# NPCs: Born or made?



## Corpun (Mar 13, 2022)

Are people born NPCs or are they molded into NPCdom? Most people seem to be genuine tards who go along with whatever someone they deem above them says. Is this something genetic and has there always been a perpetual serf or servant class of people who are genetically inclined to follow orders or are they groomed into this throughout their early life? I assume it is a mix of both but I'm not sure.

I have an idea that before the modern period all or most NPC types were the serfs of societies and the end of that era and creation of social mobility largely allowed them to move up or down the ladder. This allowed them to intermingle with various groups and the access to knowledge and education allowed some of these types to either break their programming or never get programmed in the first place. Obviously there are elite NPCs, I wouldn't be surprised if most of Hollywood is NPC bugmen going along with whatever is big, but above them people like Gates or Soros are obvious aware of shit.

What makes an NPC in the first place, how does one get made or born? Is it blind obedience to a cause or idea, is it lack of critical thinking skills, is it consuming product? Are we all NPCs on some level? On a gender level are there more men or women who are NPCs?


----------



## Blasterisk (Mar 13, 2022)

Everybody you know will, on prompting, complain about somebody else's self-awareness. (Or lack thereof) So, is everybody an NPC? Is nobody? Are you?

I think that free will is open to all, but must be seized, and once seized, cherished. At least, this fits with what I observe in the world, that is to your final question: There are unthinking men, women, whites, blacks, etc., but likewise many reasonable people to match the same descriptions.

There is no obvious biological dichotomy that defines free thought -- trends, perhaps, but no fast rules yet determined.


----------



## DumbDude42 (Mar 13, 2022)

made, through three avenues
>parenting (or lack thereof)
>education
>media


----------



## byuu (Mar 13, 2022)




----------



## Vingle (Mar 13, 2022)

Group mentality is a tough thing, and humans is a social creature. So you kinda want to do the things that gets you to be accepted by the herd.


----------



## Goyslop Muncher (Mar 13, 2022)

We used to call them lemmings


----------



## Corpun (Mar 13, 2022)

Blasterisk said:


> I think that free will is open to all, but must be seized, and once seized, cherished. At least, this fits with what I observe in the world, that is to your final question: There are unthinking men, women, whites, blacks, etc., but likewise many reasonable people to match the same descriptions.


Said it better than I ever could. Do you think people could mass break this conditioning they are under?


byuu said:


> View attachment 3069213


We are all NPCs with the racism unpatched aren't we?


----------



## FILTH Tourist (Mar 13, 2022)

I think everyone is born as NPCs. Humans are built to be information sponges, soaking up knowledge and skills then regurgitating it to spread that info. What a lot of people don't realize is that critical thinking is also skill that needs to be learned and practiced too, and without that skill then the humans are trapped in NPCdom forever sucking up and regurgitating information uncritically. 

Even with critical thinking skills I suspect we are still NPCs on some level. We are slaves to information and just because you are more picky about the source of that information doent mean that you aren't just absorbing and regurgitating that information like an NPC.


----------



## Kari Kamiya (Mar 13, 2022)

I believe it's somewhat related to this study:
Not Everyone Conducts Inner Speech​It's possible those who can't think for themselves (or even think _to_ themselves) are more likely to have NPC mentality, but it doesn't seem to be clear if that's nature or nurture.

I just really found it _super fascinating_ that when the NPC meme kicked off, it got the media and Twitter bots so fucking mad. Like why would _anyone_ get bothered by a meme unless it hit _way_ too close to home--or to the truth?


----------



## byuu (Mar 13, 2022)

Kari Kamiya said:


> I just really found it _super fascinating_ that when the NPC meme kicked off, it got the media and Twitter bots so fucking mad. Like why would _anyone_ get bothered by a meme unless it hit _way_ too close to home--or to the truth?


Is there something Twitter doesn't get mad about?


----------



## Kari Kamiya (Mar 13, 2022)

byuu said:


> Is there something Twitter doesn't get mad about?


Lol no it was to be expected, but then the MSM got their hands on it and bitched about it to all the normies. _That_ was the real interesting part to me.


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (Mar 13, 2022)

I think NPCs are a thing, but people (myself included) who complain about NPCs are surly douchebags.

The whole Internet meme has pretty much just turned into "Left man bad," I don't even think a lot of the radical Leftists are NPCs at all because they show a much greater deal of independent thought. Yes they're useful idiots of Globohomo, yes they're fake revolutionaries, but it takes some amount of free will for a guy to put on his Che Guevara T-shirt and start reading Marx and hitting dudes with bike locks than it takes to be a normalfaggot "Democrats are the real racists" conservative.

I also see a lot of NPCdom in hobbies, interests, humor, and all that. I think about it a lot because my friends back in college were into Internet culture, and now I work at a place where nobody gets that stuff. It's all football and basketball, music but only what's on the radio and stuff like guitars and drums, go dancing and out to bars but never to things like concerts or art exhibitions, no hobbies to speak of besides lifting weights, they play vidya but it's all shit like FIFA and GTA. They make unfunny jokes about things like the coffee machine and then laugh it up but goofy or surreal stuff falls flat on them. And they relate to each other through passive-aggression like women, fake smiles and compliments and laughter and then backbiting as soon as the other person's gone. And some of them will show a bit of independent thought, but if other people come around they'll put on that mask.

Really it's just me being a whiney faggot that other people don't share my taste, but it really does feel like most people just live to get along with other people and have no tastes, no interests, no personality that doesn't exist to advance themselves on some pyramid that exists only in their heads.

Where politics comes in is just that the kind of person who does that is also the kind of person who wouldn't be caught dead supporting Controversial Thing in public, they'll pretend to go against it and even argue against a buddy who agrees with them just to make themselves look better in some strangers' eyes. Trash.



Whoops, my rant failed to address the question.
Both. Some people are predisposed to be followers, some to leaders, some to outsiders.
But bad experiences can train a person to fall in line. David Wong at Cracked had a good article where he described how he got out of his proto-incel outcast state by learning to just put on the act.


