a&ount, or less often nowT 6h . . . &aybe &ore often. o you usually reco&&end radio stations to your friends if you enSoy listening to the&T ;eah, so&eti&es. $ay, what kind of #ow that you know 0A;^ is the best station 'laying all the to' hits of the %M@s, %N@s, and %E@s, are you likely to reco&&end it to all your friendsT 6h . . . &aybe . . . ?ill you in fact take out a full2'age ad in the $eattle Ti&es 'roclai&ing to the world how wonderful 0A;^ is and how everyone in the world should be listening to it all the ti&eT 1ey, wait a &inute 1ave a nice day. 4lick. ?ow" Pretty great stuff, huhT ;ou%re glad you bought this co'y of Virus of the Mind, aren%t youT !eading Virus of the Mind could &ake Iuite a difference in your Iuality of

life, couldn%t itT ;ou%re going to rave about Virus of the Mind to everyone you &eet, aren%t youT Virus of the Mind would &ake a great gift, wouldn%t itT 1eh2heh. 4losing9 The *olden Ruestion $ince sales is all about creating &e&es in custo&ersthat is, 'rogra&&ing the& in a s&all waylet%s continue to e+'lore sales &ethods. 3 sales'erson%s favorite &e&e, of course, is, ;es, /%ll take it. 3sking a Iuestion that results in the creation of that &e&e is called closing. There are all kinds of different and sneaky ways to close. They fall into three ca&'s9 direct, e&bedded, and 'resu&'tive. 3ll have the sa&e goal9 to create the yes &e&e in the custo&er. The direct close includes any straightforward reIuest for the sale, whether tentative or confrontational9 C 3re you thinking about buying any co'ies of Virus of the Mind for anyone else in your lifeT C ?ould you be willing to call ten 'eo'le and warn the& of the dangers of &ind virusesT C T here are 'eo'le you know who need to read Virus of the Mind right now. *o to the bookstore right now and buy the& each a co'y. 7kayT 3nother way of closing the sale is to use the e&bedded close. The e&bedded close by'asses the custo&er%s 'ressure detector by &aking it see& that the reIuest is not directed at hi&9 C ?hen you read Virus of the Mind, you find you want to tell everybody about it" C / had one cou'le co&e in, and the wife told the husband, ;ou should buy everyone on your 4hrist&as list a co'y of Virus of the Mind. C / was 'etting &y dog the other day, and / thought, ;ou should really go into a few of the bookstores in town and &ake sure they%re dis'laying Virus of the Mind 'ro&inently. 3 third way of consu&&ating a sale is to use the 'resu&'tive close. The 'resu&'tive close 'resu&es the custo&er has already &ade his decision and tricks his &ind into creating the yes &e&e9 C ?ould you like those co'ies of Virus of the Mind sent by Priority Mail or 8ourth24lass Book !ateT C ?ill that be Visa or Master4ardT C /s there anyone else you%d like to buy a co'y of Virus of the Mind for along with yourselfT Peo'le use the close to sell things other than 'roducts and services. 3 friend who was a for&er Mor&on &issionary told &e about a 'ractice they referred to as *R2ing 'eo'le or 'o''ing the *olden Ruestion. /n his case, the *olden Ruestion was, $o, are you willing to acce't )esus as your $aviorT $elling 'eo'le on a conce'ta whole bundle of &e&escan have a far greater influence on their lives than selling the& even a really great vacuu& cleaner.

?hen you sell 'eo'le a bundle of &e&es, it can 'rogra& the& to s'end the rest of their lives behaving the way you want the& to. Marriage is one such &e&etic bundle co&&only entered into by 'o''ing a *olden Ruestion. There%s no 'hysical reality to a &arriage. /t%s Sust 'rogra&&ing yourself with so&e new &e&es. /t%s ado'ting distinction2&e&es for &arried cou'le and fa&ily. /t%s ado'ting strategy2&e&es such as $tay together, Provide for each other, $acrifice, and so on in order to 'reserve the &arriage. /t%s ado'ting a whole set of association2 &e&es connecting various feelings and ideas with &arriage, co&&it&ent, and fa&ily. These days, it%s co&&on for two individuals getting &arried to have inco&'atible 'rogra&&ing around &arriageconflicting strategy2&e&es or incongruous distinction2 &e&es. 3 &e&etic &arriage counselor would identify those and allow the cou'le to re'rogra& the&selves with co&'atible &e&es. !a''ort and Mirroring ;ou%re &ore likely to buy a dubious2looking &e&e, like a dubious2looking used car, fro& a buddy than fro& a total stranger, rightT ?ell, a good sales'erson knows that and will do everything 'ossible to create a buddy &e&e in your &ind. 1ow to create trust and ra''ort with a custo&er is one of the hottest to'ics in 'o'ular books and se&inars on sales. The latest thing is to by'ass your conscious &ind and use #:P techniIues to create ra''ort. Most 'eo'le have no clue what%s going on when sales'eo'le do this, but if you know what they%re doing, you can have so&e fun with the&. 7ne basic techniIue is known as &irroring. /f you%re reading about this for the first ti&e, it%s going to sound really stu'id, and you%re not going to believe that anyone could do this ridiculous thing and get away with it, but believe &e, it is done and it does work. Mirroring is si&'ly &atching so&eone%s body language. /f she crosses her legs, you cross your legs. /f she folds her ar&s, you fold your ar&s. /f she tilts her head to one side and wrinkles her nose, you tilt your head to one side and wrinkle your nose. $ounds like fun, doesn%t itT Beyond si&'ly &atching 'osture, a good &irrorer will get a feel for the rhyth& of 'eo'le%s &ove&ents, the 'ace of their s'eech, the te+ture of their conversational style. /f you can &atch all that, you%ll be like a 'erfect dance 'artner and develo' that instant ra''ort usually known as che&istry. ;es, this works well for char&ing 'otential &ates as well. The 'roduct sold &ost freIuently throughout history has always been yourself. 4onfidence *a&es The &asters of establishing instant trust and ra''ort are the 'eo'le who run confidence ga&escon artists. 4on stands for confidence, and the ga&e works by gaining your confidence in the& and then tricking you. They work by creating a &e&e in your &ind that says, / trust the&. There are any nu&ber of ways to create that &e&e9 a''earing na_ve or innocent, 'erfor&ing a see&ingly altruistic act, a''earing to be 'art of a re'utable organi.ation. The &ost straightforward way, though, is by giving you their confidence first. By a''earing to trust you, they ho'e you will reci'rocate. Then they getcha. 7ne co&&on con is the street ga&e of three2card &onte. The ga&e a''ears to be si&'le enough. Three folded 'laying cardstwo aces and a Iueenrest side by side on a table. The dealer, a 'racticed 'restidigitator who can &ake the cards fly around faster than the eye can see, shuffles the order of the cards. Players bet even &oney that they can 'ick out the Iueen. The real ga&e, however, is the &ind ga&e surrounding the card ga&e. 1ere%s one variation9 3s you a''roach, you see what a''ears to be a 'layer winning consistently against the dealer, 'icking out the Iueen and doubling his &oney every ti&e. The dealer shuts hi& out, saying he can%t 'lay any&ore, he%s too good. Maybe they fold u' the ga&e and

&ove a few ste's down the street. /ntrigued, you continue to watch. 5ventually, the for&er winner a''roaches you and whis'ers that he knows how to find the lady, but they won%t let hi& 'lay any&ore. 1e offers to give you so&e of his &oney, and if you bet for hi&, you can kee' half the winnings. 1e%ll whis'er to you where the Iueen isyou can%t lose" 3fter a cou'le of wins, he says he doesn%t want the& to catch on to hi&, but he thinks you can do one &ore hand. 1ow &uch &oney do you have on youT :et%s 'ut it all down, yours and &ine, and really soak these guys" ?ell, why notT 1e trusted yougo for it" ?hen you lose everything, your new friend e+'resses shock and frustration. 1e is truly sorry. )ust then, so&eone yells, 4o's" and the dealer folds u' the table and nonchalantly walks away. /f you have any inkling of doing otherwise, there%s a big, beefy guy who used to 'lay nose tackle for the 'rison football tea& staring you down. ;ou%ve been conned, &y friend. *aining so&eone%s trust is an effective way to by'ass their ske'ticis& and &ake it 'ossible to 'rogra& the& with new &e&es. Viruses of the Mind /f you%ve been 'aying attention, you now know al&ost everything you need to know about how &ind viruses work. Before you ski' ahead to 4ha'ter == and learn how to start a cult, let%s take a &o&ent to 'ut all the 'ieces together and look at what we%ve got. 8ro& 4ha'ter J, you know that a &ind virus, or any virus, has three reIuire&ents9 a &ethod of 'enetration, a way of re'roducing itself faithfully, and a &eans of s'reading itself to other &inds. ?hen you have a conce't or a subculture or a dog&a that &eets all these reIuire&ents, you have a &ind virus. /f you currently believe in any conce'ts or subcultures or dog&as that &eet these reIuire&ents, and you didn%t consciously choose to 'rogra& yourself with these &e&es, you are infected with a &ind virus. /f you%re not aware that you currently believe anything like that, that doesn%t necessarily &ean you%re not infectedH it &ay Sust &ean you%re not aware of the infection. 1ere%s what it looks like when you%re infected by a &ind virus9 Penetration ?e looked at three &ethods of 'enetration9 re'etition, cognitive dissonance, and the TroSan horse. ?hen a virus of the &ind infects you, it &ay rese&ble one of these scenarios9 !e'etition. !e'eating a &e&e until it beco&es fa&iliar and 'art of your 'rogra&&ing is one &ethod of &ind2virus 'enetration9 C 1earing a si&ilar &essage re'eatedly on television news, co&&ercials, talk radio, and so on C Being in a grou' or organi.ation where, for instance, a charter is read or an oath is taken at each &eeting C 1earing a 'oint of view or o'inion re'eatedlyfor e+a&'le, about gun control or abortion ,if you are not a&ong the first to be infected, you could hear it fro& a wide variety of different infected 'eo'le-

 4ognitive dissonance. Being 'laced in a 'arado+ical or &entally unco&fortable situation can lead to being re'rogra&&ed with new &e&es that relieve the &ental stress9 C *oing through an initiation or ha.ing or a series of tests C Taking a confrontational or unco&fortable se&inar or course that gives a great sense of relief at the end C !eaching so&e goal or reward after a struggle or after having been told you%re not good enough TroSan horse. Bundling less2attractive &e&es with &ore a''ealing ones9 C :istening to a conce't that &ostly see&s right but has a few co&'onents that kind of rub you the wrong way C 1earing a''eals to hel' children, resolve a crisis, feed starving 'eo'le, and the like C Being asked to believe so&ething that see&s odd Sust out of trust C Being 'resented with an o''ortunity to get &ore or better se+ or relationshi's by ado'ting so&e new beliefs This is by no &eans an e+haustive list of &ethods of 'enetration by viruses of the &ind. 1owever, if you%re looking to see what &ind viruses you are already infected with, looking back to see which of these scenarios you%ve been through &ay give you so&e clues. 8aithful !e'roduction 3 &ind virus needs a way to re'roduce itself faithfullywithout distortion or o&ission. That can be acco&'lished in a nu&ber of different ways9 C By instilling a belief that tradition is i&'ortant. The way things have been said and done in the 'ast is the way they will continue to be said and done. C By saying a certain set of &e&es is the Truth, as &any religions say about their sacred te+ts. ?hy would you want to distort or o&it the truthT C By setting u' a structure to reward verbati& co'ying andLor 'unish &odification. The &ilitary has such structures set u' to condition 'eo'le to re'roduce the 'olicies and 'rocedures faithfully. The eccentric s'elling of the 5nglish language is 'reserved because of a 'ervasive &e&e that there are right and wrong ways to s'ell words. This &e&e has all kinds of su''ort, including dictionaries, co&'uter s'ell2checkers, and children%s s'elling bees. But before the 6se a dictionary strategy2&e&e beca&e 'revalent during the =Nth and =Eth centuries, 'eo'le s'elled words any way they wanted. /t%s not True that there%s one

and only one correct way to s'ell a wordit%s Sust a &e&e. 3s Mark Twain said, %Tis a s&all &ind cannot think of but one way to s'ell a word. ?e think it%s True because all our lives 'eo'le have been critici.ing us for &iss'elling wordswe%ve been 'rogra&&ed. #ot that there%s anything wrong with consistent s'ellingit enhances co&&unication, after allbut it%s i&'ortant to start seeing that all of what we think of as the Truth is co&'osed of &e&es, and &ost of those &e&es Sust ca&e into our heads through 'rogra&&ing, without any of our own conscious choice involved. 3ny beliefs you have about there being a right way and a wrong way to do things can and will be co2o'ted by &ind viruses as 'art of their faithful2re'roduction &achinery. !e&e&ber a foolish consistency" 4onsistency for its own sake is &eaningless. 3sk yourself if being consistent serves your underlying 'ur'ose, such as effective co&&unication, or if you%ve Sust been 'rogra&&ed with a Be consistent &e&e, leaving you o'en to &ind2virus infections. $'reading $'reading &ind viruses is the fli' side of 'enetration. This section is ai&ed 'articularly at the &overs and shakers of the world. /f you are an influential or vocal 'erson, if you 'roduce television shows, if you s'eak in front of large grou's, if you raise children/ want you to be conscious of what &e&es you%re s'reading. #aturally, a &ind virus that infects 'eo'le with &e&es that e+'licitly encourage s'reading it will s'read faster and &ore 'ervasively than one that Sust de'ends u'on chance to s'read itself. $o&e of the ways &ind viruses encourage s'reading are9 C Progra&&ing you with a &e&e like *et the word out before it%s too late, 'ushing your crisis and window of o''ortunity buttons. C Progra&&ing you with a &e&e to the effect that teaching this to our children will hel' the&. C Progra&&ing you to evangeli.e the virus. $o&e synony&s for evangelis& are 'roselyti.ation, re'lacing yourself, 'assing the favor on, and enroll&ent. 5vangelis& has kind of a bad na&e in so&e circles. The 'arado+ about evangelis& is that in addition to being the &echanis& used to s'read &ind viruses, it%s also the &ain way 'eo'le can have a 'ositive i&'act on the world. ;ou can have the world%s greatest idea, but unless you shout about it, crusadeevangeli.eit has no i&'act. Virus of the Mind is &y atte&'t to consciously s'read the bundle of &e&es known as &e&etics, which / see as essential to having our children live in a world of freedo&, creativity, and 'ersonal 'ower. / invite you to evangeli.e with &e" 5vangelis& is the intentional s'reading of &e&es. Make sure that the &e&es you%re s'reading are ones that you want the world to have &ore of. 3 virus of the &ind is a cultural institution that contains all these ingredients. /t is therefore self2'er'etuating and self2re'licatingit continues through ti&e and reaches out and involves &ore 'eo'le. /nstitutions that were designed by 'eo'le for the s'ecific 'ur'ose of 'er'etuating and s'reading, / call designer viruses. But long before anyone ca&e u' with that Machiavellian notion, viruses of the &ind evolved on their own into 'owerful cultural fi+tures. / call the institutions that evolved on their own to beco&e self2'er'etuating cultural viruses.

U3t least they think it &akes a difference. They &ay be fooled by their own &e&etic

'rogra&&ing" More on this in 4ha'ter E.

413PT5! #/#5 46:T6!3: V/!6$5$ $ociety everywhere is in cons'iracy against the &anhood of every one of its &e&bers. $ociety is a Soint2stock co&'any, in which the &e&bers agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater. The virtue in &ost reIuest is confor&ity. !al'h ?aldo 5&erson 8ro& the children%s ga&e of tele'hone, we know that it%s difficult to co'y &e&es with =@@ 'ercent fidelity even if we want to. ?hen re'lication occurs with slight changes in the re'licator, and those &odified re'licators are selected so&ehow for their fitness, then we have evolution. ?hen a conce't a''ears that has all the 'ro'erties of a virus of the &ind, then as it starts s'reading through the 'o'ulation, the &e&es constituting that conce't evolve. Toward what end do they evolveT ?e now co&e to the key to the 'aradig& shift9 these &e&es, and the conce'ts and cultural institutions they co&'ose, care nothing for you, &e, or our children e+ce't as vehicles for their own re'lication. They do not e+ist to raise our Iuality of life or to assist us in our 'ursuit of ha''iness. Their goal is to re'roduce and s'read, s'read and re'roduce, whatever the cost. 3ll cultural institutions, regardless of their initial design or intention ,if any-, evolve to have but one goal9 to 'er'etuate the&selves. 4ynicalT ?ell, &aybe, but it%s an inesca'able conclusion fro& everything we%ve Sust discussed. $u''ose you have =@@ cultural institutionslet%s take non'rofit organi.ations, for e+a&'le. They have varying degrees of effectiveness in the charitable tasks they are designed to acco&'lish, and they also attract funding and volunteers in varying degrees. /t is their effectiveness in attracting funding and volunteers that deter&ines whether they can stay in e+istence and 'erfor& their functions. 3fter so&e 'eriod of ti&esay, five yearshalf of the& go out of e+istence due to lack of effectiveness at funding or staffing. The other half either already 'ossessed &e&es that attracted funds and staff or else evolved the& during those five years. *iven the li&ited resources in the world and the new organi.ations being introduced all the ti&e, the surviving organi.ations &ust beco&e better and better at surviving. 3ny use of their &oney or energy for anything other than survivingeven using it for the charitable 'ur'ose for which they were created"'rovides an o'ening for a co&'eting grou' to beat the& out for resources. 3 friend of &ine recently sto''ed donating to a wildlife2'reservation grou'. 3''alled by the volu&e of &ail he received fro& the grou' after his first donation, he did so&e Iuick calculations. 1e reali.ed that the cost of the &ailings they sent hi& to solicit donations actually e+ceeded the annual a&ount he was donating" 1e sent the grou' a letter e+'laining why he was ceasing to su''ort the&. /f you%re designing a cultural institution these days, you%ve got to know &e&etics. /f you don%t design the thing with good &e&es that will &ake it self2'er'etuating fro& day one, it will either die out Iuickly or evolve to beco&e self2'er'etuating. The trouble is, the way in which it evolves could do great violence to the original 'ur'ose you intended. /n this cha'ter, /%ll describe several ty'es of cultural virusesinstitutions that have evolved away fro& their original 'ur'ose and beco&e self2'er'etuating. /n the ne+t cha'ter, /%ll e+'lore the evolution of the biggest cultural viruses of the& all9 religions. Television and 3dvertising Television is a 'articularly efficient &ediu& for &e&e evolution. #ew shows or co&&ercials can reach hundreds of &illions of 'eo'le at once. /f the shows catch onif they have good &e&esthe 'roducers are rewarded with in'ourings of s'onsors% &oney, the advertising agencies are rewarded with &ore business, and the s'onsors the&selves sell &ore of their 'roduct. 3ll this ha''ens relatively Iuickly, 'erha's in a

&atter of weeks or &onths, as o''osed to the old days when culture s'read &ostly by countries trading with and conIuering one another over the course of decades or centuries. $cares about so2called subli&inal advertising have abounded in recent years. The idea is that unscru'ulous &arketeers have 'ut hidden i&ages, voices, or sy&bols into their ads for the 'ur'ose of &ani'ulating 'eo'le into buying 'roducts that they otherwise wouldn%t buy. The story goes that one liIuor co&'any had an artist airbrush the word se+ into the rando& arrange&ent of ice cubes in a glass, or that a cigarette &anufacturer hid the word death in a waterfall, or that a see&ingly innocent arrange&ent of rando& obSects secretly for&ed a likeness of a naked and seductive wo&an. This all raises a lot of Iuestions, whether you see these i&ages when you 'eer intently at the sus'ect ads or not. U But su''osing subli&inal i&ages do e+ist, how did they get thereT 3re there really evil geniuses intentionally cackling over their airbrushes, &ani'ulating and enslaving our &indsT 7r is the 'resence of these i&ages nothing &ore interesting than 4harlie Brown%s looking u' at the clouds and seeing a duckie and a horsieT 7f course, / don%t know. But if we get stuck on that Iuestion, we%re falling into the biggest tra' of all in understanding cultural evolution. /t%s the tra' that cons'iracy theorists fall into, and the sa&e tra' that 'eo'le who 'ooh2'ooh cons'iracy theories fall into. /t%s the &istaken belief that anything co&'licated &ust arise out of conscious intention. 4o&'licated things arise naturally out of the forces of evolution. #o conscious intention is necessary. oes subli&inal advertising workT $ure" 3ds can have 'arts that you don%t beco&e consciously aware of but which draw your attention unconsciously. /f the ad 'ushes &ore of your buttons as a result of the subli&inal content, you will 'ay &ore attention to it. Paying &ore attention is the first ste' toward 'aying &ore &oney. /t can work in reverse, too9 so&e fast2food restaurants 'aint their walls orange because they believe it creates subli&inal disco&fortH you%ll want to s'end less ti&e lingering there, and your leaving o'ens u' tables for new custo&ers. But don%t think that subli&inal ads are the only 'roble&9 as should be obvious to everyone who has watched the evolution of television 'rogra&&ing for &ore than a few years, efforts to attract your attention are not li&ited to the subli&inal. The television is screa&ing at us day and night with all the greatest button2'ushing &e&es there are9 anger" 8ood" $e+" 3uthority" ?e don%t even have to believe it%s real for it to attract our attention. !e&e&ber /%& not a doctor, but / 'lay one on TVT #ot only co&&ercials, but also 'rogra&s are evolving to co&&and a greater share of your &ind, and to say they were doing it subli&inally would be an al&ost hu&orous understate&ent. The first naked fe&ale breasts on 3&erican broadcast television a''eared on the 'rogra& #;P Blue. Baywatch, a show with little 'lot but lots of bare skin, beca&e the &ost watched television show in the history of the world. 8e&ale breasts, naked or otherwise, tend to co&&and &en%s attention, and hence, in the very efficient evolutionary &ediu& of television, they tend to 'roliferate. 3 casual observer will notice that the inclusion of breasts, not to &ention the rest of the fe&ale anato&y, in &uch &ale2oriented advertising is far fro& subli&inal.