----------



## mr.moon1488 (Mar 13, 2022)

Born.  Think about it like this, let's say every single person was fully capable of free thought and had no instinct to yield to authority.  You would have a species that relies on communal cooperation as its main survival mechanism being comprised of nothing but leaders and no followers.  Obviously, this would rapidly lead to extinction because it would be exceedingly rare for two individuals to fully agree on the best course of action, and since no one is willing to yield, there would be no cooperation.  This is one of the main reasons why systems based on egalitarianism (communism, democracy, republics, capitalism, etc) have near-perfect failure rates.  There is no clear structure for establishing who has the right to rule so ultimately the right to rule is determined by the actual free thinkers who can establish the largest and most fanatical band of followers.  This obviously results in tyranny since one of the most practical ways to make sure you have the most powerful following is to destroy the followers of your opponents.


----------



## Muttnik (Mar 13, 2022)

I think everyone is an NPC to some extent. We just have areas where we "de-activate" and break free of social conditioning. And areas where we fall back in as a survival tactic.

You'd be surprised at how many NPCs are actually keklords undercover. Some are really good actors who talk a big game when out in public when it comes to the hive mind. But in private? You never know.


----------



## Milwaukee Macho Man (Mar 13, 2022)

It depends on your definition of NPC.  Most people are just "followers" by nature, so in that sense they are born.

But then the NPC phenomenon seems to extend beyond simply being a follower to some, and in that sense they are more "made", with certain people being more prone to the conditioning than others.


----------



## Jonah Hill poster (Mar 13, 2022)

When I think of NPC’s, I think of the A.I. rag dolls that are in those open world, sandbox video games.

When I think of real life NPC’s, I think of people that Jay used to make fun of from back in the day:



Overall, the popular crowd in question likes to think that they‘re in control with their own thoughts and can never fall victim to mob mentality or mass conditioning through mainstream media and the like. Even intelligent people are not immune to this, since smart people really underestimate how stupid people can be encouraged to act and be more stupid because they think you’re laughing with them.

Me personally, I just do my best to try not being something that I’m not. It‘s not always perfect, but it’s not always wrong.


----------



## I Love Beef (Mar 13, 2022)

Vingle said:


> Group mentality is a tough thing, and humans is a social creature. So you kinda want to do the things that gets you to be accepted by the herd.


On the other hand, omegas/defectors tend to exist for a reason, as I've learned. If the norm bends towards unreasonable self harm to the populace or self destructive practices for adjudication, some people will notice and flee or resist.


----------



## Kiwi & Cow (Mar 13, 2022)

Haram Exercise said:


> We used to call them lemmings


And sheeps/sheeple.



> What makes an NPC in the first place,


NPCs are uncapable of original thought, they drive by what they hear from others. I would argue there are far more right-wing NPCs than anyone is comfortable  to admit, I'm thinking about the Trump cocksuckers who still think he's their messiah. 

I was pro-Trump during his first election on the grounds that he had a few great ideas and the other candidate was way worse. I hit peak Trump in 2020 after his mishandling of the COVID pandemic, but I notice most Trump supporters are still sucking his ass, very fucking saddening to see honestly.

Usually another symptom to NPC programming is being unable to actually change your stand on a specific issue. Though it's only a symptom not a literal red flag like Sociopaths are usually manipulative, but some people are manipulative, but not Sociopaths and we can agree that there are obviously things that no normal person would support, like Nazism or Communism, so if your current stand is Libertarianism and you refuse to support Nazism that doesn't necessarily make you a NPC.

TL;DR: Anyone who watches Fox News or CNN and take everything they say as a fact is a NPC.


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (Mar 13, 2022)

By the way, women are even worse about all this. It's just in their nature to be more... homogeneous. I think that's a good chunk of the angst of being a weird misfit, weird misfit women are harder to find for you and it's 

I find it weird how even dudes I know who I'd describe as intellectual, at least somewhat, don't care one whit about a woman's personality beyond just that she's nice. That's like a different kind of shallow, it's not shallow like putting up with a bitch because she's pretty, but it's just changed it to "pretty and not overly repugnant to be around." 

I went to this student film festival last night, and being the artistes these ought to be some of the more eccentric women, y'know, but all the men's submissions had decent stuff with plots or humor or whatever, and every woman's submission was about anxiety or body image or whatever, with long indulgent scenes of them putting on makeup/primping their hair, utter drivel. No exaggeration. So fucking boring. That's what women are. So rare to encounter one that isn't a meat-puppet.


----------



## Corpun (Mar 13, 2022)

Kari Kamiya said:


> I just really found it _super fascinating_ that when the NPC meme kicked off, it got the media and Twitter bots so fucking mad. Like why would _anyone_ get bothered by a meme unless it hit _way_ too close to home--or to the truth?


Reminds me of the twitter post where people were amazed there are people who can mentally visualize an apple.


----------



## The Gifted Kid (Mar 13, 2022)

I think a lot of it is conditioning. People just want to be seen as doing the "correct" thing whether or not they actually agree with it. I notice for some older folks it can also be really hard for them to break upwards of 30 years worth of bad habits. My old man constantly rants to me about how CNN and all the mainstream news is corrupt and biased yet every time I'm at his place the TV is tuned to CNN. I don't really blame him since he's from the generation that was "raised on TV" but its honestly kind of sad to see. I definitely think my generation and Gen Z might have it worse in the long run due to smart phones and how prevalent media is in all forms nowadays. 

People just don't spend a lot of time alone in silence to think about who they are, why they do the things they do, etc. They're always plugged into something or have some sort of background noise to distract them from themselves. This is going to sound really gay but I think the best and healthiest way not to become an NPC is to take a break from the mass media and the over socialization from the internet; keep a journal and at the end of a year read the entries back to find out who you really are.


----------



## Testacles Maximus (Mar 13, 2022)

They’re groomed.


----------



## Uberpenguin (Mar 13, 2022)

This is just down to the conflicting issues of individualism vs. collectivism in human nature.

No different than how there's no such thing as an "alpha" or "beta" but rather people who have a tendency to settle into certain roles given the dynamics of whatever group they're in, people aren't inherently NPCs, they've simply taken on a collectivist mindset because especially in the modern world there's only so much room for individuality. There are a lot of people and complex systems that need to be maintained where the more robotic you are the better you'll cope.

Like, at least as it is now you're better off joining in with the flock, because letting your testosterone flow and raging at the machine is probably just going to turn you into either a felon or a neurotic hermit.



Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> By the way, women are even worse about all this. It's just in their nature to be more... homogeneous. I think that's a good chunk of the angst of being a weird misfit, weird misfit women are harder to find for you and it's
> 
> I find it weird how even dudes I know who I'd describe as intellectual, at least somewhat, don't care one whit about a woman's personality beyond just that she's nice. That's like a different kind of shallow, it's not shallow like putting up with a bitch because she's pretty, but it's just changed it to "pretty and not overly repugnant to be around."
> 
> I went to this student film festival last night, and being the artistes these ought to be some of the more eccentric women, y'know, but all the men's submissions had decent stuff with plots or humor or whatever, and every woman's submission was about anxiety or body image or whatever, with long indulgent scenes of them putting on makeup/primping their hair, utter drivel. No exaggeration. So fucking boring. That's what women are. So rare to encounter one that isn't a meat-puppet.


Wanting a woman who's "nice" could more be because intellectual dudes recognize that being overly choosy about a partner is stupid. People rarely have any idea who they'd actually be best with, you yourself are often the worst person to judge that, so basically so long as you have a foundation that someone is A) Nice B) Somewhat open minded C) not stupid to the point that you can't talk to them, and D) reasonably pretty by your standards, the rest you can adjust to.


----------



## Henry V (Mar 13, 2022)

Everyone is an NPC. Your beliefs and ideas are not special. I know mine aren't. However, the ability to take a step back and see the irony in society is what separates some people from others. That's what satire is, being able to see the patterns and the truth behind the trends, and maybe make a joke out of it. Everyone is capable of it; some people just prefer to live their days in ignorant bliss, and you can't blame them.


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (Mar 13, 2022)

Uberpenguin said:


> Wanting a woman who's "nice" could more be because intellectual dudes recognize that being overly choosy about a partner is stupid. People rarely have any idea who they'd actually be best with, you yourself are often the worst person to judge that, so basically so long as you have a foundation that someone is A) Nice B) Somewhat open minded C) not stupid to the point that you can't talk to them, and D) reasonably pretty by your standards, the rest you can adjust to.


I mean, I'd be fine with a woman who meets those traits, all of life is a compromise and you're right that people don't know what they really want, I've just noticed that at least among the people I know, they don't even consider anything beyond that a plus. Like, strict preference for more attractiveness over all other things, minimum standards of "is nice" and being the right background satisfied.


----------



## The Curmudgeon (Mar 13, 2022)

Good question. I've been brooding on this on and off lately. Most people, regardless of what walk of life they're from, seem to have an aversion to thinking in any capacity. This doesn't necessarily make them bad or stupid people. It also doesn't mean they can't be broken out of that mindset. In my opinion, of course.

Sometimes though, I wonder if most people would have been better off if they were born as farm animals instead of human beings. On the other hand, at least farm animals are useful and they can be loveable too. People who are NPCs? It varies.


----------



## PaleTay (Mar 13, 2022)

Working at a young age (ie fast food/retail high school), seems to be the most consistent factor, this leads to a lack of tech, mathematical, and scientific literacy and not being as well read in general, as well the NPC behavior is just worker behavior generalized to everyday life. I guess the idea that these people would have been serfs in the past has some merit, but I think it's mostly environmental.


----------



## Screamer (Mar 14, 2022)

NPCs are born, they're just people who aren't curious. In the past they wouldn't be reading newspapers, they wouldn't be reading books and so they wouldn't have opinions or knowledge on most things. They wouldn't know nor care.

If they ever did read a newspaper, they'd just believe everything at face value, probably not even finish reading a single article. Would be an NPC on what little "information" to are exposed to.

Now in the information age, they are bombarded with information on all sorts of topics constantly. Which they uncritically just accept. Depending on the bubble they are in determines what side of politics NPC they are.


----------



## Jewthulhu (Mar 14, 2022)

This is related to something I've been thinking about/working on for the past year or so, so excuse my long-winded answer

We all rely on being able to acquire knowledge from other people or institutions. I call this "social knowledge" (in contrast to empirical knowledge or rational knowledge). Since we are actually extremely limited on what we can experience ourselves and often lack the comprehension of a subject to form a complex rational argument, we get the vast majority of our knowledge from other people. So we all to a greater or lesser degree form our opinions based on the information and opinions given to us by other people or institutions. And while a doctor for example might have more empirical/rational knowledge of transgender issues (and even then, that knowledge is probably limited), he must still rely on social knowledge to form his opinions on foreign policy. So if that's your definition of an "NPC," all of humanity are basically npcs.


----------



## ZazietheBeast (Mar 14, 2022)

A tricky question. Its a bit of both really. Its proven repeatedly that along with physical traits, genetics influence behavior most of the time. Sometimes right down to preference! But that usually isn't enough to turn you into an NPC.

Then there's direct behavior control from other people. Who in turn were raised that way because of family and environment. Speaking of which, there is alot of things in society that shapes your behavior in subtle ways you don't perceive while growing up. Such as how you react to other people. And this is usually based on the behavior of your peers and what the media you consume is showing you. Then there are bits of knowledge that you are simply never encouraged to have.