$ubli&inal advertising su''osedly sneaks &e&es into your &ind without conscious awareness on your 'art. 3dvertisers have learned to 'ush your buttons. They also have learned a good deal about 'rogra&&ing you with all kinds of &e&es. /t%s not the subli&inal that we need to be concerned withit%s that they now have the knowledge to unleash full2blown designer &ind viruses through their advertise&ents. 3nd the effects of that are un'redictable and frightening. The 5volution of 3dvertising /&agine it%s =EG@. Television advertising is in its tender youth. #ew ;ork and :os 3ngeles abound with arrin $te'henses working for advertising agencies run by :arry Tates, all trying different strategies and ca&'aigns to advertise their clients% 'roducts successfully. They%re all running their ideas u' the flag'ole, but only a few get the salutes reIuired for success, 'ro&otion, and unabashed co'ying by everyone else in the business. /t%s a dog2eat2dog world, and the days where / feed &y doggie Thrive27 L 1e%s very &uch alive2o" can co&'ete for a share of the viewer%s &ind are as nu&bered as those of the set shot in basketball. $o&e ca&'aigns workH so&e don%t. The ones that don%t are Iuickly killed, as few advertisers can afford to 'rolong an e+'ensive 'ro&otion that isn%t 'aying dividends in attracting the attention of custo&ers and therefore their &oney. The ones that succeed are co'ied, with various creative changes being &ade intentionally or unintentionallybecause the co'ier didn%t understand what was effective about the original adyielding another generation of fitter ads. /t%s al&ost the reverse of the way so&e ani&als have genetically evolved ca&ouflage to &ake the&selves less visible9 like colorful flowers evolving to attract 'ollinators, these co&&ercials have evolved in the world of &e&es to &ake the&selves &ore visible and attract you. 3fter several years, and without any evil to' e+ecutives sche&ing about the best way to &ani'ulate the 3&erican 'ublic, &ost ad agencies are 'utting out co&&ercials featuring the big button2'ushing &e&es9 danger, food, and se+. $oon they start fine2 tuning the&, still through the auto&atic and uncons'iratorial 'rocess of &e&e evolution, to include so&e of the other button 'ushers9 hel'ing children, listening to authority, the unusual, a sense of belonging, and so on. 3ds could have evolved to where they are today si&'ly through the natural 'rocess of co&'etition, even if there were never an awareness on the 'art of ad2agency e+ecutives about the button2'ushing effect these &e&es had on 'eo'le. 7f course, there was an awareness of the button2'ushing effect. /n fact, advertising runs hand in hand with 'olitics in its calculating &ani'ulation of the &asses. /t%s not

clear to &e that e+ecutives% awareness of the situation has &uch effect on the result, but it sure tends to &ake 'eo'le think less of the&. 5ven so, one can always give the& the benefit of the doubt and still have a workable theory of &e&e evolution in advertising. id the &akers of )oe 4a&el deliberately set out to hook kids on 4a&el cigarettes by 'resenting a lovable cartoon figure s&oking their instru&ent of deathT ?ho knowsT /t does have that effect, according to at least one study, but that doesn%t 'rove conscious intent. /t%s a very, very attractive tra' to start looking for who to bla&e for what 'eo'le consider the decline of our culture. ?hen culture evolves in the direction of &ore 'owerful &e&es, it does little good to single out 'eo'le to bla&e. 3s you know by now, that%s the natural order of things. /f we want to co&bat the &ind viruses res'onsible for the decline of culture, we need to be conscious of our own 'rogra&&ing, consciously ado'ting &e&es that take us in the direction we want to go. Things *o Better with Me&es 3nother effect of &e&e evolution on advertising is the divergence of advertising content fro& 'roduct content. 3s a kid, / re&e&ber noticing the 4oca24ola 4o&'any changing its slogan fro& rink 4oca24ola to 5nSoy 4oca24ola to Things go better with 4oke. $o&ewhere along the line, so&ebody reali.ed that they didn%t really have to discuss the 'roduct itself, Sust create a &ood full of enough attractive ele&ents that 'eo'le took notice and felt good when they saw the 'roductthey created an association2&e&e in the custo&er. 3 %E@s iet Pe'si ca&'aign featured celebrities and showgirls s&iling, cavorting, and grunting 6h2huh" for half a &inute. #ot e+actly a logical delineation of the 'roduct%s features and benefits. The athletic shoes we used to call sneakers no longer get 'ro&oted by &others swearing to the long life of the brandH now strobosco'ic s'ecial effects surround fa&ous athletes, 'oetic Iuotes, and ra' &usic. $'eaking of &usic, do you have a favorite song that has been ruined forever by an ad that used your enSoy&ent of it as a TroSan horseT !e&e&ber / 4an $ee 4learly #owT / used to love that song, but now it Sust &akes &e think of ?inde+. 3dvertisers are selling a feelingH they are using TroSan2horse techniIues that hook into your feel2good buttons so they can unload their bundle of &e&es into your &ind once they have your attention. /n so&e cases, this transfor&ation of co&&ercials into direct co&&unicators of 'owerful feelings has brought the& full circle into the real& of art. /%ll follow u' that little bit of blas'he&y by 'ointing out that / have several friends who don%t watch &uch TV. ?hen we get together for the occasional viewing of so&e s'ecial 'rogra&, it fascinates &e that they are often &ore engrossed by the co&&ercials than the 'rogra& itself" /t%s as if, in order to sell 'roducts, the 'roducers of TV co&&ercials have &ade a return to the early days of television when a co&&ercial consisted of little &ore than a &ention of the 'roduct na&e. Many of today%s co&&ercials feature &iniature dra&as, co&edies, &usic videos, or even e+'eri&ental surrealis&, co&'letely unrelated to the 'roducts they%re selling e+ce't for the &ention of their na&e or a brief 'icture. /t%s a world within a world. Beer co&&ercials are notorious for this kind of treat&ent. $ell the si..le, not the steak, goes the advertising truis&. ?ell, why notT ?hen you%re 'ushing a 'roduct &ade fro& rotten vegetation whose 'ri&ary effects are to dull your wits, 'ad your 'aunch, and &ake you belch, any si..le would be a big hel'. / re&e&ber a beer co&&ercial fro& &y childhood that sold the steak. /t went9 $chaefer is the one beer to have ?hen you%re having &ore than one" $chaefer%s flavor Sust doesn%t fade 5ven when your thirst is done"

?hat a nice ad 'ro&oting a true co&'etitive advantage of the 'roduct. /t even had a nice little tune you could hu&. #ow that%s so&ething that should really a''eal to the connoisseur, rightT ?rong. 5ver since 3nheuser2Busch decided to bill its anything2but2outstanding Budweiser as the 0ing of Beers, the trend has been away fro& clai&s, true or not, about the 'roduct%s co&'etitive advantages and &ore and &ore toward building an i&age or &ood. 3dvertisers want to 'rogra& 'eo'le to feel good and 'ay attention when they encounter the 'roduct. The ads that 'ush 'eo'le%s buttons are the successful ones. ;ou don%t have to have a Ph. . in &edia studies to notice that se+ 'lays a big role in beer co&&ercials. But the co&'etition is so fierce, and the 'ayoff so great, that beer advertising has s'lit off into sur'rising niches, e+'loiting so&e of our other buttons. The agency re'resenting Budweiser and Bud :ight now have the two sIuare off in a confabulated Bud Bowl football ga&e between two tea&s of ani&ated cans and bottles every year during the $u'er Bowl, 'erha's guessing that 'eo'le 'aying attention to the real football ga&e have 'articularly sensitive co&'etition buttons, and so will 'ay attention to the co&&ercials as well. $troh%s beer ran a series of co&&ercials e+'loiting a &an%s relationshi' with his dog. !ainier Beer, a local $eattle brew, had a very funny series of co&&ercials that see&ed to engender good feelings in the 'o'ulace around the 'roduct. There was actual co&&unity outrage when the co&&ercials were canceled by the new owners of !ainier. 1enry ?einhard%s beer ran a series of co&&ercials e+'loiting the tradition &e&e, talking about their hundredyear history in the #orthwest. 3nother 3nheuser2Busch ca&'aign slogan, Proud to be your Bud, atte&'ts to hook into 'eo'le%s sense of belonging and identity. There are still a few e+ce'tional ca&'aigns that actually talk about benefits of the 'roduct, such as Miller :ite%s innovative *reat taste, less filling, but by and large the beer industry is selling the suds, not the brew, as it were. ?hat does all this &ean to you and &eT /t &eans that if we watch co&&ercial television, we are guaranteed to be influenced in both our thinking and our behavior by the 'owerful &e&es being broadcast at us. /s that badT / don%t know. But anyone who clai&s television is not a great sha'er of our culture is either na_ve or &istaken. /f television didn%t have at least as great an effect on our behavior as one &ight sus'ect, advertisers would not 'ay billions of dollars a year to sha'e our buying habits. 3nd sha'ed we are, both by the co&&ercials and the 'rogra& content. Television Progra&s The evolution of co&&ercial television 'rogra&&ing has been toward a co&bination of the &e&es that 'ush viewers% buttons and the &e&es that 'eo'le want to 'ro&ote. U 7ne way this shows u' is in the 'heno&enon of the talk show. ?hile it &ight not be a''arent to the casual viewer, &ost of the 'eo'le who a''ear as e+'erts or celebrities on talk shows are there in order to 'ro&ote the&selves or their agendato s'read &e&es. To illustrate how i&'ortant this is, a hardcover book generally needs to sell K,@@@ co'ies in a week to &ake the #ew ;ork Ti&es bestseller list. 3 single a''earance by an author on 3&erica%s to' talk show, 7'rah, co&&only sells =@@,@@@ co'ies of a book. But you have to write a book that 7'rah wants on her show. That &ay not necessarily be the book you want to write. UU There%s no doubt that the visual &edia have influenced the 'ublishing industry. :arge advances go not to books with literary value, but to those that are 'ro&otablethey have co&'onents that will 'ush 'eo'le%s buttons. To'2selling fiction writers are &ore and &ore 'enning novels that read like screen'lays. The visual ada'tation of the book

is far &ore lucrative, and reaches far &ore 'eo'le, than the written version. 4ynics 'erennially ask why life and culture, and television in 'articular, see& to be filling u' with valueless and de&eaning Sunk rather than artistic and thoughtful content. The answer is, of course, that the valueless and de&eaning Sunk is a better re'licator. /f you%re interested in filling the airwaves with art and literature, you%ve got to &ake the& better re'licators. There are two ways to &ake so&ething a better re'licator9 &ake it better e+'loit the environ&ent, or change the environ&ent to its advantage. 6sing the first &ethod, you could create art and literature that 'resses 'eo'le%s buttons, such as !obert Ma''lethor'e%s erotic 'hotogra'hs or MTV%s &usic videos. 3lternatively, you could work to change the selection 'rocess for what goes on the airnot likely anyti&e soon in the 6nited $tates, given how funda&ental the free &arket is to 6.$. culture. The difference in 'rogra& content of the nonco&&ercial PB$ versus co&&ercial networks shows what a difference the selective environ&ent &akes in deter&ining what cultural re'licators win the battle for survival. 7ne controversial &ethod of &aking art a better re'licator is the colori.ation of old black2and2white &ovies. ?hile the additional visual a''eal of color generates &ore viewersor at least the &e&e 4olori.ation generates &ore viewers has s'read to the right 'eo'lecolori.ation offends traditionalists, who es'ecially resent ta&'ering with fil&s without the directors% 'er&ission. The director intended black and white, they say, to convey a s'ecific artistic &essage. They warn that soon we%ll see colori.ation of the first >@ &inutes of The ?i.ard of 7." V My $o24alled :ife% a+ed over 'oor ratings P3$3 5#3, 4alif. ==2)an2EKTen &illion viewers is not enough to save 3B4%s cult series My $o24alled :ife, which finished ahead of only =G other shows out of ==G in the season%s first2half ratings. The show will be 'ulled fro& the air )an. >G, said Ted 1arbert, 'resident of 3B4 5ntertain&ent, who called the critically acclai&ed show art but said the show%s ten &illion viewers were a lot of 'eo'le, but not so &any 'eo'le by our standards. 5+'laining that he would be delighted to find a way to bring the show back, he said, ?e%re continuing to 'ro&ote the hell out of it, trying to get an audience into it in these last few e'isodes in )anuary. ?hile declining to 'redict whether the show would return in the fall, given the strong su''ort of its core fans and critics, 1arbert said he would &ake a decision in May, but that ratings were the key. #one of these 3 critically acclai&ed TV show can be a 'oor re'licator if it doesn%t &eet the selection criterion for co&&ercial television9 ratings. The &ost offensive e+a&'le /%ve seen of ta&'ering with artistic content for the sake of increasing viewershi' is the 'ractice of showing a 'review of a gri''ing scene in the ne+t seg&ent of the &ovie at the start of each co&&ercial break. That%s rightthey show a scene you haven%t seen yet, out of order, in an atte&'t to create sufficient interest for you to stick around through the co&&ercials" 3rgh" The 'oint is, the institution of television, while originally created as entertain&ent, has evolved into a self2'er'etuating cultural virus with little 'ossibility of anything but broadcasting the &ost gri''ing, button2'ushing sounds and i&ages. That%s true not only of the entertain&ent 'ortion of television but also of the news. )ournalis&

The idea behind freedo& of s'eech, in the &inds of the fra&ers of the 4onstitution, was that if all ideas were given eIual o''ortunity to co&'ete in a sort of free &arket of the &ind, the truth would e&erge victorious. 6nfortunately, this is not the case. /t%s successful &ind viruses that e&erge victorious, s'reading their selfish &e&es. Truth is not one of the strong selectors for &e&es. Making sense is a selector, since 'eo'le have a drive to &ake sense of things, but as we know, that does not always corres'ond to truth. ?hat laws govern our e+istenceT 5verybody understands the basics of astrology, which is not to say they believe itbut selecting one of => signs based on your birthday is easy to understand. That &e&e s'reads &uch better than a &ore scientific theory such as Iuantu& 'hysics, in which the funda&ental 'articles don%t &a' easily onto 'eo'le%s birthdays. 3ll this &akes life difficult for those heralds and guardians of the truth, those disci'les of BenSa&in 8ranklin9 the news &edia. 4onstantly accused of bias and unfair re'orting, &e&bers of this noble 'rofession have a tough ti&e balancing truth and obSectivity against saying so&ething interesting enough'ushing enough buttonsthat 'eo'le will listen to what they%re saying. $o&e Sournalists do not clai& to re'ort unbiased news. 3dvocacy Sournalists such as talk2show host !ush :i&baugh devote their airti&e to 'ro&oting a 'articular 'oint of view. #ews'a'er colu&nists such as P. ). 7%!ourke do the sa&e in the 'rint &ediu&. These 'eo'le collect evidence to su''ort their 'oint of view, then 'ut it out in an entertaining and button2'ushing fashion in an effort both to gain converts and to increase their audience. 7f course, the &ore buttons they 'ush, the &ore 'eo'le 'ay attention to the&. 3s / write this, the crisis button is in vogue on talk radio, while the hel'ing children button is a 'erennial favorite in 'rint. #ews'a'ers ty'ically 'ut colu&nists in a s'ecial section called 7'inion and 5ditorial ,o'2ed-, advertising clearly the distinction between these biased 'ieces and the so2 called unbiased rest of the 'a'er. /t%s in the rest of the 'a'er that the trouble starts. Because even if we grant that &ost Sournalists are good 'eo'le of high integrity, the very assu&'tion that it%s 'ossible to be unbiased is flawed. 1aving a nation of re'orters running around believing they%re unbiased and a nation of news consu&ers &aking the sa&e assu&'tion leads to lots of 'roble&s. More to the 'oint9 The whole news2re'orting &echanis&, with billions of co'ies of infor&ation being &ade every day, is a 'ri&e breeding ground for &ind viruses. /t%s considered s'orting in the Sournalis& field, outside of the o'2ed 'age, to give eIual s'ace and ti&e to o''osing 'oints of view so as to 'revent biased re'orting. The trouble is, in order to re'ort effectively on so&ething, it hel's for the re'orter to understand it. /t%s difficult or i&'ossible, though, to truly understand a 'oint of view other than your own, es'ecially given the incredibly short deadlines &ost re'orters have to write a story. 3nd so without conscious intent, the o''osing 'oint of view will tend to get shortchanged. ?ell, you &ight think, $urely that will even itself out over the thousands of re'orters in the country, each with his or her own 'oint of view, rightT #ot entirely. The culture of Sournalis& is rife with &ind viruses that have s'read certain biasescertain &e&esdee'ly throughout it, without any conscious intent on the 'art of individual Sournalists to be biased. :et%s see how this works. The very word unbiased i&'lies that it%s 'ossible to re'ort the news on so&e obSective level se'arate fro& the re'orter%s own conte+t of life. 1ow 'ractical is thatT 3t the very least, the news &edia &ust decide what is i&'ortant enough to be called news, and that Sudg&ent is inherently biased in several ways. /n the first 'lace, any successful re'orter is biased against the status Iuo. ?hyT Because nobody would go out and buy a news'a'er that said, day after day, Things are fine. #othing to worry about. The Things are fine &e&e is a very weak one, not