Such as in public schools, ever notice how dry and pathetic teachers usually are when teaching math and science? How its seen as a burden rather as opportunity? Alot of it is because of the people running the schools simply care more about quota rather than the students applying those two critical components into their life. Which is why most people tend to hate math and science after school. When in reality, it can open way more options than a normal person should have. Then there's how personal initiative tends to get shot down in those schools. Being made fun of by both the staff and the students.

Combine those, and here you have the NPC. A drone broken by society made to follow the options in front of them without question. Never mind the back roads.

TL;DR: Genes and regular memes make the NPC.


----------



## Dandelion Eyes (Mar 14, 2022)

NPCs are made. Cause they turn into NPCs whenever they express a popular opinion I disagree with.


----------



## Ted_Logan (Mar 15, 2022)

If it's like the nature vs nurture debate I say depends how they are raise or never accepted that they are NPCs. So I say more on accept the girl dick, accept the bugs, or some retard thing like that.


----------



## Polish Businessman (Mar 20, 2022)

PaleTay said:


> Working at a young age (ie fast food/retail high school), seems to be the most consistent factor, this leads to a lack of tech, mathematical, and scientific literacy and not being as well read in general, as well the NPC behavior is just worker behavior generalized to everyday life.



It's the other way round. Stupid people tend to be poor, and have stupid children. And since they're poor, they have to work shit jobs since an early age. An intelligent person won't be damaged somehow by doing this kind of work.



ZazietheBeast said:


> Such as in public schools, ever notice how dry and pathetic teachers usually are when teaching math and science? How its seen as a burden rather as opportunity?


Because it is a burden. Have you ever tried to explain some mathematical or physical concept to someone who *just doesn't get it*? You try different analogies, you show various examlpes, do experiments, and *he still doesn't get it*. Now imagine doing that for 30h a week for years. I bet you'd become "dry and pathetic" too. OTOH, in a school selective enough that their students generally _get it_, even an uncharismatic teacher can be successful.


----------



## Muh Pez Dispenser (Mar 21, 2022)

Great topic. I think it's a bit of both nature and nurture. The NPCs are people who are susceptible to suggestion and manipulation. I don't remember the person's name, but the guy who came up with the _*mass formation hypnosis*_ theory broke it down like this:
- 30% of folks will accept the narrative, no questions asked
- 40% will be fence sitters
- remaining 30% will question the narrative and are considered "outliers" in society

Bottom line is that there's a group of folks out there, seemingly the "majority", (though not really) who will just do/say what they are told. Not just that, they will very vocally and unapologetically defend the system. In other words, they suffer from "appeal to authority" and are indentured slaves. 

So, you've got people prone to manipulation whom are being saturated in modern day propaganda. And the NPC is born.


----------



## Kramer on the phone (Mar 21, 2022)

We're all NPCs on a bunch of topics, the alt-right has tons of topics they don't give a flying fuck about like Make Up or the Kardashaians. 

I bet if you asked most of the people on the alt-right about the real housewives they'd fit the definition of an NPC either they are apathetic or give an opinion that they never blatantly stole from pop culture (like south park) 

of course what matters to some doesn't matter to others, i know a chick into astrology that acts superior to everyone because we don't give a fuck about the star alignments. to her everyone else is an NPC. 

Another problem is apathy "you can't fight city hall" plenty of people especially older people don't have the obnoxious need to question things that people have when they're teenagers because they've lived long enough to see it doesn't matter. plenty of blackpilled individuals who get shoved in the NPC category. 

On the flip side once liberal bullshit infiltrates something someone cares about they will sperg hard, two french coons won the first season of world of dance a few years back, and most people wouldn't give a fuck but it redpilled a bunch of women in the dance community hard. Same thing with Big Brother and the cookout. these NPCs on politics suddenly became wheatfield bitches once les twins came onto the scene. Its like gamergate redpilling young white men on how evil the left is, everyone has stuff they enjoy that will get attacked and some won't care, some will shrug, but enough will care enough to be pissed about it. 

Just look at college women's swimming right now and how many women suddenly are throwing away their pussy hats and grabbing a sundress and heading to the wheatfields because of that fuckery. last year you'd consider them NPCs of the highest order now they're trump babes 2024. 

TL;DR we all go into NPC mode sometimes, but even NPCs become real people once you talk about certain topics or hobbies.


----------



## Rungle (Mar 21, 2022)

Dude have you ever talked to people from LA?
Everyone I talk to from LA is a pretentious virtue signaller who thinks they are hot shit while spouting the same BLM tranny rights bullshit.

If your born in LA I would say you are born an NPC.
If you are deciding to move to LA you are throwing your freedom away.


----------



## Fools Idol (Mar 23, 2022)

Kari Kamiya said:


> I believe it's somewhat related to this study:
> Not Everyone Conducts Inner Speech​It's possible those who can't think for themselves (or even think _to_ themselves) are more likely to have NPC mentality, but it doesn't seem to be clear if that's nature or nurture.
> 
> I just really found it _super fascinating_ that when the NPC meme kicked off, it got the media and Twitter bots so fucking mad. Like why would _anyone_ get bothered by a meme unless it hit _way_ too close to home--or to the truth?


I never got why the whole inner speech thing was such a big deal with pol and the like. Just because you speak to yourself doesn't mean that you're more of a free thinker than someone who thinks in a more abstract way.

Think about your own internal monolog, I'd imagine that it's in English right? Or whatever your native tongue is but those words and sentences aren't yours are they? You didn't invent a new language, you're using the one you learned throughout your life. In a sense the words of every person you've ever encountered and every person they're encountered lives in you head. The same is true of the written word and even this post.


----------



## Lemmingwise (Mar 24, 2022)

Fools Idol said:


> I never got why the whole inner speech thing was such a big deal with pol and the like. Just because you speak to yourself doesn't mean that you're more of a free thinker than someone who thinks in a more abstract way.
> 
> Think about your own internal monolog, I'd imagine that it's in English right? Or whatever your native tongue is but those words and sentences aren't yours are they? You didn't invent a new language, you're using the one you learned throughout your life. In a sense the words of every person you've ever encountered and every person they're encountered lives in you head. The same is true of the written word and even this post.


Maybe the people using decypherabke language were the real npcs all along.


----------



## Dandelion Eyes (Mar 24, 2022)

Fools Idol said:


> I never got why the whole inner speech thing was such a big deal with pol and the like. Just because you speak to yourself doesn't mean that you're more of a free thinker than someone who thinks in a more abstract way.
> 
> Think about your own internal monolog, I'd imagine that it's in English right? Or whatever your native tongue is but those words and sentences aren't yours are they? You didn't invent a new language, you're using the one you learned throughout your life. In a sense the words of every person you've ever encountered and every person they're encountered lives in you head. The same is true of the written word and even this post.


Based.


----------



## Pissmaster (Mar 24, 2022)

Dandelion Eyes said:


> NPCs are made. Cause they turn into NPCs whenever they express a popular opinion I disagree with.


Hey everybody!  This guy's an NPC!


----------



## Otterly (Mar 24, 2022)

The no inner speech thing is fascinating. I’m never really sure what to make of it. Are they saying people literally never have any? I can accept I suppose that people may have very different ways of inner reflection, we all think in lots of different ways, verbally, images, intuition etc. but are they saying some people have literally no inner reflection at all? That’s really weird.
   Anyway NPCs, I do have a theory on this and it’s mind control BUT BEAR WITH ME IM NOT INSANE. I think, that this is what causes it. People have been traumatised and trained, until they can’t even think about certain things without feeling bad. Political correctness really curtailed what people could say in public. Then we had socia media and we encouraged everybody to spew every mundane thought and opinion online. Then, they gradually ramp up the us vs them thing, where every opinion is either ultra hood or ultra bad, no nuance. And of course people keep exposing opinions online. Cancel culture then forms a massively powerful social feedback loop, whereby any ‘bad’ speech is immediately (important) met by often catastrophic consequences - social ostracism, loss of job, loss of payment access. Humans are social beings (in the main, this audience may differ somewhat) and expulsion from the group = death in our lizard brains.
   The result is actual mind control - you control what people do and don’t say to such a point that it turns into what they do and don’t THINK. People are trained to not think any thought that makes them likely to face the negative feedback. Just look at university safe spaces, with students seeing over being exposed to bad ideas. It’s literal thought control - people are so conditioned that when you try to make them think a certain thing or say a certain thing they react as if they are avoiding a pain stimulus.
    If you don’t believe me try this. TELL someone this theory and they will laugh at you and deny it. Now, ask them to say nigger out loud. Watch their reaction. They will squirm and justify not saying it, even if there’s only two of you, and you’re not recording
 It’s like beating a dog every time the door opens for years then leaving the door open. The dog won’t go through it. Or how prisoners will kill a potential escapee if they’ve been collectively punished before. 
   It is collective, punishment based conditioning.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Mar 24, 2022)

Modern urban "society" really is like a cult.

- People who are integrated into "society" are referred to as "members" (like cult members).

- There's countless written and unwritten rules to be "normal" (like being in good standing with a cult).

- "Cringe" is treated like a "sin" or "heresy", as is not believing The Narrative™.

- Those who don't integrate - the "heathens" or "heretics" - are called "losers", "social outcasts", "weirdos", etc.

- Blaming a cult for problems is often if not always discouraged, as if the cult can do no wrong.

People shouldn't go out of their way to be assholes or too freakish, but there's a such thing as too much conformity.


----------



## Terrorist (Mar 24, 2022)

Everyone is an NPC in some context because humans are social animals by necessity. If everyone was the perfect *smuckle* _individualist _that marched to the beat of their own drum, we’d never get anything done. The use of the NPC meme is itself socially-conformist, an ingroup/outgroup signaling mechanism in communities such as this one.


----------



## Hoi Polloi (Mar 24, 2022)

We're all NPCs in some ways. The world is too complex for one person to act independently all the time, we all have areas of our lives where we just go with the flow because being aware and intentional about what you're doing 24/7 is exhausting and you'll burn out if you try it.


----------



## milk (Mar 24, 2022)

Kari Kamiya said:


> I believe it's somewhat related to this study:
> Not Everyone Conducts Inner Speech​It's possible those who can't think for themselves (or even think _to_ themselves) are more likely to have NPC mentality, but it doesn't seem to be clear if that's nature or nurture.
> 
> I just really found it _super fascinating_ that when the NPC meme kicked off, it got the media and Twitter bots so fucking mad. Like why would _anyone_ get bothered by a meme unless it hit _way_ too close to home--or to the truth?


That study is what triggered the meme iirc.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Mar 24, 2022)

Terrorist said:


> The use of the NPC meme is itself socially-conformist, an ingroup/outgroup signaling mechanism in communities such as this one.





Hoi Polloi said:


> being aware and intentional about what you're doing 24/7 is exhausting and you'll burn out if you try it


Trying to be perfectly non-conformist can be just as unhealthy as trying to be perfectly "normal".


----------



## Polish Businessman (Mar 25, 2022)

Dandelion Eyes said:


> Based.
> View attachment 3103852



I agree, the Wordcel vs Shape Rotator dichotomy is much more interesting. After all, even those supposed NPCs seem to be able use language correctly, even if they insist on not having an internal monologue. But the wordcel is a different beast, and, to me, much more alien and scary. It looks like in the wordcels' world the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is true, and indeed, as Wittgenstein said, "the limits of my language are the limits of my world".
Unlike the NPCs, they can be detected with simple tests which they can't fake. Not only those requiring  literal shape rotation or operating machinery, but also some maths or programming problems where reasoning in terms of prepositions without certain shape rotating shortcuts is very slow and error-prone. In my experience the wordcel fears relational databases the most, second only to fixing his bike.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 9, 2022)

What's going to be the next Current Thing of Current Year after the Ukraine invasion?