'ressing any of our &aSor buttons. ?e would ignore itH the 'a'er would go out of businessH the re'orter would starve to death. That would be news" !u&blings of a liberal bias in the news &edia during the !eagan and Bush, $r., 'residencies Iuickly turned to gru&blings about conservative hate&ongering when the &ore liberal 4linton was elected. ?hich one is trueT #either. /n reality, the bias in the &edia isn%t liberal or conservativeit is toward stories that 'ush our buttons, &eaning that we buy their 'a'ers, listen to their shows, and kee' the& in business. 7ne of the few voices for the status Iuo during the !eagan years was the show 4rossfire on the 4able #ews #etwork ,4##-. Brilliantly conceived, it set u' a conflict between voices fro& the left and the right to 'ress our danger and crisis buttons. ?ith those &e&es 'enetrating our defenses, we heard both the liberal and conservative view'oints. The so2called liberal bias was not a liberal bias at allit was a bias against s'eaking out in favor of the status Iuo, for a reason no &ore sinister than this9 Being in favor of the status Iuo is boring" /t doesn%t 'ush any Buttons. The news &edia have evolved into a self2'er'etuating cultural virus s'eaking out in favor of change. This 'rocess has continued to the 'oint where the word conservativewhich used to &ean o''osing changehas evolved to refer to so&e of the &ost revolutionary ideas around" 3rgue for kee'ing things the sa&e is not a good &e&e. 4ons'iracy Theories Peo'le%s drive toward &aking sense of senseless things leads to a ty'e of cultural virus known as a cons'iracy theory. 7ver the years, 'eo'le have sus'ected cons'iracies in everything fro& the assassination of )ohn 8. 0ennedy to the su''osed 'lot by the 3&erican Medical 3ssociation to kee' us de'endent on &edical care by li&iting the 'otency of over2the2counter vita&ins. o such cons'iracies really e+ist on a large scale, or are they Sust isolated incidents such as ?atergate, doo&ed to be uncovered because of the sheer difficulty of kee'ing a secret a&ong so &any 'eo'leT :arry 0ing, one of &y favorite talk2show hosts, regularly 'unctures callers% cons'iracy bubbles by asking one Iuestion9 1ow could that &any 'eo'le kee' that big a secret for so longT $ir, it Sust ain%t 'ossible, he concludes. ?hile he &akes a good 'oint about the difficulty of kee'ing good &e&es secret, that%s really only 'art of the story. 3 belief syste&, through its &e&es, can s'read in a way that looks Sust like a cons'iracy without any conscious intention on the 'art of the 'artici'ants. /s there a cons'iracy a&ong 3&erica%s far&ers and the govern&ent to 'ush &eat and dairy 'roducts on us, knowing that the high fat content of those foods will da&age our healthT #ah, the far&ers Sust want to sell their 'roducts to stay in business. Their lobbyists su''ort 'oliticians who see things their way, and 'retty soon we%ve got television ads and govern&ent 'rogra&s all 'roclai&ing the benefits of eggs and 'ork, the other white &eat. To the far&ers and lobbyists there%s no secretH they Sust want to &ake a living. But to so&eone who%s not i&&ersed in that culture, the &essage to eat &eat and dairy 'roducts looks threatening, even evil. 1ow about the 3&erican Medical 3ssociationT o they have a secret session at their annual &eeting where they discuss ways to cri''le the 3&erican 'ublic to increase their businessT #ah, they%ve Sust been 'rogra&&ed with the &e&e that they, as educated health s'ecialists, are best Iualified to regulate and dis'ense health care. 8ro& this core belief co&e 'olicy decisions such as their stand on over2the2counter vita&ins and regulation of nutritional su''le&ents. But don%t conclude that cons'iracies are i&'ossible to kee' secret. /n fact, all but the

&ost interesting cons'iracies are e+tre&ely easy to kee' secret, si&'ly because news about the& won%t s'read if it doesn%t have good &e&es. 3 few years ago, the to' three &anufacturers of 'lastic dinnerware were found to have cons'ired to a 'rice2fi+ing sche&e. /t was covered in a s&all article in the $eattle Ti&es. ?hatT ;ou hadn%t heard about itT That cons'iracy was ke't secret si&'ly because &ost 'eo'le had no interest in hearing about itthe story had bad &e&es. /t%s incredibly hard to be heard. Businesses s'end billions of dollars a year on 'ublic2 relations agencies and advertising, trying to get their &essage out. ?hy would we think that a single leak by a cons'irator would blow the thing wide o'enT /t took &any 'eo'le working hard for &any &onths to uncover the Suiciest 'arts of the ?atergate scandal, and that was an affair in the national s'otlight. 5ven that wouldn%t have co&e out if #i+on hadn%t ta'ed hi&self doing illegal things. ?hy did he do itT :ike the &eat and dairy far&ers taken to another degree, he was so i&&ersed in his belief syste&, &aking the 'racticalities of reelection so i&'ortant, that he si&'ly didn%t see hi&self as doing anything wrong. To hi& it wasn%t a cons'iracyH it was Sust a strategy &eeting. :ike &e&bers of religions that 'ractice ritual sacrifice of hu&an beings, the ?atergate cons'irators had a set of beliefs that drove the& to do things that &ainstrea& 3&erica considered re'rehensible. /t%s difficult to ste' out of your own &e&etic 'rogra&&ing and see yourself as others see you. /n the case of ?atergate, the 3&erican 'ublic, aided by the ?ashington Post, hel'ed the& do that. ;ou don%t auto&atically 'ay attention to everything you see and hear. ;ou auto&atically filter out things that don%t coincide with your worldview, and that includes cons'iracies, unless of course you%re a cons'iracy buff, in which case you tend to see the& everywhere. /t de'ends on your worldview, your conte+t. / wonder how long it will be before so&eone alleges a cons'iracy a&ong radio talk2 show hosts, a cons'iracy to 'ooh2'ooh all cons'iracy theories. 1ow strange that so &any of the& auto&atically ridicule anyone who calls u' with a new theory about the )80 assassination or the Trilateral 4o&&ission. 1&& . . . #ah. Man Bites og /t%s an old saw of Sournalis& that when a dog bites a &an, that%s not news, but when a &an bites a dognow there%s news" The 'oint, of course, is that everybody already knows dogs bite 'eo'le9 one &ore occurrence of this everyday event is not interesting to 'eo'le. ?hen so&ething unusual or ironic occurs, though, 'eo'le want to know about it. This leads to another bias in the &edia9 a bias toward the unusual and offbeat. /t%s only naturalH 'eo'le want to hear about the unusual and offbeat. 1owever, the a&'lifying 'ower of the &edia gives 'eo'le a distorted i&'ression of the world because the &edia rarely re'ort the &undane and ordinary. ?e watch televisionH see cri&e, disasters, and su'erhu&an athletic featsH and for& a 'icture of the world having little to do with our day2to2day e+'erience. The 'roble& is, going through life with a distorted 'icture of the world handica's us. /n =EE>, JM,MMG 'eo'le were killed by guns in the 6nited $tates. 3nother O@,EN> were killed by auto&obiles. U ;et a casual look at re'orting would verify that guns get &uch &ore coverage than cars, even though al&ost half the gun deaths ,=N,=GE- were suicides. /%& not saying guns shouldn%t get &ore coverageafter all, this gun 'roble& is new and growing, while the car 'roble& has been with us for decades. But 'eo'le get a distorted 'icture of the

dangers involved. )ust doing a si&'le calculation, the chance of any one 'erson dying in an auto&obile accident in a given year in the 6.$. are = in G,>>OH the chance of dying in a gun incident other than suicide is less than half as likely9 = in =J,@@K. /f you 'ut yourself in a low2risk grou' by not being a cri&inal or a 'olice officer, your odds get considerably better. But what are 'eo'le &ore afraid of9 guns or carsT /f you%re like &ost 'eo'le, the answer is guns, and it%s likely because of the distorted &edia coverage. This kind of distorted coverage leads to an outcry fro& the 'o'ulace, which often leads to 'oliticians going offforgive the 'unhalf2cocked with solutions to the 'roble&. #ow let%s get a handle on what it really &eans to have a =2in G,K@@ or a =2in2=J,@@@ chance of dying. /t%s as if you lived on an island in the $outh Pacific with a 'o'ulation of GK@. ;ou &ake your living by swi&&ing around in the a.ure waters around your idyllic 'aradise and s'earing fish for dinner. ;u&, yu&. 3bout once every ten years, a stray shark ha''ens by and eats a swi&&er. That%s a =2in2G,K@@ chance of any one 'erson being eaten by a shark, Sust the sa&e as the odds of dying in an auto&obile accident in the 6.$. in =EE>. 3lso, about once every >@ years, two &en get into an overheated argu&ent over a fish or a wo&an and one of the& kills the other with his s'ear. That%s a =2in2=J,@@@ chance of being killed in an argu&ent, Sust the sa&e as the odds of being killed by so&eone else with a gun in the 6.$. in =EE>. These are very sad events, and 'robably dinner2table conversation for Iuite a few days, but not the be2all and end2all of life. 8ortunately, since you live on an isolated island, these events co&e and go, and life goes on. But now i&agine there are JE>,@@@ of these islands all linked by television and /## ,/sland #ews #etwork-. This brings the total 'o'ulation to about >KO &illion, less than the 6.$. today. 5very night, /## re'orts on the goriest of the =@M shark attacks and KO s'ear deaths that day. $uddenly 'eo'le%s 'icture of the world is Iuite different. 8ro& a 'eaceful e+istence disru'ted only by a tragedy every few years, you go to a fear2ridden hell filled with cri&e and terror. /sn%t this interestingT #othing has changed e+ce't the addition of television. ;et now it feels like you%re living in a dangerous world, not an idyllic 'aradise. $a&e nu&ber of shark attacks, sa&e nu&ber of s'ear deaths. ?hat ha''enedT Television news. /t%s 'rovided a new and 'owerful &eans of s'reading &e&es that 'ush our danger button. ?e%re 'articularly susce'tible to &e&es that 'ush our danger button, since it was i&'ortant in the days before television, back when the &ore Iuickly we res'onded to danger, the better chance we had to survive and re'roduce. But sitting in front of the television getting scared about danger halfway across the world isn%t very useful and doesn%t add &uch to our Iuality of life. /t%s like an addiction, a drug. ?e have very real buttons that get 'ressed when we see danger, buttons that drive us to 'ay attention to it. /t takes substantial &ental effort to 'ry ourselves away fro& it. Back in our for&er 'aradise, 'eo'le start de&anding that the govern&ent do so&ething about this new 'erceived danger. Politicians start talking about a five2day waiting 'eriod for s'ear 'urchases. 5ntre'reneurs start running half2hour info&ercials for shark re'ellent. But underneath it all, the tragedy is that 'eo'le don%t enSoy life as &uch any&ore. They live in fear, fear brought about by nothing &ore than television news. id it have to ha''en this wayT ?hat if the 'eo'le who invented television news had decided to cover good, heartwar&ing news rather than scary, dangerous newsT 8or one thing, to stay in business, the news &edia have to re'ort things that 'eo'le are interested in. Those things are nothing &ore or less than &e&es that 'ush our buttons. #ow, silly us for having stu'id buttons like danger, crisis, 'ower, territory, and so on.

But the fact is9 ?ithout a''ealing to those buttons, the &asses will not tune in, and the network will go out of business. /f another network, say, TP4 ,The Peaceful 4hannel-, were to go on the air co&'eting with /##, showing sunsets, ha''y 'eo'le, and 'al& trees blowing in the bree.e, it would not be long before its directors would notice that certain shows got better ratings than others. Being co&&itted to staying away fro& the danger button, they would have to find a niche with other buttons, &aybe food and se+. $oon The /sland *our&et would go head2to2head with /##%s $hark Bite of the ?eek. The search would go out for the 'erfect island wo&an guaranteed to ca'ture the &en%s attention and &ake the& dissatisfied with their &ates% looks. /f it worked, and TP4 did &anage to ca'ture so&e ratings 'oints fro& /##, how long would it be before a co&'etitor started a third network that 'ut on shows that 'ushed not only the food and se+ buttons but the danger button, tooT $oon we%d have island soa' o'eras and Battle of the Volcano Virgins ca'turing to' ratings, and once again ca'turing our attention at the e+'ense of our 'eace of &ind and accurate view of the world. ;ou 'robably know 'eo'le who are addicted to news, as well as other kinds of &edia sti&ulation. /t%s a drug of the &ind, ca'turing your attention and giving little in return. Turn off the tube. Pets Technology is by no &eans the only driving force behind cultural viruses. /n fact, a cultural virus doesn%t even have to be so&ething bad. Take a look at 'ets. 7ur beloved dogs, cats, iguanas, and so on, along with the enor&ous industries that have arisen to su''ort the&, are all 'art of a huge cultural virus known as 'ets. ?hatT Pets, a virusT #o, /%& not Soking. *ranted, fro& our egocentric 'oint of view, 'ets are one of life%s 'leasures, delightful co&'anions and 'lay&ates, 'art of the richness of being hu&an. 8ro& their 'oint of view, though, we%re essentially their slaves. :et%s take a look. 3 virus of the &ind is so&ething out in the world that, by its e+istence, alters 'eo'le%s behavior so that &ore co'ies of the thing get created. Pets have all the Iualities necessary to be a virus of the &ind9 Pets 'enetrate our &inds by attracting our attention. The Iuality they have that gets the& attention is so&ething like cuteness or adorability. Pets actually 'rogra& us to take care of the& in several ways. The ani&als the&selves take advantage of the instincts we have to care for our young. The 'et industry, 'art of the 'et virus, 'rogra&s us through television and advertising to s'end &ore and &ore &oney on e+'ensive 'et foods and veterinary bills. Pets are faithfully re'roduced, with the hel', of course, of their own #3 and of the resources we devote to caring for the&. But there%s also a tradition &e&e working for &any 'et s'ecies in the for& of 'et shows and kennel clubs. Peo'le are rewarded for re'roducing a breed faithfully. 3nd of course 'ets s'read in the natural way. They do this so effectively that we%ve noticed the 'roble& and started ca&'aigns to neuter ani&als to 'revent unwanted offs'ring. 7f course, eli&inating unwanted offs'ring also increases the value of the faithfully bred ani&als sold by the 'et industry.

Pets evolved to be cuter and cuter. 1owT The ones that weren%t cutethat weren%t able to co&&and our resources, to enslave us into taking care of the&they died" /t%s natural selection in action9 the cute ones bred with each other until we reached the 'oint we%re at today . . . infected with the 'et virus. 7bviously, this is a bit tongue2in2cheek9 nobody is worried about being enslaved by 'ets. But there is a s'ecies of ant that has evolved to literally enslave another insect, the a'hid. The ants so&ehow evolved to give off the secret che&ical that controls a'hids% actions. The ants herd the&, gra.e the&, and &ilk the&, &uch as we do with cattle. Pets don%t give off a secret che&ical, but they do have an irresistible cuteness that serves &uch the sa&e function. $o ne+t ti&e you see a dog or cat, Sust for a &inute look at it fro& the ani&al%s 'oint of view. Pets have got a 'retty cushy life, don%t theyT Panhandling Peo'le in big cities don%t give &any handouts to beggars any&ore. There%s a sense that the 'eo'le begging aren%t the ones who really deserve the hel'. The business of begging is Sust as subSect to &e&etic evolution as all other institutions. /t see&s the ineffective beggars'robably those you%d want to hel'have been driven out by the ones who%ve learned to be good at it. Panhandling is an interesting study in &e&e evolution9 like the 'rogression of the forest, it see&s to reevolve over and over again each ti&e a new environ&ent is created where 'anhandlers can flourish. Being good at begging, in this book anyway, &eans having the right &e&es to attract donations. :aws being 'assed against aggressive 'anhandling show that a Be aggressive strategy2&e&e has been successful. 7ther strategy2&e&es /%ve noticed working for beggars are Beg with children or ani&als, $tand at a busy intersection with a traffic light, and 1ave a sign saying ?ill work for food. / actually heard a beggar on talk radio co&'aring techniIues, and he highly reco&&ended the last two of those three. 1e noted that he%d never actually worked for food'eo'le Sust handed hi& &oney through their car windows, es'ecially &iddle2aged wo&en. ?ith 'ro beggars using such effective &e&es, it%s difficult for the a&ateurs to get attention, and therefore donations. 8ro& an e&barrassing but necessary way of life, begging has evolved into a cultural virus that 'er'etuates itself through ever2&ore2 effective &ethods now being s'read even over &ass &edia. The &ost effective 'artici'ants in this virus &ake a fair living at it, according to their own state&ents, and drive out the 'eo'le who actually need hel'. This force of &e&e evolution, away fro& original intent and toward e+'loitation of the syste&, works Sust as surely with govern&ent handouts, be they welfare 'rogra&s or ta+ breaks. *overn&ent Power corru'ts. #o doubt about it. 8ederal bureaucracies grow fat and wastefulH 'oliticians cater to s'ecial2interest grou's or worseH big businesses shower ineffective e+ecutives with lavish salaries and fringe benefits. ?e know about all of this, and &any of us have grown Saded and grudgingly acce'ting of this black eye on the face of society. ?e catch the& when we can and toss the& out of office or even into Sail for a few &onths, but it%s Sust a fact of life, isn%t itT Power corru'ts. ?hat / once thought was a cynical, 'essi&istic worldview, / now understand to be the natural result of &e&e evolution. Mind viruses e+'loit instruction2obeying &echanis&s. /f 'ower is defined as the ability to have others follow your instructions, it%s not a difficult lea' to see why evolutionary forces tend to attack and corru't any concentration of 'ower. The very instant we set u' a bureaucracy, a govern&ent, or a big business with e+traordinary 'ower over our lives, corru'tion begins. :ittle by little, the good intentions

originally 'resent in the organi.ation beco&e stifled, choked, or even re'laced by an evolving set of &e&es that have no clai& to 'ower other than that they are good at s'reading. The forces of &e&e evolution are unbelievably 'owerful. Take a look at that unshakable bedrock of govern&ent9 the 6.$. 4onstitution. !atified in =MNN and designed by so&e savvy 'eo'le with firsthand knowledge of the corru'tion 'ossible in a big centrali.ed govern&ent, it contained &any 'rovisions devised to safeguard against that ha''ening in their new country. But little by little, and always for what see&ed to be good reasons, 'ower shifted fro& the 'eo'le and states to the federal govern&ent. id you know the original 4onstitution 'rohibited the direct ta+ation of 'eo'le by the federal govern&entT The /!$ was unconstitutional" The fra&ers knew that with centrali.ed ta+ation co&es centrali.ed 'ower and centrali.ed corru'tion. 3nd what we see through &e&etics is that such a central 'ower is doo&ed to evolve away fro& any charitable intent and toward self2 'er'etuation. The 6nited $tates has evolved so far away fro& the ideas of individual res'onsibility and states% rights that 'eo'le now 'u..le over the &eaning of the Tenth 3&end&ent. /t says that all rights not s'ecifically granted to the federal govern&ent shall be reserved for the 'eo'le or the states. That%s still 'art of the 4onstitution" The 'ower of &e&e evolution has brought us to an era where the federal govern&ent sees nothing wrong with &andating a national s'eed li&it, controlling access to health care, and deciding which drugs 'eo'le will be i&'risoned for using and which will be subsidi.ed by the ta+'ayers. The Black Market ?henever the govern&ent outlaws certain for&s of econo&ic activity, it creates the 'otential for a cultural virus called the black &arket. 3 subculture s'rings u' full of strategy2&e&es such as $ell drugs in order to rea' the rewards. These black2&arket &e&es 'ush so&e of the 'ri&arily &ale buttons discussed in 4ha'ter G'ower and window of o''ortunityso one would e+'ect 'ri&arily &en to be involved in black2 &arket activity. The so2called war on drugs, in a 'arallel to the for&er 'rohibition of alcohol, created a niche of enor&ous 'ower for a grou' of 'eo'le who are now necessarily outlaws, the black2&arket drug dealers. The &ore difficult the govern&ent &akes it to acIuire illegal drugs, the higher 'rices black &arketeers can charge. The harsher the 'enalties for dealing drugs, the &ore freedo& the dealers have to co&&it other cri&es in their 'ursuit of the econo&ic and social 'ower their trade gives the&. 3fter all, they%re already cri&inals and have little &ore to lose9 low risk, high reward. The tighter the crackdown by the govern&ent, the scarcer the su''ly of drugs, and the &ore 'otential for &oney and 'ower individual dealers have9 the &ore strongly the window of o''ortunity and 'ower buttons get 'ushed. 3s we discovered during Prohibition, the good the govern&ent does by reducing drug use &ust be weighed against the har& done in su''orting the cri&inal underground that serves this black &arket, not to &ention the loss of individual freedo& caused by the state i&'osing its grou' &orality on everyone. $o why does the govern&ent have a war on drugs, knowing that it creates this black &arket and all the cri&e that goes with itT /t%s the chief disadvantage of a de&ocratic govern&ent, es'ecially in this age where national offices are deter&ined &ostly by television coverage. To get elected, leaders are forced to advertise the&selves using the &ost 'owerful &e&es available. :ately, this has involved 'ointing out a crisis ,the drug 'roble&, the budget deficit,