Or in other words, the next freakshow bandwagon like the coof, "BLM", and "Support Ukraine"?


----------



## Raoul_Duke (Apr 9, 2022)

ToroidalBoat said:


> What's going to be the next Current Thing of Current Year after the Ukraine invasion?
> 
> Or in other words, the next freakshow bandwagon like the coof, "BLM", and "Support Ukraine"?


From reading the tea leaves, pro-pedophilia movements. We're already seeing the first stirrings of it in the headlines, and especially with the new supreme justice.


----------



## Goyslop Muncher (Apr 9, 2022)

ToroidalBoat said:


> What's going to be the next Current Thing of Current Year after the Ukraine invasion?
> 
> Or in other words, the next freakshow bandwagon like the coof, "BLM", and "Support Ukraine"?


Pro pedo shit from every possible angle, further climate crisis shit, further push towards fake food and huwhite supremacy


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 9, 2022)

Traincake said:


> From reading the tea leaves, pro-pedophilia movements.





Haram Exercise said:


> Pro pedo shit from every possible angle, further climate crisis shit, further push towards fake food and huwhite supremacy


These "Current Things" could be stepping stones - or distractions - that tyranny uses to turn "little people" into cybernetic serfs.

(Also weren't SJWs very anti-pedo?)


----------



## Saint Agustin (Apr 9, 2022)

ToroidalBoat said:


> (Also weren't SJWs very anti-pedo?)


When? They were always pro pedo and pro choice. Even back in the 00' when the movement originated they touted lowering the age of consent.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 9, 2022)

Saint Agustin said:


> They were always pro pedo and pro choice.


Weren't the woke at least against straight "cis" males being pedos?


----------



## Irrelevant (Apr 10, 2022)

Otterly said:


> The no inner speech thing is fascinating. I’m never really sure what to make of it. Are they saying people literally never have any? I can accept I suppose that people may have very different ways of inner reflection, we all think in lots of different ways, verbally, images, intuition etc. but are they saying some people have literally no inner reflection at all? That’s really weird.
> Anyway NPCs, I do have a theory on this and it’s mind control BUT BEAR WITH ME IM NOT INSANE. I think, that this is what causes it. People have been traumatised and trained, until they can’t even think about certain things without feeling bad. Political correctness really curtailed what people could say in public. Then we had socia media and we encouraged everybody to spew every mundane thought and opinion online. Then, they gradually ramp up the us vs them thing, where every opinion is either ultra hood or ultra bad, no nuance. And of course people keep exposing opinions online. Cancel culture then forms a massively powerful social feedback loop, whereby any ‘bad’ speech is immediately (important) met by often catastrophic consequences - social ostracism, loss of job, loss of payment access. Humans are social beings (in the main, this audience may differ somewhat) and expulsion from the group = death in our lizard brains.
> The result is actual mind control - you control what people do and don’t say to such a point that it turns into what they do and don’t THINK. People are trained to not think any thought that makes them likely to face the negative feedback. Just look at university safe spaces, with students seeing over being exposed to bad ideas. It’s literal thought control - people are so conditioned that when you try to make them think a certain thing or say a certain thing they react as if they are avoiding a pain stimulus.
> If you don’t believe me try this. TELL someone this theory and they will laugh at you and deny it. Now, ask them to say nigger out loud. Watch their reaction. They will squirm and justify not saying it, even if there’s only two of you, and you’re not recording
> ...


This is the definition of Newspeak in 1984.

It's not a crazy theory and quite mainstream, assuming people have actually read 1984 and are not simply repeating quotes like an NPC.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 12, 2022)

Shaneequa said:


> I think bullying holds a pretty important social purpose during a child's development.
> 
> It establishes social hierarchies within the same caste, which is something that you'll encounter everywhere there's any amount of person to person interaction.
> 
> It corrects deviant behavior.


To me that sounds like a way a conformist "NPC" can be made.

It's better to teach people not to be jerks than to bully people into submission and conformity.


----------



## Shaneequa (Apr 12, 2022)

ToroidalBoat said:


> To me that sounds like a way a conformist "NPC" can be made.
> 
> It's better to teach people not to be jerks than to bully people into submission and conformity.


i bet if i could backhand you across the mouth rn you'd stop being so cringe


----------



## Getting tard comed (Apr 12, 2022)

NPCs are born. There are NPCs among every walk of life among every political spectrum. It just so happens that right now the American Left has more(or appears to have more) due to them being the dominant cultural force. There are a lot of NPCs in "right wing" churches and circles. It's a function of adaptation as not "fitting in" means you get ostracized and don't get kids but it's also a function of something else I'm not quite sure how to categorize it. It isn't new seeing as Aristotle talks about people who cannot be instructed and cannot learn from information but have to be emotionally manipulated in Rhetoric, so NPCs have existed for 2k-3k years ago so its not a product of our specific culture. 

Being an NPC isn't necessarily a bad thing. If you have a better society than being an NPC is fine. The problem is society sucks right now so NPCs suck as well. 



Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> By the way, women are even worse about all this. It's just in their nature to be more... homogeneous. I think that's a good chunk of the angst of being a weird misfit, weird misfit women are harder to find for you and it's
> 
> I find it weird how even dudes I know who I'd describe as intellectual, at least somewhat, don't care one whit about a woman's personality beyond just that she's nice. That's like a different kind of shallow, it's not shallow like putting up with a bitch because she's pretty, but it's just changed it to "pretty and not overly repugnant to be around."
> 
> I went to this student film festival last night, and being the artistes these ought to be some of the more eccentric women, y'know, but all the men's submissions had decent stuff with plots or humor or whatever, and every woman's submission was about anxiety or body image or whatever, with long indulgent scenes of them putting on makeup/primping their hair, utter drivel. No exaggeration. So fucking boring. That's what women are. So rare to encounter one that isn't a meat-puppet.