health care, our broken educational syste&-. 6nfortunately, the effectiveness of the button2'ushing &e&es in the ca&'aign sound bites is unrelated to whether the 'ro'osed solutions will actually work to solve these 'roble&s. 3 e&ocratic !e'ublic The fra&ers of the 6.$. 4onstitution understood this 'roble&, and that is why they created not a true de&ocracy but a re'ublic9 the citi.ens de&ocratically elect re'resentatives, and then they'resu&ably the elite thinkers, the 'eo'le of highest integrity&ake infor&ed decisions based on what is best for the country. ?hat ha''enedT Me&e evolution, this ti&e &utating govern&ent toward the direct vote of the 'eo'le, who ulti&ately hold the reins of 'ower. /n =E=J, another article of the 4onstitution fell, again with noble &otives, this ti&e the one 'roviding that state legislatures would no&inate senators. #ow it would be the 'eo'le, thus re&oving the distinction the fra&ers designed into the two2house syste&, with the 1ouse of !e'resentatives being the voice of the 'eo'le and the $enate being the voice of the states. The so2called s&oke2filled roo&s, where candidates used to be no&inated, for better or worse, by the local 'arty 'owerful, have been eli&inated in state after state in favor of direct elections, thus ensuring that any successful candidate would have to distill his or her &essage into a short ad that 'ushes a lot of buttons. 4ries are now being heard to eli&inate the 5lectoral 4ollege, the last s&idgen of 'ower individual states have in affecting the Presidential election, in favor of a direct national vote. 3t this 'oint, /%& not trying to say that evolution of the govern&ent toward &ore and &ore centrali.ation is a bad thingalthough it is a bad thing for 'eo'le who want to have control over their own lives. !ather, /%& Sust showing another e+a&'le of the way syste&s auto&atically evolve toward the 'owerful getting &ore 'owerful. The &ore 'ower an institution has, the &ore it can influence the s'reading of its &e&es. The &ore it s'reads its &e&es, the &ore 'ower it gets. 3rticle /, $ection J The $enate of the 6nited $tates shall be co&'osed of two $enators fro& each $tate, chosen by the :egislature thereof, for si+ ;earsH and each $enator shall have one Vote. =Mth 3&end&ent ,=E=JThe $enate of the 6nited $tates shall be co&'osed of two $enators fro& each $tate, elected by the 'eo'le thereof, for si+ yearsH and each $enator shall have one vote. `````````````````````````````````````````````````` 3rticle /, $ection E #o 4a'itation, or other direct, Ta+ shall be laid, unless in Pro'ortion to the 4ensus or enu&eration herein before directed to be taken. =Gth 3&end&ent ,=E=J-

The 4ongress shall have 'ower to lay and collect ta+es on inco&es, fro& whatever source derived, without a''ortion&ent a&ong the several $tates, and without regard to any census or enu&eration. 7riginal li&itations on govern&ent 'ower in the 6.$. 4onstitution have eroded, giving &ore and &ore 'ower to the federal govern&ent and to the &aSority voters at the e+'ense of legislators and states. /n the 6nited $tates, the &aSority voters have the ulti&ate 'ower, so we see slow but noticeable evolution toward what is called the tyranny of the &aSority9 the &aSority i&'osing its &e&es on the &inority. The Bill of !ights was designed to &ake such tyranny i&'ossible. ;et without a single one of those first ten a&end&ents being re'ealed or &odified, their enforce&ent and inter'retation has shifted bit by bit to take 'ower away fro& the individual and give &ore and &ore to the &aSority. This shift in 'ower always see&s to be for a good reason at first. 8or instance, the right of 'eo'le to hire and rent to who&ever they choose has been over'owered by the govern&ent%s atte&'t to eradicate the effects of se+is& and racis&. ?hile the short2 ter& results, better treat&ent of wo&en and &inorities, a''eal to the &aSority of voters, the long2ter& increase in govern&ent control over yet another as'ect of life is not so a''ealing. 7ne of the &ost 'recious rights, one that gives 3&ericans cause to call their country free, is the right to due 'rocess of law before the govern&ent can sei.e 'ro'erty. 4urrent govern&ent 'olicy against sus'ected drug dealers is to sei.e cars, boats, and houses used in drug cri&es even before the sus'ects are brought to trial and convicted. /s this a good 'olicy, or one &ore e+a&'le of reaction to a short2ter& crisis by increasing central 'owerT The 7rigins of *ridlock This corru'tion of govern&ent is rarely a conscious, evil intention on the 'art of the 'owerful. ?hen it iswhen a 'owerful leader abuses the trust 'laced in hi& and co&&its illegal actswe can recogni.e the 'roble& easily and &ete out 'unish&ent swiftly when the cri&e is discovered. /t%s &ore difficult to deal with what we see all over the world today9 the gradual infection of the entire 'ower culture with &e&es that divert the 'ower away fro& the 'ur'oses for which it was initially granted. :et%s take the 6.$. 4ongress as an e+a&'le. The original conce't was for wise 'eo'le to &ake infor&ed decisions about the course of the new country. They would decide how &uch to ta+ citi.ens, how &uch to s'end, what to s'end ta+ revenue on, and what regulations to create. The very instant this 'ower structure was brought into e+istence, it laid itself o'en to attack by &ind viruses. 3ny &e&es that infected legislators and shifted their 'riorities got so&e very 'owerful results. #ot only are 'oliticians 'owerful 'eo'le, able to act on those ideas, but they are notorious talkers and tend to s'read the ideas they%re 'ro&oting through s'eeches and other &eans. 3t first, legislators 'icked u' ideas fro& reading, listening to others, and 'erha's fro& offhand conversation in social circles. The 'olitical views that had the best &e&esthat a''ealed to the legislator for whatever reason, whether it be crisis, hel'ing children, &aking sense, or so&e 'ersonal buttonwere the ones he ado'ted. But 'retty soon, with all the &e&es bu..ing around the legislator%s ear, there began to be so&e fierce co&'etition for his attention. !egardless of their &erit, &e&es needed to co&e in &ore and &ore 'owerful 'ackages to win the notice of the legislator. 7ne 'owerful 'ackage is a 'ackage wra''ed in &oney9 ca&'aign contributions to the legislator%s biennial need to get reelected. /t%s easy to 'ay &ore attention to the &e&es of grou's that contribute than those that don%t,

and 'aying attention is the first ste' toward &e&e 'enetration. 5ven if the legislator is co&'letely honest, the contributor%s &e&es have their 'enetrating effect. 3 cor'orate lobbyist or s'ecial2interest grou', bringing u' a &atter again and again, would use re'etition to advantage in trans&itting &e&es to legislators. Today, legislators are surrounded by lobbyists, 'eo'le e&'loyed solely to trans&it 'articular &e&es to legislatorsto condition the&, to 'rogra& the& with &e&es" The legislators, in turn, hire huge staffs to sort through all the infor&ation co&ing in and screen it. The lobbyists now &ust figure a way to 'enetrate this new layer of defenses in a sort of congressional ar&s race. This wouldn%t be anything worse than inefficient if it were not for one key fact9 the legislator%s Sob is not to select the best ideas fro& a&ong all the s'ecial interests% 'ro'osalsH it is to decide what is best for the country" The vast &aSority of the &e&es that congress'eo'le are being bo&barded with are reIuests to directly or indirectly benefit so&e interest. /t%s al&ost i&'ossible for the& not to be biased in favor of doing so&ething, enacting so&ething, regulating so&ething, to address these issues. ?hen *ood Peo'le 1ave Bad Me&es Put the s'ecial2interest bo&bard&ent together with the way our 'olitical 'rocess works and it%s easy to reach the conclusion that es'ousing s'ecial2interest &e&es is a necessary condition for being in 4ongress. This does not &ean that these 'eo'le are bad or evil. /t%s Sust the forces of &e&e evolution. $u''ose a 'olitician were to shield hi&self fro& the &e&e attack so&ehow and re&ain devoutly co&&itted to doing what was best for the country. 6nless he translated that course of action into &e&es that a''ealed to voters, that 'erson wouldn%t stand a chance at reelection against an o''onent who ta''ed into the current hot buttons of the &aSority of voters, regardless of what was best for the country. Pretty soon, the only 'oliticians in office are the ones who are broadcasting &e&es that 'ush voters% buttons. 3nd it could all have ha''ened through &e&e evolution, without any conscious intention to deceive or &ani'ulate. Politicians win elections based on the only factor that counts9 voter a''eal, which is to say good &e&es. 5lective govern&ent is set u' to select for 'oliticians who are good at saying what 'eo'le want to hear. 3nd the &ore i&'ortant television beco&es in 'olitical advertising, the less related this 'olitical i&age beco&es to the reality of the 'erson. Today, only the &ost foolhardy or reckless Presidential candidate would &ake a television a''earance without advice fro& a handleran i&age advisorto instruct hi& in how to co&e across &ost effectively. *rowth of *overn&ent es'ite the ad&onition, often attributed to Tho&as )efferson, That govern&ent is best which governs least, de&ocratic 'olitical syste&s have evolved toward govern&ent governing &ore and &ore. That evolution is a result of the &e&es that voters 'ay attention to. There is a tendency to notice the reward &e&eto vote for 'oliticians who &ake an issue out of doing so&ething that benefits you as a voter. 3s a student, / re&e&ber activists &obili.ing in favor of candidates who 'ro&ised to increase govern&ent s'ending on education and student loans. The 'ork that &e&bers of 4ongress bring back to their ho&e districts gets the& votes, but it all adds u' to a burdenso&e a&ount of federal s'ending and an ever2increasing a&ount of 'ower in the federal govern&ent. To unseat an incu&bent, a challenger &ust send a &essage with better &e&es than the incu&bent%s &essage. 7ften that &essage involves bigger or &ore e+'ensive govern&ent. The trend of all this has been for the 6.$. govern&ent to get continually bigger, fatter, and &ore e+'ensive and inefficient, while the &e&es used in the ca&'aign get leaner, &eaner, and &ore 'otent.

Me&e evolution, though, is difficult to 'redict. The =EEO 6.$. election saw a &essage filled with &ission and danger as the !e'ublicans took over the 1ouse of !e'resentatives and the $enate over the e&ocrats% stay2the2course &essage. There%s a crisis" they said. ?e can fi+ it" They &anaged to 'ackage their 4ontract with 3&erica 'latfor& with essentially the sa&e button2'ushing TroSan horse the e&ocrats used in =EE> to 'ro&ote their solution to the then2hot health2care crisis. 3s 'oliticians beco&e &ore and &ore ade't at button 'ushing, the outco&e of the election beco&es less and less related to their real agendas. /f the &aSority of voters understood &e&etics, would we see a sudden transfor&ationT ?e would certainly see a change for the better in the ty'es of ca&'aigns and, 'erha's, the integrity of govern&ent.

UPersonally, ever since / first read about subli&inal advertising, /%ve seen the word se+ in every glass of liIuor on the rocksnow /%ve got a distinction2&e&e for it" U ouglas !ushkoff%s book Media Virus" ,Ballantine, =EEO- illustrates this 'oint in great detail. 1is use of the ter& virus is &ore like what / call a TroSan horsethat is, a bundle of &e&es with a sugarcoating of 'alatable &e&es and a hidden agenda underneath. UU3s if to 'rove &y 'oint9 one of &y reviewers wrote in the &argin here9 Be 7'rah" carefuldon%t alienate / haven%t, have /T A U$ource9 3dvance !e'ort of 8inal Mortality $tatistics, =EE>, fro& Monthly Vital $tatistics !e'ort, Vol. OJ, #o. G, $u''le&ent, March >>, =EEK ,corrected and re'rinted-. 6.$. e't. of 1ealth and 1u&an $ervices, Public 1ealth $ervice, 4enters for isease 4ontrol and Prevention, #ational 4enter for 1ealth $tatistics.

413PT5! T5# T15 M5M5T/4$ 78 !5:/*/7# / like your 4hrist, / do not like your 4hristians. ;our 4hristians are so unlike your 4hrist. Mohandas *andhi /t%s been said that believing in a 4hristian *od is an obvious choice9 if 1e e+ists, the 'enalty for nonbelievers is substantialH if 1e doesn%t, what%s the har&T This argu&ent 'resses our chea' insurance button and feels like a good one. But, sha&elessly biased as / a& in favor of reality, /%& going to at least e+'lore the 'ossibility that religious beliefs are not in fact handed down fro& on high, but are instead the result of so&e of the &ost 'owerful &ind viruses in the universe. /%& writing now about religious dog&a. /%& addressing the Iuestion of why 'eo'le have religious Truths they believe, where such beliefs co&e fro&, and how they 'er'etuate and s'read. Peo'le relate to religious scri'ture anywhere on the s'ectru& fro& vehe&ent disbelief to useful allegory to word2of2*od funda&entalis&H and while the &e&etics behind the s'read of such scri'ture is the sa&e, the behavior of so&eone who is 'rogra&&ed with dog&a2as2Truth is very different fro& so&eone who sees the sa&e writings as a 'arable, a &ythology. ;ou can consciously 'rogra& yourself with &e&es that hel' you with whatever you%re u' to in life. That%s one of the &ain strategy2&e&es in the &e&etics 'aradig&. /t goes against that strategy to believe religious dog&a without having consciously chosen it as e&'owering to your own life. /t%s also counter to the &e&etics 'aradig& to believe religious &e&es or any &e&es are True, rather than half2truths useful in a given conte+t. The long2standing religious &e&es around today are the ones that survived &e&etic evolution. :ike any &e&es, you get to choose whether 'rogra&&ing yourself with the& aids or hinders your life 'ur'ose. The 7rigin of !eligion ?here did religious &e&es co&e fro&T 1ere%s one 'ossible scenario. /t%s the era of 'rehistoric &an, and 'roble&2solving skills have turned out to be a big win in the survival2of2the2fittest ga&e. The cave 'eo'le who survived to re'roduce were the ones who evolved to answer Iuestions like9 C 1ow do / hide fro& this saber2toothed tigerT C ?here is the foodT C 1ow can / find Mr. or Ms. !ightT ;ou know, the ty'ical day2to2day concerns of the so'histicated cave dweller. Proble& solving was a good survival skill. But once that &echanis& ca&e into e+istence, early hu&ans naturally turned it to so&e of the big 'roble&s, the ones 'hiloso'hers throughout the ages have been struggling with9 C ?here did we co&e fro&T C ?hy are we hereT

C ?hat should we doT ?ell, these Iuestions were a lot harder to answer than the &ore 'ractical ones involving danger, food, and se+, but not so hard that our $tone 3ge friends couldn%t venture a guess. The cognitive dissonance set u' by having these Iuestions in &ind caused the creation of so&e &e&es that &ade sense as answers. 3nd fro& these guesses evolved &ythology, 'hiloso'hy, and religion. 1ow did that evolution workT 3s always, survival of the fittest &e&es. ?ithout going into the actual history of religion, let%s continue our i&aginary $tone 3ge scenario. /&agine the 8lintstones and the !ubbles are all 'ondering the Iuestion of where we ca&e fro&. 5ach co&es u' with a guess9 ?il&a concludes *od created us, but kee's it to herself. Barney thinks about the Iuestion for years, but the 'oor lunkhead doesn%t co&e u' with an answer. Betty, thinking about the Iuestion with e+ce'tional insight and creativity, 'ro'oses that we evolved fro& single2celled organis&s. #eedless to say, Betty%s idea doesn%t catch on. But 8red, who is &ore than &iddling 'leased with hi&self that he has solved this stu&'er, figures we were created by *od, ?ho also told us to s'read the word or we%d burn in hell. U ;abba dabba doo" 8red ha''ened to co&e u' with a fit set of &e&es in his guess at the solution to the 'roble&. id he do it on 'ur'oseT 3l&ost inconceivable. But i&agine &illions of 'eo'le all thinking fro& ti&e to ti&e about this Iuestion, and the set of beliefs constituting the acce'ted answer constantly i&'roving, evolving to have better and better &e&es that s'read farther and wider and &ore ra'idly, until the belief syste& 'ervades the society and beco&es a religion. 3 religion for&ed in this way, as a cultural virus ,evolved without conscious hu&an intention-, evolves not toward truth, not even toward the better&ent of its adherents, but toward &ore effective &e&es. This is the &ost crucial 'oint in this entire book9 Me&e evolution is not designed to benefit the individual. $o for religions that were not created by individuals with the conscious intent to start a designer &ind viruswhich / would i&agine accounts for &ost of the religions on 5arththe belief syste&s are not guaranteed either to be True or to be good ways to live life. They are, however, guaranteed to be self2'er'etuating. ?hen / say there was no conscious atte&'t to start a designer virus, / don%t &ean there was no conscious atte&'t to s'read &e&es that would yield a good life. /t would see& that &any religious leaders, fro& Buddha to )esus, did have a conscious intent. But without knowledge of &e&etics on the 'art of their founders, those &e&es either died out or Iuickly evolved into self2'er'etuating institutions, concerned &ore about their own e+istence than about 'eo'le%s Iuality of life. 3nd &any of the religious institutions did so by clai&ing that their &e&es were the one set of True &e&es, regardless of the intention of their founder. The 3bsolute Truth ?hen / was growing u', one of the ty'ically adolescent Iuestions / 'ondered was, ?ith so &any religions on 5arth clai&ing to be True, and &any of the& clai&ing to be the only Truth, how could / know which one really was trueT There didn%t see& to be any easy way to tell9 it see&ed &ost of the world religions looked u'on 'eo'le of other faiths with attitudes ranging fro& indifference to 'ity to disdain, but usually with su'eriority and a s&ug belief that theirs was the only True way. 3nd then there were the few that didn%t &ake that clai&9 was one of those the true oneT ?ho to believeT 7ne of the biggest tra's 'eo'le get into in life is getting sucked into trying to solve 'erceived 'roble&s at the e+'ense of things that are &ore i&'ortant to the&. The