Not to insult you, ignoring the incel vibes, men generally aren't looking for the same things in a friend as they are in a partner who could potentially be the mother to their kids. Being pleasant and fun to be around is way more important that being smart and someone you can "debate" with when you come home to that person every day.


----------



## Vince McMahon (Apr 12, 2022)

Kari Kamiya said:


> I just really found it _super fascinating_ that when the NPC meme kicked off, it got the media and Twitter bots so fucking mad. Like why would _anyone_ get bothered by a meme unless it hit _way_ too close to home--or to the truth?


This is a cute excuse but the reason loads of people were outraged is because you directly insult people with the NPC meme, as you state with it that "you're not even a human being". People do get upset with things that are made to insult them, so it wasn't because they were "NPCs".


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 12, 2022)

Otterly said:


> The result is actual mind control - you control what people do and don’t say to such a point that it turns into what they do and don’t THINK.


One way this kind of "mind control" can be attempted is by labeling "wrongthink" as "cringe", like I said.

Of course this approach fails if one doesn't care if they're "cringe" or not.


----------



## celebrityskin (Apr 12, 2022)

The overwhelming majority of people are shaped by the environment and culture they were born and raised in and are way more vulnerable to hysteria than they think. If they were alive in the times and places 80%+ of the population would be down for hunting witches in 1600s Salem, burning books in 1930s Germany and smashing babies against tree trunks in 1978 Cambodia.


----------



## gang weeder (Apr 12, 2022)

As with most social behaviors it's probably a combination of nature and nurture as to what "makes someone an NPC." We also might have to define what exactly is meant by the term. To me, it implies someone who values social comfort over truth, and this includes the vast majority of the population. As we can see with troonism, if saying that 2+2=5 leads to social acceptance, most people will say it, or at least not really try to argue against it. This is a pretty predictable way for humans to evolve, as being liked by the rest of your tribe is obviously of more concrete benefit than being correct in the abstract on some autistic debate topic (as Socrates found out the hard way).

As someone else pointed out, it isn't necessarily a bad thing, either. It just depends on what those dominant social values are that the average person is conforming to.


----------



## The Wicked Mitch (Apr 12, 2022)

Born but certainly very heavily reinforced for obvious reasons by those who rule over us. I encourage you to look into the work done by Solomon Asch during the 50's on conformity and social pressure.

In short an astounding percentage of the population will consistently go with the group consensus even if it's blatantly, objectively wrong.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 12, 2022)

Does anyone think Meyer Briggs personality could impact the odds of NPC behavior?

For example ~20% of women are ISFJ. It’s also pretty common in men. Could explain the bullshit were being subjected to. 

Idk how valid MB personality is. But, it’s interesting to consider. Especially the SF (sensing, feeling) grouping.


----------



## Saint Agustin (Apr 12, 2022)

Wow, this thread really became a well of information on behavioral science. 

Kiwis are a smart bunch


----------



## Never Scored (Apr 12, 2022)

Otterly said:


> The no inner speech thing is fascinating. I’m never really sure what to make of it. Are they saying people literally never have any? I can accept I suppose that people may have very different ways of inner reflection, we all think in lots of different ways, verbally, images, intuition etc. but are they saying some people have literally no inner reflection at all? That’s really weird.


It's weird. I've seen it portrayed as almost hearing a voice in your head. That sounds schizo to me. I see images in my head moreso than a voice. I learn much better from seeing something written down or a diagram or a demonstration than I do from someone verbally telling me something. When I read something written down my brain extrapolates a visual in my mind as opposed to hearing the words in my head. I always wondered if it was related to the inner voice thing. It's incredible how different people have totally different thought processes and ways of forming ideas. I retain almost everything I read, but very little I hear. I've met people who were the opposite.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 12, 2022)

Never Scored said:


> I've seen it portrayed as almost hearing a voice in your head.





ToroidalBoat said:


> The Simpsons: Homer talking to his brain compilation - YouTube
> 
> I like how Homer has an internal monologue despite having a crayon in his brain making him stupid.


----------



## Never Scored (Apr 12, 2022)

He also sees cartoons in his head like me.


----------



## Jimjamflimflam (Apr 13, 2022)

I'd say made for the most part.  NPC is a state of being in autopilot and we live a system that does it damnest to make sure we stay in that mode through a combination of easy dopamine hits and low expectations. Anyone who can't examine their life and realize NPC behavior they fell into at one point is very likely still a NPC. Sadly alot of people are doomed to be forever NPC because they never get the shock or critical idea that wakes them up.

Just because you are aware of yourself now doesn't mean you can't fall back into NPC mode.


----------



## L50LasPak (Apr 13, 2022)

Born, overwhelmingly. Think about it for ten seconds. Too many leaders pulling in different directions and absolutely nothing gets done. The labor doesn't get distributed where its needed, people don't know what they want, society has no direction, and things spiral into indolence until its too late. Then you go extinct.

Think about the level of conflict and uncertainty that can arise from just two strong leaders who have even moderately differing opinions from one another. Now consider the consequences of adding just one more strong personality to that matrix; the consequences are exponential. 2x2=4. 3x3x3=27. You've just complicated things by an additional 675%, where every single point of difference could mean death.

Having the overwhelming majority of human beings lack the capacity for higher thought is not a defect. Its a failsafe system which we have defeated and will shortly face the consequences for doing so.


----------



## ddw (Apr 13, 2022)

absolutely born. NPCs are recognizable as kids if you spend enough time interacting with them. based on personal experience (as a gradeschooler):

they have no ability to question why a punishment or rule even exists, just laments it at most
doesn't have any knowledge of stuff not taught in school
(idk the modern equivalent so i'll just stick with what it was like in the 2000's) doesn't use the internet because it's "dangerous" or they "might get a virus" and if they use it at all they just go on a handful of kid sites like the cartoon network site and webkinz, not based stuff like screwattack and newgrounds. forget about trying to show them a youtube video
very hesitant to complain about parents, even in total privacy


----------



## Megaton Punch (Apr 13, 2022)

It's interesting how certain people seem to default to "everyone is an NPC, free will does not exist" as a cope.  They don't seem to realize how telling that statement is.  The idea of not being a blind conformist is not only alien to them, but humanly impossible.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 14, 2022)

L50LasPak said:


> Having the overwhelming majority of human beings lack the capacity for higher thought is not a defect.