'roble&2solving tendency in &any of us is so strong that, without a solid grounding in and clear understanding of our own 'ersonal 'riorities, we tend to devote &uch of our lives to solving 'roble&s that don%t get us anywhere. 1ow to &ake &ore &oney, how to change our s'ouse%s behavior, how to conIuer fears9 these 'erceived 'roble&s stare us in the face every day and therefore are each fodder for countless best2selling books, talk shows, and se&inars. But the biggest 'roble&2solving tra' that even highly educated, brilliantly intelligent 'eo'le fall into is the Ruest for the 3bsolute Truth. ?e have an enor&ous hunger to understand the world around us, which was e+tre&ely useful when the world was si&'le and &ostly consisted of 'hysical rewards and dangers. /n the society of &e&es, however, we are constantly trying to &ake sense of things that si&'ly have no sense. ?e think they &ake sense, because our brains haven%t had &uch of a chance to evolve fro& the ti&e when these cultural, 'sychological landsca'es si&'ly didn%t e+ist. $o we devote huge a&ounts of ti&e, &oney, and energy trying to understand and solve &eaningless 'roble&s. The biggest &eaningless 'roble& is this9 ?hich religion is TrueT That breaks down into sub'roble&s such as9 oes *od e+istT ?hat is 1e likeT /s there a heavenT /s there a hellT ?as )esus 4hrist the $on of *odT ?hat does *od want &e to doT Then those break down into even &ore &eaningless Iuestions9 /s *od a &an or a wo&anT ?hite, black, red, yellow . . . T ?here does 1e or $he liveT 1ow &uch 'ostage does it take to send 1i& a letterT ?hen 1e%s on vacation, does 1e have 1is &ail forwardedT 1ow &any angels can dance on the head of a 'inT /&&ersed in Iuestions like that, it%s difficult to get a 'ers'ective on what religion is and where it ca&e fro&. But fro& the &e&etic &odel, all naturally evolved religionscultural virusesare bundles of &e&es. !eligions are creations of our &inds, kluges that have evolved fro& the days when our lives were &ostly s'ent avoiding danger and seeking food and se+. !eligions are conce'tual bundles that &a' the 'rehistoric world our brains were used to onto today%s world of &orals, culture, and society. 3nd unless we invent our own religiona designer virus, with a 'articular 'ur'ose in &indthe way these bundles sha'e u' is deter&ined by &e&e evolution9 religions evolve to have good &e&es. That%s it" That%s all there is to it" #one of the religions is the True oneH they%re all variations on a the&eor a &e&e. But let%s take a closer look at what &e&es &ake for a successful religion. !eligion Me&es /f /%& correct about religions evolving to have fit &e&es and not being handed down fro& *od, /%d e+'ect all our favorite &e&es to show u' in the &ost successful religions. $o let%s take a look. :et%s start by looking at the structural &e&es, those that are fit si&'ly by virtue of the laws of &e&etics9 Tradition. The tradition strategy2&e&e re'licates because it 'rogra&s 'eo'le to 'er'etuate itselfalong with the rest of the bundled &e&es. !eligions have a&ong the strongest traditions of any cultural institutions. 8ro& Mecca, ancient churches, and 5astern &onasteries to kosher laws and the careful 'reservation of the Bible, traditions 'ervade &ost religions. !e&e&ber9 /t%s not that the traditions are being ke't because the religions are true or goodthe cause and effect are reversed" The religions survived because, in 'art, certain traditions beca&e ingrained in the&. !eligions without strong traditions had less chance of surviving. 1eresy. 1eresy is any belief that goes against the dog&a of a religion. The fli' side

of tradition, the heresy distinction2&e&e is like an infection2fighting white blood cell, identifying and co&bating infectious new &e&es. 1eresy carries with it a whole list of association2&e&es about what will ha''en to you if you believe ,allow 'enetration of- or s'eak ,s'read- heresy. 5vangelis&. The evangelis& strategy2&e&e re'licates because it%s shouting $'read &e to new 'eo'le" This one is interesting because not all religions are evangelistic in the sense of standing on street corners handing out 'a&'hlets. But you%d have to look hard to find a &aSor religion that doesn%t evangeli.e to the children of its adherents. This works even better when co&bined with the 1ave as &any children as 'ossible &e&e favored by the Po'e, Mor&ons, and our current welfare syste&. /t%s beside the 'oint that 'eo'le are sincere and have good reasons to evangeli.e9 )esusL$cientologyLThe 8oru&LThe 3&erican ?ay &ade such an incredible difference in &y life that / want everyone else to e+'erience that Soy. The institutions that encourage evangelis&that even condition 'eo'le to evangeli.ehave a &e&etic advantage, regardless of the i&'act of the religion on 'eo'le%s lives. The religion is successful because so&ehow evangelis& beca&e a 'art of its dog&a. 3 religion that gave 'eo'le incredible Soy but did not 'rogra& the& to evangeli.e would not be as successful. Making sense. /deas that &ake sense re'licate better than those that don%t by the very nature of the hu&an &indre&e&ber the children%s ga&e of tele'hone. !eligions that have clear, handy e+'lanations for those tough Iuestions are &uch &ore 'o'ular than those that challenge 'eo'le to think for the&selves, such as ^en. 7f course, those answers to tough Iuestions don%t have to be true, any &ore than $anta 4laus or the 5aster Bunny, as long as they%re easy to understand. !e'etition. !ituals abound in &ost religions, fro& $unday church to saying grace before &eals. The &ore we re'eat an action, idea, or belief, the &ore co&fortable we get with it and the less we Iuestion it9 we beco&e conditioned or 'rogra&&ed by it. $uccessful religions have evolved to e&body what any advertising e+ecutive would tell you9 re'etition sells. 3 strong dose of each of those &e&es alone would &ake for a successful religion, but &e&e evolution didn%t sto' there. #ow let%s look at the 'ush2button &e&es, the ones that are fit because they take advantage of our basic hu&an nature9 $ecurity. Many religions are based in fear9 fear of *od%s wrath, fear of burning in hell, fear of ostracis& by one%s co&&unity. $etting u' artificial dangers and clai&ing to be a safe haven fro& the& is a very 'owerful 'art of a belief syste&. /n the case of ostracis&, the danger is not even artificial9 the 3&ish live in fear of being shunned, or cut out of their close2knit co&&unity for the rest of their lives. :iving within the entire belief syste& of the religion is the su''osed salvation. 4risis. Many cults, not strong on 'ushing the &aking sense button, &ake u' for it here. 4ult leaders )i& )ones and avid 0oresh were both said to be constantly tru&'eting i&&inent danger, both fro& *od%s wrath and fro& outside ene&ies. They alone held the key to salvation in the crisisso they said.

8ood. ;es, food" 8easts and fasts &ake a religion &ore attractive by hooking into 'eo'le%s &ost basic button. / al&ost Soined the Baha%i faith once because / thought it was great to have feasts every =E days" U 5aster dinners, Passover seders, and the ti&es you get to eat during the fast of !a&adan all add attractive &e&es to a religion. 8asts, in fact, set u' cognitive dissonance to reinforce the &e&es you were fasting for. $e+. /t%s the rare religion that doesn%t have so&ething to say about se+. To be an effective co&'onent of a belief syste&, though, getting the se+ &ust be tied in with buying into the rest of the belief syste&. !eligions have various ways of acco&'lishing this, fro& &onoga&ous &arriage within the church to the te&'le 'rostitutes of ancient !o&e to the free2love cults such as the !aSneeshees. ?hen the !aSneeshee enclave in 7regon started to get regular visits fro& sold2out tour buses full of salivating &en, the Bhagwan $hree !aSneesh decided to 'ut a ten2day waiting 'eriod on se+ with newco&ers, a s&all &e&etic change that &ade it less easy to snatch the bait out of the tra', as it were. Proble&. This one is es'ecially 'ernicious and effective at lassoing in s&art, educated 'eo'le. The idea that there is a &ysterious body of knowledge that can be attained through a lifeti&e of 'roble& solving is a 'owerful lure. This is the cornerstone of such 5astern religions as ^en and Taois&, although adherents would 'robably tell you it isn%t. ,That%s what &akes it so &ysterious"- !eligions such as 4hristianity have so &uch written about the& that you could never &ake a dent in it in a single lifeti&e. But for &any 4hristians, religious study is a great 'art of their lifestyle. They 'ore over the Bible, believing it is the direct word of *od, bringing enlighten&ent if they could Sust understand a little &ore. o&inance. 1aving a status ladder to cli&b is great for hooking 'eo'le with strong 'ower buttons, which are &ostly &en, since this button is evolutionarily linked to access to fe&ales. The idea of levels or degrees runs through even Iuasi2religious organi.ations such as the Boy $couts and the 8ree&asons. /t%s interesting that the 4atholic 4hurch, with one of the shortest ladders of hierarchyonly five levels fro& laity to Po'ee+clusively addresses &en and e+'licitly reIuires celibacy to &ove u' the ladder. Perha's celibacy tricks the &ind into enhancing the drive to cli&b the ladder. Belonging. Most 'eo'le have a button that draws the& to belong to a grou'. 8or &any lonely 'eo'le, this &e&e by itself is sufficient to get the& involved in whatever religion ha''ens to be handy and holding regular &eetings. / know several 6nitarians who 'rofess not even to believe in *odH they Sust like going to church and &eeting with their grou'. $cience vs. !eligion 3lthough &e&etics &akes it breathtakingly clear how religions have evolved, it does not force us to conclude that religion is a bad thing. That%s a knee2Serk conclusion often reached by 'eo'le when they discover that &e&es have been the driving force behind the success of religious dog&as, and it%s a very shallow conclusion. 7n the contrary, &e&etics &ay hel' bring science and religion back together after a centuries2long falling2out. The ga' between science and religion began 'ractically with the origin of science.

!eligious teachings have been at odds with scientific theories for ages. ?ith each new one of its discoveries, science calls further and further into Iuestion religious histories and e+'lanations. Many scientifically &inded 'eo'le can%t understand why anyone would want to believe in so&ething obviously untrue, or even believe so&ething you don%t need to believe in order to e+'lain how the universe works. Most intelligent 'eo'le / know have divided the&selves into two ca&'s when it co&es to religion9 7n one side, they either beco&e agnostic or atheist, unwilling to buy into what they see as i&'ossible stories of su'ernatural 'owers, virgin births, 'arting of seas, or other &iracles. 7n the other side, they ado't a religion and beco&e ade't at rationali.ing the truth of such stories U or treat the& as allegorical &ythology rather than Truth. $o we%re at a bit of an i&'asse. Many of the religious know they are getting value fro& their faith9 they see and feel the tangible results in their lives. Many who shun religion know they are right9 their understanding of the world &akes it obvious to the& that these &ythologies are Sust fairy tales, and why would anyone want to believe a fairy taleT 3nd so the two grou's stand on o''osite edges of a chas&, shouting across at each other or turning their backs on each other, but rarely &aking the lea' across. To the *reater *lory of *od 3 co&&on belief a&ong the dee'ly religious, if you ask the& the 'ur'ose of their lives, is so&ething along the lines that they devote their ti&e on 5arth to the greater glory of *od. ?hat does that &eanT 8or one thing, it &eans that they are clear that there is a 'ur'ose to their lives, so&ething &ost faithless 'eo'le are not at all certain about. But so whatT 3 harsh if ty'ical attitude fro& the rational, scientific co&&unity &ight be so&ething like this9 / really 'ity those 'oor religious fools who run around like chickens with their heads cut off, devoting their lives to bring Vglory% to a god that doesn%t e+ist. 3nd of course, the faithful look back in return at the godless e&'iricists, 'itying the& for never knowing the ra'ture of *race. 6sually, what scientific2&inded 'eo'le obSect to about religion is an overdose of faithbelieving in so&ething without any evidence, or even des'ite evidence to the contrary. They 'oint to the 4rusades and the $'anish /nIuisition as e+a&'les of how destructive faith in the unscientific can be. This always 'u..les &e since, as scientists, they should know you can%t 'rove a theory by citing a cou'le of e+a&'les, es'ecially when there are 'lenty of e+a&'les of good stuff created by 'eo'le as a result of their faith, and bad stuff created by the faithlessand by scientists, for that &atter" The officially godless $oviet 6nion and wea'ons of war s'ring to &ind as an obvious case in 'oint. /%& not saying that all the scientists who work on wea'ons are faithless, Sust suggesting that their faith is not a driving force behind their work. But take a look at so&e things that were a result of faith9 &ost of the great architecture, art, and &usic throughout history" ?e%d be &uch 'oorer without the $istine 4ha'el, The :ast $u''er, or Bach%s )esu, )oy of Man%s esiring. 3&erica was built on the Protestant work ethic, and the revolution that created the 6nited $tates is based u'on the recognition of *od2given rights. Most charities serving the 'oor and hel'less are religious organi.ations, which function far &ore efficiently than govern&ent welfare 'rogra&s. 5ven the &ost hard2line e&'iricist cannot avoid recogni.ing the results of faith. The reason faith in *od works is that when 'eo'le believe they have a 'ur'ose to their lives, they get things acco&'lished that they otherwise wouldn%t. The beliefs ,&e&es- you ha''en to hold at any given ti&e 'rogra& your &ind to work in certain ways, &uch as loading a 'rogra& into a co&'uter causes it to 'erfor& certain tasks. /f you 'rogra& yourself with the belief that life is &eaningless and rando&, you are likely to live a &eaningless and rando& life. /f, on the other hand, you 'rogra&

yourself with the belief that there is a 'ur'ose to your life, you will tend to acco&'lish that 'ur'ose. The self2fulfilling strategy2&e&e of having a 'ur'ose to life is one key to why religion works. #ow, if you obSect to swallowing a volu&e of fairy tales Sust for the sake of having a &ore fulfilling e+istence, / don%t really bla&e you. But don%t labor under the assu&'tion that your current 'icture of the way the world works is accurate either. ?e all live with a certain a&ount of delusion and self2deceitH &aybe it%s Sust a &atter of consciously 'icking the right set of delusions to 'oint us in the direction we want to go.

U4urrent religious history 'laces the invention of the hell &e&e with the )ews under !o&an o''ression. /t was not then tied to evangelis&H it was thought to be an e+'lanation of why *od would let the 4hosen have it so &uch worse off than the *entilesthe !o&ans &ight have it good right now, but there would be hell to 'ay later. 1ell is only a &inor 'art of )ewish dog&a. /t really caught on with the 4hristians when, co&bined with the evangelis& strategy2&e&e, it beca&e i&'erative to s'read 4hristianity and thus $ave the unbelievers. U;ou have to believe before you can eat9 feasts are for Baha%is only. UThere%s even a fellow who travels the world lecturing about how the theory of the origin of s'ecies through evolution couldn%t 'ossibly be truesort of religious disinfor&ation" / watched one of his lectures on television, enSoying the challenge of finding the holes in his logic. /t went so&ething like this9 :ook at all the beautiful colors of birds" There%s no scientific reason for the&" They%re Sust beautiful" 7bviously the work of *od" :ook at how co&'licated the eye is" 4ouldn%t have evolved" Must be the work of *od" The dinosaurs got wi'ed out for no a''arent reason" $cience can%t e+'lain it" :ooks like the work of *od to &e9 they 'robably got caught in the 8lood" ,/ su''ose they were too big to fit in #oah%s ark./f the logical holes in this argu&ent are not i&&ediately a''arent, and you enSoy scathing attacks on creationis&, read !ichard awkins%s The Blind ?atch&aker ,#orton, =ENM-.

413PT5! 5:5V5# 5$/*#5! V/!6$5$ ,17? T7 $T3!T 3 46:T The first &an who, having fenced in a 'iece of land, said, V This is &ine,% and found 'eo'le na_ve enough to believe hi&, that &an was the true founder of civil society. )ean2)acIues !ousseau Throughout history, there have always been those who would &ani'ulate others in order to gain se+, &oney, or 'ower. ?e have not yet 'ut that era behind us. The new science of &e&etics 'rovides e+traordinarily 'owerful tools for &ani'ulation9 designer viruses that, once unleashed, self2re'licate and channel 'eo'le%s lives toward so&e self2serving end. 6nlike cultural viruses, which si&'ly evolve to 'er'etuate the&selves, these Machiavellian designer viruses serve their creators% agendas. #ow, if / was the only one who knew about these, / &ight not write about the&. ?hy 'ut &ore tools in the hands of the bad guysT ?hy risk going down in history as the new MachiavelliT /%ve already had a few cautions fro& 'eo'le who fear what will ha''en when this technology beco&es well known. But the 'oint is, there are already designer &ind viruses out there. Telling the whole world about how they work is &y atte&'t to level the 'laying field. /n the sa&e way you%d warn an innocent young virgin about a slick suitor with a 'hilandering re'utation, / feel co&'elled to e+'ose the hidden workings of designer viruses. My intent is to hel' 'eo'le kee' the&selves fro& being taken advantage of, fro& being unwittingly 'rogra&&ed by designer2virus &e&es. The &e&es we%re 'rogra&&ed with drive our behavior. That%s why &ind viruses are so scary and 'owerful. /f it were only a &atter of getting infected with so&e silly &e&e like The &oon is &ade of green cheese and going ahead and living a rich, full life with that &istaken knowledge, it wouldn%t be a big deal. 3fter all, if you ever got to the &oon, you%d find out it wasn%t &ade of green cheese and say, 7h, isn%t that interesting. #o biggie. But our &e&es drive our behavior, and when &ind viruses infect us with &e&es that cause us to act in ways that derail us fro& our 'ursuit of ha''iness, we have a 'roble&. Virus of the Mind is an urgent atte&'t to alert 'eo'le to that danger. /n this cha'ter, /%ll e+'lore what life will be like in the new era of designer viruses, e+a&ine the ingredients that go into their design, and s'eculate on a few that &ay already be with us. Viruses of the 8uture /n the not2so2distant future, the bulk of our culture will be co&'osed of designer viruses. ?hyT Because now that we know how to design the&, we will. ?e will conIuer the conce'tual landsca'e as surely as we conIuered the wilderness. 3t first, designer viruses will co&'ete with cultural viruses for a share of our &inds. $oon the old cultural viruses will lose, because the natural selection with which they evolve is not as Iuick as the intelligence2directed creation of designer viruses. Those ways of thinking won%t be wi'ed out co&'letely, but &ore and &ore 'eo'le infected with old cultural viruses will be restricted to self2contained, inco&&unicado enclaves like the 3&ish. 3fter that battle, designer viruses will have to start co&'eting with each other, and increasingly so'histicated technology will be needed to create a winner in the &ind war. ?e will see co&'uter 'rogra&s doing so'histicated &e&etic &odeling to fine2tune the &e&es before launching. ?hat kinds of designer &ind viruses will we see in the futureT /t de'ends u'on the intentions and the skill of their creatorsand on the &e&es those creators are infected with" / would e+'ect to see &any 'rofit2&otivated viruses, &any 'ower2&otivated ones, and 'erha's a few &otivated by so&eone%s vision of a better future for hu&anity. Profit Viruses

Profit2&otivated designer viruses, &any of which are co&'letely legal and aboveboard today, have their shady origins in the crooked Pon.i sche&e. U 4harles Pon.i was an /talian i&&igrant who o'ened a business in Boston in =E=E called the $ecurities 5+change 4o&'any. 1e offered to re'ay 'eo'le%s invest&ents in E@ days with K@ 'ercent interest9 an invest&ent of ]=@ would bring ]=K in three &onths. 1is story was that he bought international 'ostal re'ly cou'ons in 5uro'e and, due to currency fluctuations, redee&ed the& in the 6nited $tates at a 'rofit. Peo'le started to get sus'icious when a news'a'er discovered that, with ]=K &illion invested in Pon.i%s fir& in eight &onths, only ]JG@ in 'ostal re'ly cou'ons had been soldin the entire world" Pon.i%s sche&e was si&'le9 as long as his base of investors ke't growing, he could 'ay off early investors with the cash 'u&'ed in by later ones. ?hen the news'a'er story broke and 'eo'le sto''ed investing, Pon.i was found to owe ]M &illion and have only ]O &illion in assets. The later investors were out of luck. The &ind virus in the Pon.i sche&e, though, had nothing to do with the sche&e itself. /t was the s'reading of the strategy2&e&e /nvest with Pon.i. Bundled with 'owerful button2'ushing window of o''ortunity and reward &e&esa *et rich Iuick &e&ePon.i%s sche&e attracted so &uch attention that it s'read Iuickly throughout the general 'ublic in Massachusetts and neighboring states. Pon.i%s e+'loits were fraudulent on the face of it9 he was lying to 'eo'le about what they were investing in. But the related 'yra&id sche&e had no reIuire&ent to lie to investorsits &e&es worked with co&'lete honesty. /n a ty'ical 'yra&id sche&e, there is an organi.ational chart in the sha'e of a triangle, with one na&e at the to'H two na&es on the level beneath thatH two na&es beneath each of those two, for a total of four on the ne+t lineH and twice that, for eight, on the last line. The 'layer whose na&e is at the to' of the chart holds a 'yra&id 'arty for new recruits. The botto& row, with eight s'aces, is blank, and the host is ho'ing to fill the&. Players are recruited to buy &e&bershi's for, say, ]=,@@@. 7f that fee, ]K@@ goes to the 'erson at the to' of the 'yra&id and ]K@@ goes to the na&e in the row of four directly above the new 'layer%s. ;ou recou' your invest&ent Iuickly, si&'ly by recruiting two new 'layers. ?hen all eight s'aces are filled, the host, who recou'ed his ]=,@@@ long ago when he was in the row of four, retires with a 'rofit of ]O,@@@. The 'yra&id then s'lits in two, with the two 'layers in the row of two each beco&ing hosts eligible to &ake ]O,@@@. $uch a deal" Pyra&id sche&es rely on the sa&e button2'ushing &e&es that the Pon.i sche&e does and add in the 'owerful force of evangelis&. $ince infected 'eo'le have a stake in enrolling new 'layers in the 'yra&id virus, the illusion of reward doesn%t need to be as great as with the Pon.i sche&e. !ather than si&'ly attracting new investors, there is now an ar&y of recruiters intentionally infecting 'eo'le with the 'yra&id virus. 3lthough the 'yra&id virus%s s'reading &echanis& is different fro& the Pon.i sche&e%s, the two institutions fall a'art for the sa&e reason. e'endent on e+'onential growth, they Iuickly e+haust the su''ly of 'layers. The initiator of the 'yra&id needs to enroll only =O 'eo'le to &ake his ]O,@@@H after ten 'yra&id s'littings, new recruits to the row of eight would need to enroll =O,JJG new 'layers, for a total invest&ent of ]=O,JJG,@@@, in order for all of the& to cash out. ?hen you saw 'rofit viruses, did you i&&ediately think of 3&wayT 3&way is the &ost successful of the currently 'roliferating 'rofit viruses known as &ultilevel &arketing ,M:M-. Multilevel &arketing is distinct fro& a 'yra&id sche&e and is legal. /nstead of selling &e&bershi's that have no value e+ce't that they give you the right to sell &ore &e&bershi's, M:M creates a 'yra&id2sha'ed network of distributors of an actual

'roduct. 6'line distributors receive a 'ercentage of the sales fro& the downline distributors who& they recruited. 8or an honest M:M business to work, the &e&bers% rewards should be based on their success both at selling the 'roduct and at recruiting new &e&bers. :arge 'rofits go to the relatively few 'eo'le who, through 'ersistence and good sales&anshi', build a large and successful organi.ation underneath the&. Their financial reward co&es at the e+'ense of &any 'eo'le who Soin, e+'end so&e energy, and decide it%s not for the&. /t%s a business of eIual o''ortunity and survival of the fittest" /n so&e ways, you could look u'on M:M as &orally su'erior to traditional businesses with relatively unchanging organi.ational structures. /n traditional co&'anies, those at the to' tend to stay there, &aking large 'rofits at the e+'ense of low2level e&'loyees with relatively little o''ortunity for advance&ent. Multilevel &arketing is the business of the future. 3s broadcast &edia and the co&'etition for the consu&er%s &ind beco&e costlier, noisier, and &ore crowded, the o''ortunity to sell directly and chea'ly through a &ultilevel network grows &ore and &ore attractive.

3 'yra&id sche&e, like this one, is an e+a&'le of a 'rofit virus. The key to a successful 'rofit virus is having an incentive to evangeli.e or enroll new 'eo'le. 3 few years ago, the M4/ tele'hone co&'any introduced a hugely successful 'rofit virus called M4/ 8riends < 8a&ily. $ubscribers got the largest discount on 'hone calls to their friends and fa&ily, but only if they enrolled the& in the 'rogra&. Brilliant" ?ith a s&all burst of advertising to seed the 'rogra&, it had the 'otential to take off on its own. The M4/ 8riends < 8a&ily 'rogra& ran into trouble because of 3T<T%s belated res'onse. The tele'hone giant s'ent what &ust have a&ounted to tens of &illions of dollars blanketing the airwaves with anti2M4/ ads. These ads created negative association2&e&es with M4/%s 'rogra& and 'ro&oted 3T<T%s deal, which gave you discounts whether or not you enrolled 'eo'le. /n res'onse to 3T<T%s ca&'aign, M4/ had to look in a new direction. /f they had understood &e&etics, though, they &ight have decided to stick it out or even add better &e&es to the 8riends < 8a&ily 'rogra&. ;ou see, 3T<T would have needed to kee' advertising forever to counter M4/%s self2'er'etuating 'rofit virus. ?hile 3T<T &ay even have had a better deal, they did not do as M4/ did and harness the e+'onential force of self2re'lication, the &ost 'owerful force in the universe. Power Viruses $o&eone once said a cult is a religion that hasn%t caught on with enough 'eo'le yet. / disagree with that definition, but not in the way you &ight think9 / don%t think a cult has to be a religion at all. There are two key ele&ents necessary for a cult9 =. 5ach individual co&&its to so&e &ission or higher 'ur'ose not chosen through

'ersonal, conscious reflection. >. There are serious conseIuences attached to leaving. These two &e&esco&&it&ent to &ission and conseIuences of leavingare sufficient to harness 'eo'le%s lives and labors in a cult. ?hen co&bined with so&e for& of evangelis&, a 'owerful &ind virus is created, a 'ower virus that s'reads auto&atically as far as it can throughout the 'o'ulation. 3 cult is a kind of 'ower virus. The whole 'oint of the thing is to give 'ower, in the for& of access to &oney, se+, andLor 'eo'le%s energy, to the cult leader. ?hen cult &e&bers devote their life energies to a 'ur'ose outside the&selves, that gives 'ower to whatever the e+ternal 'ur'ose is. The word cult is usually reserved for organi.ations considered evil or har&ful by the &asses, but the workings of 'ower viruses are identical whether the 'ur'ose of the organi.ation is &oral, i&&oral, or a&oral. 4ults ty'ically have a &ission that they say they%re working toward'erha's a holy &ission. Me&bers are conditioned to believe this &ission is the &ost i&'ortant use of their lives, and they should be willing to sacrifice everything else for the higher 'ur'ose. 7nce that &e&e gets 'rogra&&ed in, they%re effectively enslaved. /f you%re currently dedicating your life to a &ission or higher 'ur'ose, / would suggest you reconsider your dedication based on three tests9 =. /f you were asked, ?hat is the &ost i&'ortant use of your lifeT would your answer be that &issionT >. oes evidence show that your 'artici'ation with this grou' is really the &ost effective way to fulfill this &issionT J. o you have a 'ersonal sense of fulfill&ent fro& your day2to2day 'artici'ation with this grou'T /f your answer is no to any of those Iuestions, what the heck are you doing thereT /f you found the Iuestions difficult to answer, /%d say you%re in great sha'e. /f it was easy for you to answer yes to all three Iuestions i&&ediately, you%ve al&ost certainly been 'rogra&&ed, and you should at the very least take a break fro& what you%re doing and go s&ell the fresh air for a while. 5ver2growing &egacor'orations are 'ower viruses, and they are beginning to use designer2virus techniIues to grow &ore and &ore 'owerful. /n a free2&arket econo&y, it%s not sur'rising to find cor'orations &aking better and better use of &e&es to further their econo&ic ends. :ike all &e&e evolution, this can ha''en without any conscious intention. The co&'anies that try out strategies that effectively harness &e&es si&'ly do better and get co'ied by others. /t has beco&e 'o'ular in cor'orate 3&erica for co&'anies to design &ission state&ents and ask or reIuire e&'loyees to subscribe to the&. These are ty'ically straightforward and nonthreatening bundles of cor'orate values such as co&&it&ent to Iuality and devotion to custo&er service. ?hat%s the 'ur'ose of a &ission state&entT /t%s to get everybody 'ointing in the sa&e

direction so each e&'loyee%s work builds on the others%. ?ithout that align&ent, 'eo'le tend to work &ore at cross2'ur'osesH they &ay find their efforts cancel one another other out rather than add u' to so&ething significant. The idea of aligning 'eo'le%s intentions is so successful that a whole econo&y has s'rung u' around cor'orate training se&inars designed to do Sust that. ?hen does this cor'orate training cease to be training, though, and begin to be conditioning, 'rogra&&ing, brainwashingT ?hen you%re i&&ersed in such a culture, be it a cult or a cor'oration, it%s difficult to discern whether the grou'%s &ission is really the best use of your life. /s itT /t%s a good Iuestion to be asking yourself consciously. 3nother &e&e2harnessing strategy used by cor'orations is called golden handcuffs. The gold these handcuffs are &ade of is a financial reward, usually in the for& of stock o'tions, that is tied to the e&'loyee%s long2ter& 'artici'ation with the co&'any. *olden handcuffs are nothing &ore than the conseIuences of leaving &e&e, the sa&e one used by cults to kee' 'eo'le in line. 3nother &ethod of bonding 'eo'le to an organi.ation is the cognitive2dissonance effect of the initiation ordeal. By 'utting 'eo'le through a trial by ordeal such as a fraternity ha.ing, one of two things occur9 either the initiate leaves rather than endure the 'ain, or a &e&e re'resenting the value of belonging to the organi.ation is created or reinforced in the initiate%s &ind. 3fter being initiated, &e&bers of a fraternity feel a bond to the organi.ation and an irrational sense of value in belonging, a sense they wouldn%t feel as strongly if they hadn%t had to go through the ordeal to get there. ?hile cor'orations rarely use ha.ing, in &any 'rofessions there is the conce't of 'aying your dues, going through a 'eriod of ti&e where your duties are so&ewhat un'leasant and difficult before &oving on to a &ore enSoyable 'osition. This effectively brainwashes you into believing that your current Sob is &ore valuable than you would otherwise think. ;outh gangs ty'ically have initiations involving co&&itting a serious cri&e. These serve a dual 'ur'ose9 the 'rogra&&ing or brainwashing effect of cognitive dissonance, and the assurance that the initiate has bought into the lawlessness of the gang culture. / used to watch a lot of television. / don%t any&ore, but one of &y favorite shows was an e'isode of 8a&ily Ties in which 3le+, the teenage archconservative, falls in love with a girl who%s a liberal activist. /n order to get close to her, he attends &eetings of her organi.ation and even goes so far as to 're'are a s'eech arguing against everything he 'reviously stood for. ?hile 3le+ eventually ca&e clean and told her the truth before it was too late, / wonder how &any of us start down the 'ath of our 'olitical beliefs for si&ilar reasonsT Beliefs are like cow 'aths. The &ore often you walk down a 'ath, the &ore it looks like the right way to go. 3fter a few years of thinking liberal thoughts and &aking decisions based on the&'oof" ;ou%re a liberal" /t%s &uch &ore difficult and energy2consu&ing to start fro& scratch on every issue and really think it through than to atte&'t to be consistent with a 'articular set of beliefs. This is where !al'h ?aldo 5&erson co&es in again, saying, 3 foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little &inds. / often sur'rise 'eo'le with what they 'erceive to be a lack of consistency in &y 'oints of view. *ood" /t &eans /%& staying off the cow 'aths" / wonder what would ha''en to so&eone like a 0ennedy or ole if they &agically got a''ointed to the $enate for life and no longer had to be &outh'ieces for the :eft or !ight. /t%s not so farfetched, actually. There have been any nu&ber of $u're&e 4ourt Sustices who have sur'rised everyone by voting &ore liberally or conservatively than their Presidential a''ointer had 'resu&ably ho'ed, once they got their lifeti&e 'osition. Their barriers to leaving their ideologies were re&oved, and they were free to think for

the&selves. ?hen you get 'eo'le to co&&it to a belief syste& and 'ut u' barriers to kee' the& fro& changing their &inds, you%ve effectively harnessed their lives and energies. 3dd evangelis& and you%ve created a self2s'reading 'ower virus, using u' 'eo'le%s lives to achieve so&e end. 3lign&ent of 'ur'ose is not necessarily a bad thingSust &ake sure the 'ur'ose is one that you consciously subscribe to, that%s honestly acco&'lishing what it says it is, and that%s 'ersonally fulfilling. Microsoft, where / worked for a long ti&e, had a clear &ission fro& the beginning, one voiced by the co&'any%s co2founder, visionary genius Bill *ates9 a co&'uter on every deskto', and Microsoft software on every co&'uter. Beneath this &aSor &ission were a bundle of values U shared by everyone in the co&'any9 technical e+cellence, intolerance of shoddiness, highest Iuality, and above all, being nu&ber one. / wouldn%t bet against the&. Virus $hells /f you really want to start a cult or so&e other virus of the &ind, you now know everything you need to do it. )ust find so&e attractive &e&es to suck 'eo'le in and 'rogra& the& to do your bidding, including evangeli.ing the cult to others. But watch out" /t%s the virus of the &ind that really has the 'ower, not you. !e&e&ber )i& )ones and avid 0oresh. /t%s interesting that once you have the shell of a successful &ind virus set u', you can Sust 'lug in any agenda you have as long as it doesn%t interfere with the virus%s 'ri&ary function of self2re'lication. There are &any e+a&'les of such virus shells in &odern life9 Political ca&'aign organi.ations. These often use the sa&e basic for&ula9 renting a vacant shell of office s'ace, calling 'eo'le and asking the& to volunteer, and then having those volunteers call still &ore volunteers. The volunteers self2re'licate, and you can 'lug in literally any 'olitical agenda. Multilevel &arketing co&'anies, as described earlier in the cha'ter. The 'roduct sold is really secondary to the structure of the business. 7f course, you need to have a real 'roduct to &ake it legal, but it%s effectively 'rogra&&ing &e&bers to recruit &ore &e&bers that &akes it work. ?ord2of2&outh se&inar series. Partici'ants attend a several2day, intensive se&inar that leaves the& feeling very good. Mi+ed in with the course content is the use of conditioning, cognitive2dissonance, and TroSan2horse techniIues that 'rogra& 'eo'le to do two things9 recruit new 'artici'ants for the ne+t offering of the classH and sign u' for the ne+t, &ore e+'ensive se&inar in the series. U The co&&on thread in all &ind2virus shells is evangelis&. irectly or indirectly, you%ve got to recruit &e&bers who recruit &ore &e&bers who recruit still &ore &e&bers. ?hen you%ve got a good virus shell, you can 'lug in your agenda, cross your fingers, and ho'e it doesn%t &utate to co&e back and getcha. Ruality2of2:ife Viruses /n a future where &ind viruses 'roliferate, the kinds / 'ersonally want to see win are viruses that raise 'eo'le%s Iuality of life. The way to &ake such viruses win is twofold9

=. 5vangeli.e, evangeli.e, evangeli.e" ?hen you co&e across &e&es you like, s'read the& consciously" $ilence is death to &e&es. >. Make a 'oint of tying together all the button2'ushing &e&es you can with the &e&es that raise Iuality of life. Point out how they hel' our children" !e&ind 'eo'le this is a crisis" $erve the& food" 7ffer the& se+" ?ell, whatever. But co&'lacency is defeat in the world of &ind virusesyou%re co&'eting with all these self2re'licating &e&es designed to take us back to 'rehistoric ti&es. /s all this evangelis& and button 'ushing /%& 'ro&oting too Machiavellian for your tasteT oes it sound hy'ocritical, like /%& advocating &ani'ulating 'eo'le to save the& fro& being &ani'ulatedT / ho'e not. / don%t want you to lie, Sust to understand the effect you have on the world by s'reading &e&es. ?e%re all 'artici'ating in &ind viruses all the ti&e. / want you to choose which ones you s'read consciously, with an eye toward what%s &ost i&'ortant to you. )a&es !edfield%s best2selling The 4elestine Pro'hecy is an effective &ind virus. /t%s a fictional account of the author%s discovery of an ancient &anuscri'tone that 'ur'orts to contain a 'rescri'tion for a rosy future for hu&anity. #ow / don%t know if !edfield did this intentionally or not, or if he%s even aware of it, but he 'ut a &ind virus in that booka good one" /%ll tell you e+actly how it works. 7ne of the lessons of the 4elestine &anuscri't is that there are no coincidences. 3ll see&ing coincidences are actually o''ortunities for growth. /n 'articular, when you find so&ething coincidental about 'eo'le, you have a duty to talk with the& until you find out what the lesson is that either they have for you or you have for the&. Peo'le who read The 4elestine Pro'hecy absorb that &e&e and start looking for such o''ortunities. #aturally, that often turns into a reco&&endation to read the bookto evangeli.e it" Presto" 3 &ind virus is born. 7ne as'ect of !edfield%s advice is actually terrific and touches on the &ain advice / give in this book9 Take any o''ortunity to s'read the &e&es you want to have out there. /%& not a 'articular fan of all of the &e&es in that book, but whenever the subSect of The 4elestine Pro'hecy co&es u', / sure turn it into an o''ortunity to tell 'eo'le about &e&etics. That%s really interesting, / say. id you know there%s a virus of the &ind in that bookT 3nd / go on to have a lively discussion about &ind viruses. 7ne Iuality2of2life virus known to be created intentionallya designer virusis The 1unger ProSect. 3 s'in2off of ?erner 5rhard%s 'ersonal2growth grou's est and The 8oru& ,evangelistic designer viruses the&selves-, it &akes no 'retense of doing anything other than s'reading its own &e&es. 3ll The 1unger ProSect does is educate 'eo'le that there is a 'roble& with world hunger and ask the& to co&&it to ending it. The grou' buys no food, sends no &oney to the 'oor, 'lants no riceall they do is hold se&inars at which they enroll 'eo'le in the 'roSect and raise &oney to enroll &ore 'eo'le. /t &ight at first glance see& that this is a useless 'ursuit. But don%t underesti&ate the effects of s'reading &e&es. The effect of enrolling several &illion 'eo'le in a co&&it&ent to end world hunger &ay be substantialthey &ay go off on their own and cause so&ething to ha''en out of that co&&it&ent. They%re certainly &ore likely to do so than if they had not &ade the co&&it&ent. /n any case, this designer virus has been successful thus far Sudged solely on its ability to re'licate9 &illions of 'eo'le have gone to a 1unger ProSect event since its ince'tion. 5nding world hunger is a worthy end, but /%& willing to be even &ore a&bitious. 1ow about a designer virus that disinfects 'eo'le fro& &ind viruses and ins'ires the& to live

the &ost fulfilling life 'ossibleT 1ow would you launch such a virusT 4ould you be sure that it wouldn%t &utate into so&ething undesirableT /n the ne+t cha'ter, / discuss the nature of disinfection.

U3n entertaining e+'loration of Pon.i%s original sche&e and several other interesting virus2like 'heno&ena a''ear in )ose'h Bulgat.%s book Pon.i $che&es, /nvaders fro& Mars, < More 5+traordinary Po'ular elusions and the Madness of 4rowds ,1ar&ony Books, =EE>-. U?orking at Microsoft worked well for &e for &any years because / shared those values 'ersonally. / like to be a kind of s'ecial agent who co&es in and saves the day. /n fact, with Microsoft%s fantastic success / felt like they were doing so well that they didn%t need &e any&ore. That loss of a sense of 'ur'ose contributed to &y losing interest in working there and finally taking the lea' to beco&ing a writer and teacher. Before / left, though, / considered Su&'ing on board their new consu&er division, a 'lace where the challenge of going fro& .ero to &arket leader once again &ateriali.ed. U on%t read this to &ean that all such se&inars are sca&s. / can say uneIuivocally that taking at least one se&inar series that uses this virus shell was one of the &ost valuable learning e+'eriences of &y life. 6nfortunately, /%ve also been acIuainted with a few that are genuine cults. My advice9 before you take one of these courses, ask the advice of so&eone you trust, who has a life you like, and who has not been involved with the organi.ation for at least three years.

413PT5! T?5:V5 /$/#854T/7# /f only he had used his genius for the forces of niceness . . . Ma+well $&art, the 'rotagonist in the TV show *et $&art $cientific revolutions often bring with the& 'rofound 'hiloso'hical Iuestions. The &e&etics revolution is no different. ?e can%t even talk about disinfecting ourselves and society fro& &ind viruses without bringing u' two very i&'ortant ethical Iuestions. 1ere%s the first9 /%ve na&ed this cha'ter disinfection, but given that our &inds are &ade u' of genetic hardware and &e&etic software, what does it even &ean to be disinfectedT 4ertainly not to wi'e out all of our &e&es" ?hat &e&es do you want to be 'rogra&&ed withT This is the classic 'hiloso'hical Iuestion9 1ow should / behaveT brought to a new level9 1ow should / 'rogra& &yselfT The second ethical Iuestion is one already being 'ondered by 'sychologists and #:P 'ractitioners. ?hat &e&es do you want to 'rogra& other 'eo'le withT ?hat &e&es should / s'readT The knowledge that you can actually have a huge i&'act on other 'eo'le through the &e&es you s'read carries with it a corres'ondingly huge res'onsibility. ?hat 4o&es #aturallyT Many 'eo'le%s i&&ediate reaction is not to want to think about these Iuestions. That%s so artificial, so&e say. /%ll Sust take what co&es naturally, s'eaks the gut feeling. 4arefulre&e&ber what that gut feeling serves" ;our gut feelings evolved to &a+i&i.e your #3%s chance of re'licating back in 'rehistoric ti&es. #ever thinking about these ethical Iuestions is, of course, one way to deal with the&. /f you do that, you%re leaving evolution in the hands of selfish &e&es, which evolve according to the tendencies we develo'ed in the $tone 3ge to su''ort our selfish genes. There%s absolutely no incentive for &e&e evolution to 'rovide for our ha''iness. /nfestations of &ind viruses that chain us to infor&ation ter&inals, frantically aiding the re'lication of infor&ation, &ay well take over if we don%t intervene. o you think it%s a far2fetched scenario of the future that hu&ans could beco&e slaves to a race of co&'utersT :ook inside any large office building and see how &any 'eo'le s'end eight hours a day following the instructions on their dis'lay screen to the 'oint of da&aging their vision and inSuring their hands fro& the strain. ?hat are &ost of the& doingT 5ntering, du'licating, correlating, and analy.ing infor&ation. Me&es. ?hen we aren%t working, we%re telling each other about the latest news, 'robably so&ething to do with danger, food, or se+. Me&es. #o, &e&es aren%t auto&atically going to evolve to benefit our survival, let alone our ha''iness. Me&e evolution is on a co&'letely different ti&escale fro& genetic evolutiona &uch, &uch faster one. ?e have no choice but to confront it or let it rule our lives. /f we want to direct &e&e evolution in a way to benefit our s'ecies, life on 5arth, or anything, we%re going to have to take the bull by the horns. Punting on these two ethical Iuestionsad&itting defeatSust kee's the infection going. ?e can either give u' on the ho'e of having a fulfilling life and a better world or consciously choose which &e&es to 'rogra& ourselves with and which we want to s'read. 7f course, &any 'eo'le do 'unt on these ethical IuestionsH &ost aren%t even aware of the&. Thoreau said, The &ass of &en lead lives of Iuiet des'eration. ?hyT /t doesn%t see& to &ake senseas beer drinkers know, we only go around once in life, so why don%t we grab all the gusto we canT Because it really feels like you have to follow these 'rogra&s that have been stuck into your head by &ind viruses" 6ntil you break free, it%s tough to reali.e that life can be different, that you%re allowed to figure out what%s &ost i&'ortant in your own eyes and

devote your life to that. 4uring this infection, both in ourselves and in others, is going to take a conscious effort. /t won%t ha''en auto&atically. /f we Sust kick back and watch TV, we will 'robably not evolve in a way that you or / will a''rove of. The future of our world will not look good. 5ven if you and / cure ourselves, unless we act to s'read the cure to others, we and our children will end u' living in a world where 'eo'le are living less and less &eaningful lives. They will devote &ore and &ore of their lives to being the unknowing slaves of &ind viruses. ?e%ve got to act now. Think about your 'ersonal answers to the two 'receding ethical Iuestions. Try so&e of the ideas in the rest of this cha'ter to disinfect yourself. /f it calls to you, be the new cha&'ion of childhood education, and we can begin to teach children how to guard the&selves fro& infection. /&agine what creativity and contribution would be 'ossible in the world if children grew u' able to &ake the &ost of life%s o''ortunities" /n this cha'ter, /%ll start by discussing the first ethical Iuestion9 ?hat &e&es should / 'rogra& &yself withT Then /%ll outline so&e &ethods for recogni.ing your current 'rogra&&ing so that you can break free of the &ind2virus infections you currently have. 8inally, /%ll o'en the Iuestion of what &e&es we &ight want to 'ut out into society, and es'ecially to the ne+t generation of children. The Ruest for Truth ?hat &e&es should you 'rogra& yourself with, now that you have the chanceT The second2&ost2'o'ular answer ,after 'unting- is9 ?ith the truth. /t%s hard to see how there could be any 'roble& with 'rogra&&ing yourself with &e&es that are true. But re&e&ber 3lfred #orth ?hitehead9 all truths are half2truths. There are several 'roble&s with the strategy2&e&e Progra& &yself with the truth. /n the first 'lace, you can%t ever know the whole truth of the universe. ;our brain doesn%t have enough storage ca'acity to accurately &odel the entire universe. The best you can do is co&e u' with so&e si&'lified &odels that work &ost of the ti&e. To 'ara'hrase ?hitehead, it%s believing these &odels are true that 'lays the devil" /n the second 'lace, it%s often distracting and ti&e2consu&ing to find the truth 'ast a certain 'oint. The use of instant re'lay in 3&erica%s #ational 8ootball :eague ,#8:- is a 'erfect e+a&'le. !ecogni.ing that even the best officials &ade &istakes, the #8: owners decided a few years ago to have an additional official watch the ga&e on television. /n the case of a Iuestionable call, he would sto' the ga&e, view re'lays, and 'ossibly overturn the field official%s decision. The re'lay official, having an o''ortunity to view the 'lay slowly and fro& different angles, would have a better chance to &ake a correct callto know the truth" /n =EEK, #8: owners voted to end their e+'eri&ent with instant re'lay. They decided that sto''ing the ga&e and interru'ting the fans% enSoy&ent wasn%t worth the additional truth they got fro& the 'rocess. They saw the trade2off between enSoying life and knowing the truth and decided in favor of enSoy&ent. They have since resu&ed the use of re'lays on a &uch &ore li&ited basis. Peo'le 'rogra&&ed with the Iuest for truth &e&e often s'end ti&e analy.ing 'ast events, trying to figure out who was right, who was wrong, what 'eo'le%s true intentions were, and so on. :ike sto''ing the football ga&e for instant re'lays, sto''ing to figure out the truth all the ti&e can distract fro& your enSoy&ent of life. 8inally, the truth is always based on so&e set of assu&'tions&e&es. 6ntil you%ve really &a''ed out your &e&etic 'rogra&&ing, you%re not aware that you even have these underlying &e&es &aking certain things look true. /n &y e+'erience, the &ore you understand your own &e&etic 'rogra&&ing, the less anything in life looks like the 3bsolute Truth. $o, besides what co&es naturally and the truth as &eta2strategies for 'rogra&&ing yourself, what else is thereT

$erving ;our #3 ;ou could devote your life to the re'lication of your #3. This has never been an attractive o'tion to &e, but you could &ake $erve &y genes your &e&e2 'rogra&&ing strategy. 8or wo&en, this would &ean having as &any babies as you could su''ort, which in &ost civili.ed countries &eans as &any as you could 'hysically bear. 8or &en, it &eans i&'regnate, i&'regnate, i&'regnate" Throw out those condo&s" *et out your ;ellow Pages and start dialing u' s'er& banks" Travel a lot, and secretly have three or four fa&ilies in different 'laces" That is, if you%re really serious about serving your #3. But why serve only the #3 in your own bodyT ?hy not serve all hu&an #3T 7r, for that &atter, all ani&als, all insects, all bacteria, allvirusesT /f you%re going to serve your #3, re&e&ber9 what co&es naturally no longer works. ;ou%re going to have to think. /t &ay not always be what feels the best. ;ou%re going to need to be conscious of having that 'ur'ose for your life and 'rogra& yourself for it. But if you%re going to 'ick a life 'ur'ose, serving #3 see&s like a silly one to &e. 3 :ife Pur'ose The 'eo'le /%ve &et who see& to be getting the &ost out of life are those who have so&e kind of life 'ur'ose. #ow, there are an infinite variety of life 'ur'osesH and in fact there are 'lenty of cults, cor'orations, and other &ind viruses ha''y to give you one that serves their own 'ur'oses. / would suggest you select a higher 'ur'ose for yourself that &a+i&i.es your fulfill&ent and enSoy&ent in life. Psychologists and 'sychiatrists such as 3braha& Maslow and Viktor 8rankl have noticed that when 'eo'le are willing or forced to sto' worrying about such issues as their own survival and i&&inent crises, they have another set of drives, referred to alternately as higher 'ur'ose, calling, or self2actuali.ation. ?here did these drives co&e fro&T Peo'le will s'lit over two 'ossible answers to that Iuestion. $o&e will say they co&e fro& *od. 7thers will believe these higher drives are Sust there in our brains as artifacts of evolutionklugy side effects of #3 that in so&e other way su''ort their own re'lication. 8ortunately, either 'oint of view works eIually well to continue e+'loring how they relate to &e&es. These drives see& to be even &ore varied a&ong different individuals than the second2 order buttons described in 4ha'ter K. 1el'ing 'eo'le find their calling or 'ur'ose in life is e+tre&ely rewarding for &e and is one of the goals of &y first book, *etting Past 70, and of &y ;our :ife%s ?ork se&inar. These drives constitute what so&e 'eo'le call s'iritualityH they are by definition drives to live life in the way that each individual would consider the best use of his or her ti&e on 5arth. ?hen they have the 'resence of &ind to see beyond the day2to2day hassles of life, 'eo'le hunger dee'ly to fulfill whatever is their own 'ersonal life 'ur'ose. Mind viruses leech our lives away fro& that 'ur'ose. Most of us are unwittingly infested by these unwanted 'arasites on our lives. :et%s find the& and e+ter&inate the& so we can &ake the &ost of our lives. ^en and the 3rt of evirusing 3lthough ^en &asters never heard of the word &e&e, beco&ing aware of the &e&es that 'rogra& one is the essence of the ^en disci'line. There is incredible value in learning how to free yourself fro& the 'rison of thoughts and &ind 'rogra&s anyti&e you want to. ^en 'ractitioners &editate and 'onder riddle2lessons called koans in an effort to retrain their &inds to do Sust that. They learn to take in e+actly what their senses 'erceive and to dissolve the artificial distinction2&e&es of hu&an ideas and conce'ts. 3s any adherent of ^en would tell you, it%s al&ost i&'ossible to even understand what this &eans unless you%ve actually done it. U

$uccessfully 'racticing ^en is said to 'roduce an e+traordinary feeling of 'eace and clarity. /t would see& to be one &ethod of curing yourself of &ind viruses, if you%re willing to s'end >@ years 'racticing ,or if you%re in a hurry, as one ^en story goes, J@ years-. 1owever, ^en is not an answer in itself to the Iuestion of how to &ake the &ost of your life. 3nd the devirusing results a''ly only to the individual who s'ends decades following the disci'line, not to society as a whole, and you still have to live there. /t%s no wonder that so &any stories of ^en &onks end with the& &oving to the to' of a &ountain or under a bridge to s'end the rest of their days in solitude. 7nce you clear your &ind, it%s easy to for& the o'inion that the rest of the world is running around ai&lessly like headless chickens. /f you%re wondering whether 'racticing ^en or si&'ly beco&ing &ore aware of your thoughts would benefit you, here%s an easy test9 4an you easily turn off your internal conversation and Sust beT Try 'utting this book aside and not thinking any thoughts for the ne+t &inute. o it now. /f you had difficulty doing thatif you ke't talking to yourself inside your head, or thoughts ke't cree'ing in and distracting you fro& si&'ly 'erceiving the world around you at the 'resent &o&entchances are you%d gain a valuable skill by 'racticing noticing your thoughts. #e+t ti&e you%re bored and te&'ted to turn on the TV, try this instead, a non&ystical &editation techniIue that /%ve found useful9 )ust get co&fortable and clear your &ind of any thoughts. /f they do cree' in, don%t react to the&H Sust notice the& and let the& go. $ee if you can go for five full &inutes, and then observe how you feel. /f you learn to turn off your internal dialogue, you%ve &ade the first big ste' toward freeing yourself fro& the tyranny of &ind viruses. ?hile you still &ay not fully reali.e which 'rogra&s you%re running because they su''ort your 'ur'ose in life, and which you%re running because you got infected with a virus of the &ind, at least you know how to turn the& off at will. 8urther, when you Iuiet your &ind, you can &ake far better use of your intuition, which will lead you out of ruts and into 'laces you &ay not have reali.ed you wanted to go. The ^en disci'line goes beyond learning how to turn off your inner dialogue. The ^en student goes through life looking at events fro& a series of different 'ers'ectives given to her by her &aster in the for& of koans. By looking at life fro& these different 'ers'ectives, the student eventually reali.es that &any of the beliefs she had taken for granted about the nature of reality were si&'ly fig&ents of her i&agination. T his 'rocess, ^en adherents believe, eventually results in the dissolving of all artificial beliefs and an understanding of the world at a new level. ?hile / haven%t s'ent >@ years in a ^en &onastery, it%s fair to say that &ost of the &aSor growth and learning /%ve e+'erienced as an adult has been a result of looking at things fro& different 'ers'ectives and finding out / was wrong about one 'igheaded belief or another. 3t that 'oint, 'eo'le co&e crawling out of the woodwork to 'at &e on the back and say how ha''y they are to see the change in &e. ?hy didn%t you tell &e about this beforeT / ask. ?e tried, co&es the chorus of re'lies. 7ne useful way to try out fle+ing your 'oint of view is to take advantage of any disagree&ent you have with anyone. /nstead of trying to win the argu&ent or backing off fro& the conflict, try as hard as you can to see things fro& the other 'erson%s 'oint of view. ;ou%ll know you%ve succeeded when the 'erson you were arguing with says, ;es" That%s e+actly what / &eant" /n fact, you &ay even find that all the other 'erson wanted was to be understood. 7nce you learn that new 'oint of view, over the ne+t several days try using it a few ti&es to look at situations that co&e u'. $ee how it feels. 5ven if you don%t end u'

ado'ting it as your own belief, at least you%ll understand how so&e other 'eo'le react to things differently fro& you. That understanding will be valuable to you no &atter what you want to do with your life. Most 'eo'le are so full of &ind viruses, of e+ternally acIuired &ental 'rogra&&ing, that they don%t s'end &uch of their ti&e and energy 'ursuing what they want in life. /n fact, it%s 'robably fair to say &ost 'eo'le aren%t even very clear about what they want in life. #oticing your thoughts and fle+ing your 'oint of view are the best tools / know for understanding the difference between who you are and how you%ve been 'rogra&&ed. Try ityou%ll like it" The :earning Pyra&id Mind viruses take advantage of 'eo'le%s learning styles, or heuristics. By advancing the way you learn fro& the survival2and2re'roduction heuristic you were born with, you can effectively i&&uni.e yourself against &ind viruses. ;ou go through different levels of learning heuristics in your life, each building u'on the 'revious in a kind of 'yra&id. $te''ing fro& one level of the 'yra&id to the ne+t reIuires not Sust learning a different subSect, but Su&'ing to a whole new &anner of learning, and in fact a whole new way of looking at the world. Peo'le outgrow their belief syste&s, like butterflies leaving the cocoon. 7bviously, outgrowing a belief syste& doesn%t &ean the beliefs were wrong or bad. There%s value in &astering one way of o'erating, getting so you can be that way with your eyes closed. ?e teach children about whole nu&bers and let the& &aster that world before we start talking about fractions or real nu&bers. That doesn%t &ean integers are bad. 7utgrowing your belief syste& is &ore a transcendence than a re'udiation. ;ou%ll still re&e&ber how to o'erate as you had before, but you%ll reali.e that there%s a bigger ga&e available to 'lay. 3s you%ll see, the 'ri.e of the :evel J ga&eliving a free, 'ur'oseful, fulfilling, and &eaningful lifeis si&'ly not available fro& :evels = or >. The first level of the 'yra&id is the genetic 'rogra&&ing you were born with. This level was learned for you throughout the course of evolutionH you don%t need to do anything other than wander through life to get its benefits. This level consists of the instinctual drives you and all ani&als havere&e&ber the four 8%sT This level lets you survive and re'roduce in the world of nature. Through attraction and revulsion, through hunger, anger, fear, and lust, it%s 'ossible to survive with no further learning. 3ll of traditional education, fro& nursery school through Ph. . thesis, is designed to &ake the transition out of :evel =. $o&e 'eo'le sto' here, never acIuiring the self2disci'line to &aster :evel >. :evel = 'eo'le lack foresight, self2disci'line, and integrity. They tend to live chaotic lives, unable to hold a Sob or kee' a relationshi' going. ?hile they &ay enSoy the &o&ents of life &ore than 'eo'le in :evel >, they do not live 'owerfully. /f the four 8%s re'resented :evel = of the learning 'yra&id, then the three !%s characteri.e :evel >. 3ll acade&ic subSects, acIuired skills, and fields of study &ake u' :evel >. !eading, %riting, and %rith&eticnot to &ention co&'uter 'rogra&&ing, 'olitical science, 'sychology, and religious doctrinebelong in this level. Most 'eo'le sto' here. /t takes so &uch work, so &uch ti&e and effort, to acIuire all the knowledge and beliefs that &ake u' a healthy :evel > that the task of transcending it all to &ake the Su&' to :evel J see&s not si&'ly difficult but ridiculous. Beyond that, 'eo'le who re&e&ber how &uch better life works in :evel > than it did in :evel = will be reluctant to give u' the co&fortable fra&ework of the belief syste& that got the& here. Peo'le who get stuck in :evel > feel like they%re in a rut or burned2out or that their lives lack &eaning. They beco&e resigned or cynical. 7ften they are the ones who live Thoreau%s lives of Iuiet des'eration. They &ay cling indefinitely to their religious beliefs, or to the

currently 'o'ular anti2religious belief that life lacks &eaning, ho'ing their faith in what they believe to be the 3bsolute Truth will eventually &ake things better. They &ay atte&'t to re'eat 'ast successes, go back to school, learn new subSects, or switch religions, but until they are willing to give u' their reliance on the Truth of their belief syste&s, in :evel > they will re&ain. 3t this 'oint, you &ay be wondering which level you%re in. 3gain, &ost 'eo'le are in :evel >. #o one co&es along and ta's you on the shoulder saying it%s ti&e to &ove u' to :evel J. /n fact, you will have tre&endous resistance to even considering that :evel J e+ists or, if you acknowledge that it does, that you%re not already in it. /f you%re living a life of Iuiet des'eration, you%re in :evel >. /f you often feel bored, un&otivated, confused, resentful, guilty, unworthy, 'owerless, or like life lacks &eaning, you%re in :evel >. /f you%re Sust doing what you%ve always done without thinking &uch about what you want out of life, you%re in :evel > or =. /%& now going to say so&ething about :evel J. /f you%re in :evel >, your first reaction will 'robably be to co&'are what / say to so&ething you already know and for& a conclusion about it. That is a :evel > learning strategy that doesn%t work in :evel J. / invite you to read with the 'ossibility in &ind that there%s so&ething here that%s different fro& what you already know, and Sust kind of sit with that awhile. :evel J is learning to look at life as so&ething to be created out of your 'ersonal 'rogra&&ing and 'ur'osethe two P%sT rather than as a &a.e of knowledge, beliefs, goals, and challenges to be run like a rat. /t%s co&'lete 'ersonal freedo&freedo& fro& societal 'ressures, freedo& fro& guilt, freedo& fro& &ind viruses. ,;ou know the trouble with the rat race, don%t youT 5ven if you win, you%re still a rat./n :evel J, you 'ick a 'ur'ose for your life and hold it as your highest 'riority. /f you co&&it strongly enough to this 'ur'ose, the cognitive dissonance created with old &e&es that don%t su''ort this 'ur'ose will result in so&e re'rogra&&ing. 3fter ti&e, you%ll find yourself beco&ing &ore and &ore effective at living your 'ur'ose. 3nd again, / would reco&&end 'icking a 'ur'ose that you find rewarding, &otivating, &eaningful, and altogether fulfilling. ;ou%ll enSoy life and be good at what you do. $'reading Me&es to 7thers /f the 'ur'ose you 'ick involves influencing the lives of other 'eo'le, you%ll want to take u' the second ethical Iuestion9 ?hat &e&es do you want to s'readT 3s with the first Iuestion, there are &any 'ossible answers to this one. 7ne 'o'ular 'hiloso'hy is :ive and let live. /%ve got &y beliefs, you%ve got yours, and that%s fine. This is an offshoot of the what co&es naturally strategy and as such, leaves evolution in the hands of selfish re'licators that don%t serve your Iuality of life. /t%s a very te&'ting 'osition to take, al&ost a &andatory 'osition for tolerant 'eo'le in a free country. But there%s a big difference between the govern&ent i&'osing totalitarian beliefs and individuals s'reading &e&es they consider i&'ortant. ?e%ve got to get over our distaste for evangelis& if we want to have a 'ositive i&'act on societyH otherwise, &ind viruses that &ake use of evangelis& will win the battle for 'eo'le%s &inds. $o, given that you can &ake a 'ositive difference in 'eo'le%s lives by intentionally s'reading &e&es, which &e&es will you s'readT / leave that u' to you. /t shouldn%t be hard for you, reading this book or *etting Past 70, to figure out that /%& in favor of 'eo'le having a clear and accurate 'icture of the world and enSoying life. ?hat kind of world would you like to live inT *o out and &ake it ha''en" !egardless of whether you think it ethical to influence other adults% beliefsto intentionally s'read &e&es to other 'eo'lefew would deny the value of influencing children%s beliefs, of educating the&. ?hat new insights does &e&etics give us about childhood educationT 4an we use &e&etics to kee' our kids fro& being har&fully infected by &ind viruses, or to disinfect the& once they areT

isinfecting 7ur 4hildren 7ne way to look at education is to see it as co'ying facts and ideas fro& the &inds of one generation to the &inds of the ne+t. 4o'ying &e&es. 3s such, education is subSect to all the sa&e invasions by viruses of the &ind that the rest of society is 'rone to, and even &ore, since it is so intent on co'ying as its 'ri&ary 'ur'ose. The tradition &e&e dies hard in education. /s it any wonder our grade2school syste& is essentially the sa&e structure invented by Plato &ore than >,@@@ years agoT /s it a sur'rise that we still give students three &onths off in the su&&er long after it has ceased to be a 'ractical reIuire&ent to tend the far&T 1ere%s &y favorite9 des'ite decades of knowing that listening to lectures is 'erha's the least effective way for 'eo'le to learn, is it a shock that we still conduct classes 'ri&arily that wayT /s co'ying ideas and facts really the 'ri&ary 'ur'ose of education, or should it beT !e&e&ber, without conscious effort on our 'arts, we tend to fall into the role of &ind slaves of &e&es, living our lives to 'er'etuate and s'read whatever &e&es are the &ost 'owerful. 4an we consciously choose a better 'ur'ose for education than si&'ly 'u&'ing our children%s &inds full of &e&esT ;ou 1ave #ot ;et Told The& ?hat to Think" / re&e&ber a story &y !ussian2language teacher told &e in high school. $he said she had Sust returned fro& the $oyu. $ovetskikh $otsialisticheskikh !es'ublik$oviet 6nion, to you and &ewhere she had co&'leted the second half of a teacher2 e+change 'rogra&. The classroo& in !ussia was al&ost entirely &e&ori.ation and drills. The teacher would recite so&ething, and the children would re'eat it. $he said the $oviet teacher was befuddled by 3&erican teaching &ethods, in which students would be asked to discuss their thoughts on so&e subSect the teacher brought u'. 1ow can they discuss thoughtsT she 'u..led. ;ou have not yet told the& what to think" 1er be&use&ent 'oints out the &aSor advance in education in the last century9 a shift fro& &e&ori.ation and skill shar'ening to learning how to think. The new &ath of the %G@s was designed to teach students to think abstractly about the entire syste& of &athe&atics rather than si&'ly &e&ori.e &ethods and for&ulas. 7nce the students learned how to think in this one arena, it was ho'ed, they could a''ly this skill to the rest of their lives, turning into a generation of baby2boo& 5insteins. By &y Sudg&ent, it worked, at least for the students who show u' at school ready to learn. 5ducated young adults today are 're'ared to think abstractly about everything fro& 'olitics to their own &inds, creating a boo& in the talk2show and &ental2health industries. The shift in e&'hasis fro& what to think to how to thinkalong with such authority2shattering events as Vietna& and ?atergatehas 'roduced a generation of Iuestioning &inds. They Iuestion why things are the way they are, what their lives are about, what they should be. They are dissatisfied. !einventing 5ducation There%s still a huge ga' between what we teach children during those first =N years and what it would be 'ossible to teach the&. ?hy don%t we take advantage of those =N yearsT ?hat should we be teaching the& insteadT 3nd who gets to decideT The disa''ointing answer to the first Iuestion, why things are the way they are, is largely the subSect of this book. $ociety, culture, 'ower structuresit%s difficult to &ake sense of any of the& because they are the results of &e&e evolution, not anything designed by hu&ankind for our own benefit. But su''ose we could invent any education we wanted for our children. ?hat would it beT /&agine you%re in charge of creating a brand2new society. ;ou%ve got a school full of eager teachers and bright2eyed children Sust starting first grade. /t%s your Sob to decide what to do with those children for the ne+t => years in order to give your society the best

chance of flourishing and give the& the best chance of having rich, full lives. ?hat would you doT The 'roble& with our current educational syste& is that we don%t ask Iuestions like that very often, and when we do, any 'ro'osals that would call for substantial changes get ha&&ered down by the entrenched 'ower structure and by 'eo'le%s fear of change. ?e know so&ething is wrong. 4urrent talk about self2estee& in the classroo& and outco&e2based education 'roves that at least so&ebody%s thinking about the 'roble&. The continued flight fro& the 'ublic schools by anyone who can afford it, the increasing 'o'ularity of ho&eschooling, and the steady decline in national test scores are all alar&s sounding the i&&ediacy and severity of our educational crisis. But how do we fi+ itT 3nd if we figure out how to fi+ it, how do we convince the 'eo'le in charge to actually do itT ?hat%s Most /&'ortantT Ruick9 start the clock" ;ou%ve Sust been born. ;ou%ve got e+actly one lifeti&e to learn everything you need to know in order to live life, then live it. !eadyT *o" ?hat kinds of things do you learnT :anguagesT The world ca'italsT MathT Music a''reciationT ?hatever it is, you%ll need to learn everything other than what you got fro& your genes in this one lifeti&e. $orry, no carryovers allowed. /f you believe in such things, you can see a channeler or a 'sychic and get so&e tidbits fro& 'ast lives, but that takes your ti&e and energy Sust like any other for& of learning. ?ith =.O &illion books in 'rint, not to &ention the out2of2'rint volu&es in libraries and the =@@,@@@ or so new ones co&ing out each year, you won%t have ti&e to read the& all. 1ow will you 'ick and chooseT There are five billion or so 'eo'le on the 'lanet with you. ?ho will you talk to, watch, learn fro&T ?here will you go to schoolT ?hat subSects will you takeT ?hich assign&ents will you do, and which will you blow off in favor of hanging out in coffeehouses, getting drunk at 'arties, or other of life%s nonacade&ic lessonsT ?ho& will you have relationshi's withT !e&e&ber, &arriage is the world%s best ,and freIuently &ost e+'ensive- 'ersonal2growth worksho'. But there%s only enough ti&e to learn fro& a few 'eo'le. 4hoose, Iuick" Thanks to genetic evolution, along with &odern advances in &edicine and technology, you%re born 'retty &uch set to survive in the 'hysical world. But the world of the &ind, of society and culture, is a different story. ;ou%ve got to learn Sust about everything starting with 'age one fro& the ti&e you%re born. 3nd if you don%t, you Sust kind of surviveand &aybe never even know the difference, never know what you could have had, what life &ight have been like. $ad but true. / hear a lot of talk about the failings of our educational syste&. 7ften critics co&'are our syste& unfavorably to that of )a'an, where children go to school for &any &ore hours and days than they do here. Their 'oint is usually that as a result of the &ore intense education in )a'an, children grow u' to be better and &ore 'roductive workers. /s growing u' to be a better and &ore 'roductive worker the 'oint of educationT /n &y eyes, no. The 'oint of education is to create a flourishing society in which as &any 'eo'le as 'ossible have wonderful lives filled with freedo&, ha''iness, and fulfill&ent. But not everyone would agree with &e. /t%s easy to find 'eo'le and organi.ations willing to answer the other Iuestions, about the &eaning of life. The 'roble& is, those answers are all either self2serving or 'art of so&e &ind virus ready to hook you into a religious belief syste&. But the current fashion of eli&inating any of these s'iritual Iuestions fro& school curricula creates a 'sychic hole in graduates, who within a few years begin to hunger for &eaning in life. /s it a''ro'riate for school to teach students s'iritual valuesT / don%t think so, for a nu&ber of reasons. /n the first 'lace, 'ower corru'ts. 3nyone or any grou' who got the charter to decide what values to teach would Iuickly beco&e infected with every tricky

and 'ernicious &ind virus in e+istence, not to &ention so&e new ones that would evolve Sust for the occasion. That%s the 'ri&ary benefit of our se'aration of church and state. Maybe the solution is a se'aration of school and state. /s it ti&e to give u' on the idea of 'ublic schools, throw in the towel, and ad&it it Sust can%t workT Maybe central schooling, a cultural institution with a great concentration of 'ower, is Sust too susce'tible to virus infection. /n the abstract, it%s an attractive idea to eli&inate 'ublic schools and throw the school doors wide o'en to co&'etition. ?ho *ets to ecideT ?ho gets to decideT ?ho gets to control that initial 'rogra&&ing we give our children before we kick the& out of the nest and let the& fly on their ownT !ight now it%s 'retty ha'ha.ard. /n fact, the schools are so weak today that kids get &uch of their 'rogra&&ing fro& television. ?e%re not &aking &uch of a conscious effort to direct our children%s lives in school any&ore. Many overworked teachers co&'lain they%re the only ones who are trying, and the Sob is Sust too big. 3s a result we see children without a strong fa&ily life being swe't u' in an e+'losion of youth2oriented subcultures with 'owerful &e&es9 gangs. $aying it%s the 'arents% Sob to su''ly the children with values and direction won%t work for these kids who don%t have &uch of a fa&ily. The schools are the 'lace to start ta''ing these kids% interests and showing the& there is indeed an o''ortunity for the& to have a great life. The #e+t *reat $hift ?hatever the &ethod, the ne+t great shift in education needs to be as big a shift as the &ove&ent fro& &e&ori.ation to learning how to think. The ne+t ste' in education is teaching children to decide for the&selves what is &ost i&'ortant in their livesfacilitating their lea' to :evel J of the learning 'yra&id. That &eans e&'owering the& to discover what e+cites the&, &otivates the&, &akes the& feel worthy ,you know, self2estee&-, and gives life &eaning for the&. /t &eans telling the& the 'ur'ose of their lives is to &ake the &ost of these things, not to be a cog in the self2'er'etuating &echanis& of rando& culture. /t goes beyond handing out buttons telling the& to Iuestion authority or bu&'er stickers e+horting the& to subvert the do&inant 'aradig&, and giving the& license to be their own authority and create their own 'aradig&. /t &eans teaching the& to be conscious" 4onscious" 4onscious" 4onscious" $caryT ;ou bet. But the only way to wrest the course of our evolution away fro& the rando& selective forces of &e&es and get it in the hands of individuals is to be absolutely unwavering in our belief that each individual is entitled to life, liberty, and the 'ursuit of ha''iness. !ight now all we%re teaching kids is the 'ursuit of grades and a''roval. The 'ursuit of a''roval is an engraved invitation to the Viruses% Ball. /t sucks you into whatever 'owerful &ind virus 'ushes the &ost of your buttons. 4hildren &ust be taught to discern and 'ursue their own values. /t%s going to be a huge task to co&e u' with a great curriculu& that really works to 'rogra& all children for a life of freedo& and ha''iness, not slavery or des'air. /t%s an even bigger task to sell it to the schools and get it u' and running. /t see&s al&ost i&'ossible, but what else is there to doT /%ve taken a baby ste' toward that goal by writing these words. The rest is u' to you. 3nd work fast. This one really is a crisis.

U8or a wonderful do2it2yourself course in ^en koans, see Tho&as 4leary%s translation of the best2known collection of koans, entitled #o Barrier ,Banta& Books, =EEJ-.

!547MM5# 5

!53 /#*

5volution awkins, !ichard. The Blind ?atch&aker ,#orton, =ENG-. 3 convincing argu&ent for evolution of s'ecies by natural selection, including &erciless attacks on creationists and other non arwinian heretics. awkins, !ichard. !iver 7ut of 5den9 3 arwinian View of :ife ,Basic Books, =EEK-. The e+ecutive su&&ary of the state of the art in evolutionary biology. /f you%ve only got a cou'le of hours to learn about evolution, this is the book to read. awkins, !ichard. The $elfish *ene, #ew 5dition ,7+ford 6niversity Press, =ENE-. Brilliant e+'lanation of the selfish2gene con2ce't. The first book to describe the conce't of the &e&e. ennett, aniel 4. arwin%s angerous /dea9 5volution and the Meanings of :ife ,$i&on < $chuster, =EEK-. 3 lucid, thorough, and brilliant e+'loration of universal arwinis&9 how evolution by natural selection can and does a''ly to all as'ects of the universe. Plotkin, 1enry. arwin Machines and the #ature of 0nowledge ,1arvard 6niversity Press, =EEJ-. Meaty and intellectual e+'loration of the evolutionary basis of knowledge and learning, a subSect known as evolutionary e'iste&ology. 4o&'uter 5volution :evy, $teven. 3rtificial :ife ,Vintage Books, =EE>-. 8ascinating roundu' of the state of the art in this new field of co&'uter science. 5volution of Me&es 4siks.ent&ihalyi, Mihaly. The 5volving $elf ,1ar'er4ollins, =EEJ-. Thoughts on the future as seen through the theory of &e&etic evolution. 5volutionary Psychology Buss, avid M. The 5volution of esire ,Basic Books, =EEO-. 3 clear e+'osition of the &ating2strategy as'ect of evolutionary 'sychology, backed u' by i&'ressive acade&ic studies. ennett, aniel 4. 4onsciousness 5+'lained ,:ittle, Brown, =EE=-. 3 &asterwork about the nature of hu&an thought with an e+cellent section on &e&es. ?right, !obert. The Moral 3ni&al9 ?hy ?e 3re the ?ay ?e 3re9The #ew $cience of 5volutionary Psychology ,Pantheon, =EEO-. /ncisive e+a&ination of the divergent evolution of &ale and fe&ale &ating strategies, co&bined with a biogra'hy of arwin. Men%s and ?o&en%s !oles *ray, )ohn. Men are fro& Mars, ?o&en are fro& Venus ,1ar'er 4ollins, =EE>-. 3 'ractical, straightforward book e+'laining the differences in &en%s and wo&en%s needs and co&&unication styles in relationshi's. 4ultural Viruses Bulgat., )ose'h. Pon.i $che&es, /nvaders fro& Mars, < More 5+traordinary Po'ular elusions and the Madness of 4rowds ,1ar&ony Books, =EE>-. 3&a.ing stories of historical &ind viruses. The one thing we learn fro& history is that we don%t learn fro& history. !ushkoff, ouglas. Media Virus" ,Ballantine Books, =EEO-. /nteresting e+'loration of the evolution of television and s'eculation on the use of TroSan horses to bundle hidden agendas with 'alatable &e&es. 4ults and Progra&&ing 4ialdini, !obert B. /nfluence9 The Psychology of Persuasion, !evised 5dition ,Ruill, =EEJ-. Mind2boggling, easy2to2read book about 'sychological techniIues being used every day to influence 'eo'le%s &inds. /f you liked 4ha'ter N, you%ll love this book. Mc?illia&s, Peter. :ife =@>9 ?hat to o ?hen ;our *uru $ues ;ou ,Prelude Press, =EEO-. The author of several best2selling selfi&'rove&ent books recounts the events that led to his being brainwashed into s'ending =K years in and giving ]= &illion to a

cult. ^en 4leary, Tho&as. #o Barrier9 6nlocking the ^en 0oan ,Banta&, =EEJ-. $u'erb e+'lanation of ^en introduces a brilliant translation of the ?u&enguan, the &ost fa&ous book of ^en riddle2lessons. 1ofstadter, ouglas !. *Ydel, 5scher, Bach9 3n 5ternal *olden Braid ,Vintage, =EME-. 5ven though Tho&as 4leary clai&s 1ofstadter doesn%t really grok ^en, any serious student of the nature of the &ind should read this Pulit.er Pri.eWwinning labor of love. Pirsig, !obert M. ^en and the 3rt of Motorcycle Maintenance ,Banta&, =EMO-. 3utobiogra'hical narrative of the author%s inIuiry into the nature of reality, distinctions, and sanity. $tarts like a travelogue, but takes a shar' turn into the 'hiloso'hical in 4ha'ter G. :ife Pur'ose Brodie, !ichard. *etting Past 709 3 $traightforward *uide to 1aving a 8antastic :ife ,?arner Books, =EEK-. 1ow to use the art of &ental re'rogra&&ing to transfor& your Iuality of life, told through the author%s 'ersonal life e+'eriences and illustrated with 5ggbert cartoons. 8rankl, Viktor. Man%s $earch for Meaning ,?ashington $Iuare Press, =ENO-. Moving, thoughtful, and 'ersuasive argu&ent for having a life 'ur'ose, told through firsthand accounts of life in #a.i death ca&'s. Maslow, 3. 1. The 8arther !eaches of 1u&an #ature ,Penguin, =EM=-. Very difficult reading about the nature of self2actuali.ation and higher hu&an values, but if you like authoritative credentials, you can%t get &uch better than Maslow%s.

340#7?:5 *M5#T$ $usan *o'len, *reg 0usnick, Bill Marklyn, and $teven $alta each devoted an e+traordinary a&ount of ti&e and thought to assisting &e with the sha'e and content of Virus of the Mind. Their su''ort shows u' not only in the ideas they contributed, but in their enthusias& for &y getting the book out there. Marc de 1ingh, Bob Matthews, and :loyd $ieden all gave &e detailed feedback on the &anuscri't, yielding &any i&'rove&ents in clarity. / rewrote entire cha'ters based on so&e of their lucid Iuestions and criticis&s. *eorge 3therton, )on Ba.e&ore, !obin Burchett, an ennett, 3shton Mac3ndrews, 1olly Marklyn, 5lan Morit., !ichard Pock2lington, Peter !inearson, Matthew $enft, 4harles $i&onyi, Brett Tho&as, and 5ric ^inda all took ti&e fro& their busy schedules to co&&ent on the &anuscri't. 5ach one%s contribution shows u' in at least one i&'rove&ent to the book%s content. My brother Mike Brodie swoo'ed in fro& $outheast 3sia Sust in ti&e for last2&inute 'roofreading and &oral su''ort. :i. *reene hel'ed &e 'roof the current edition. 8inally, thanks to !ichard awkins for being so gracious when he discovered / had inadvertently 'inched the title he had 'reviously used in an essay ,Viruses of the Mind-. My genes thank you. My &e&es thank you. My viruses of the &ind thank you. 3nd / thank you.

3B76T T15 36T17! !ichard Brodie is best known as the original author of Microsoft ?ord. 1is self2hel' book, *etting Past 70, is an international bestseller. !ichard has a''eared on do.ens of television and radio shows, including The 7'rah ?infrey $how. !ichard continues to 'ursue wide and varied interests, which he occasionally blogs about at9 www.liontales.co& .