What if there could have been an increased natural urge to cooperate or empathize, without having an "NPC state"?

Of course, centralized civilization - at least or especially technological - may have been unable to emerge then.


----------



## Bungus Scrungus (Apr 14, 2022)

I'd answer the question, but I'm shocked to discover by the similar threads section below that this meme is _*at least*_ in it's Wojak form anyways 3 years old at this point. It's going to turn 4 this year. Jesus Christ, where does the time go?


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 14, 2022)

Megaton Punch said:


> The idea of not being a blind conformist is not only alien to them, but humanly impossible.


Reminds me of the schoolyard "logic" kids can have: "if it's different it's wrong".

(in Current Year it may be something like "if it's different it's cringe")



Bungus Scrungus said:


> where does the time go?


I made a thread awhile back on the 2010s being a blur.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Apr 14, 2022)

Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> Does anyone think Meyer Briggs personality could impact the odds of NPC behavior?
> 
> For example ~20% of women are ISFJ. It’s also pretty common in men. Could explain the bullshit were being subjected to.
> 
> Idk how valid MB personality is. But, it’s interesting to consider. Especially the SF (sensing, feeling) grouping.


SJ types in general are known to basically be the biggest conformists for the most part.



Spoiler: MBTI Sperging



If we're bringing in MBTI then we need to pay close attention to what the 4 main groupings are. There's SJ, SP, NT, and NF. SJs (ESFJ, ESTJ, ISFJ, ISTJ) are normies and make up at least 45% of the population combined. SPs are probably something like 35% (ESFP, ESTP, ISFP, ISTP). Both of these groups act totally differently from each other in a lot of cases and won't really see the world in anywhere near the same way since the underlying functions are different. An ESFJ wants to please and be liked. An ESFP wants to have fun and stick his dick in everything.(


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 14, 2022)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> SJ types in general are known to basically be the biggest conformists for the most part.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Does the S element make normie-hood more likely, you think? Seems like they’re constrained to what’s in their immediate vicinity making it easier to use mass media to convince them of stupid shit


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Apr 14, 2022)

Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> Does the S element make normie-hood more likely, you think? Seems like they’re constrained to what’s in their immediate vicinity making it easier to use mass media to convince them of stupid shit


S can mean two different things. Introverted Sensing (which is Si and is the defining element in Sjs) and Extraverted Sensing (likewise for SPs). Both can be NPCs and the categories trend toward it implicitly. They can also learn to think for themselves if the inclination is given.


Spoiler: How they work in detail



By itself, either way, it denotes simply that the user doesn't take in information from abstract concepts but uses more or less purely physical stimuli. The difference from there then comes in what physical stimuli is being processed followed by how. 
An Si user will (broadly) more or less follow the rules given to them and remain within those confines. They default to being NPCs because their brains 'see' primarily based on prior experience and default to instruction. The function itself is basically a filing cabinet.
An Se user will simply see the world and process it internally to some degree as it comes up. They live based on continuous inputs and will program themselves along with it. The function itself is essentially a camera.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 14, 2022)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> S can mean two different things. Introverted Sensing (which is Si and is the defining element in Sjs) and Extraverted Sensing (likewise for SPs). Both can be NPCs and the categories trend toward it implicitly. They can also learn to think for themselves if the inclination is given.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: How they work in detail
> ...


I think there’s a thread somewhere on here that has a survey. I couldn’t find it after three seconds so gave up.

Anyway, I bet $20 that NTs are vastly over represented in the autistic Thunderdome. 

And SF is vastly over represented on Twitter. 

Anyone who’s cognitive functioning (or whatever) is confined by the senses and emotions is most likely going to end up an obnoxious NPC to the worst degree. Plus Sensing is 70+% of population and Feeling is 60+% of population. “I see current issue. Current issue makes me feel sad. Therefore, narrative narrative narrative.” 

The question is: to what extent does nature select this distribution of NPCs or is it nurtured by society. 

And another question: How can we influence or alter their natural NPC setting - without owning the mainstream media and big tech corps? Is it possible? (Are the SF retards trainable?)


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Apr 14, 2022)

Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> I think there’s a thread somewhere on here that has a survey. I couldn’t find it after three seconds so gave up.
> 
> Anyway, I bet $20 that NTs are vastly over represented in the autistic Thunderdome.
> 
> ...


Clearly nature favors them and society nurtures it. As others have said, a million different people trying to be the leader just leads to conflict and someone needs to sweep the floors. Trying to produce a million elites will leave 90% of them unsatisfied. 
As for if SFs are trainable: that depends. xSFJ mainly just wants their to be emotional harmony and order in their life. If you can convince then to think more about their actions instead of just going with what's cool then they'll more or less just do it because they like you. Think Brett from Inside Job.
An XSFP is essentially a born hedonist. If you can convince them it gives them extra pleasure and status without too much work (and perhaps part of that comes from being a good person) then they'll do it. Think Goku from DragonBall.


----------



## Jimjamflimflam (Apr 14, 2022)

Otterly said:


> TThe no inner speech thing is fascinating. I’m never really sure what to make of it. Are they saying people literally never have any? I can accept I suppose that people may have very different ways of inner reflection, we all think in lots of different ways, verbally, images, intuition etc. but are they saying some people have literally no inner reflection at all? That’s really weird.



To be fair, if I remember the study correctly it wasn't "no inner speech" but that most (like 70%) people when randomly asked throughout the day what are they thinking reported nothing.  Implying that they are just passively navigating life on autopilot for the majority of the time.    Imo its not that they aren't capable of it just that they don't.

The whole thinking in words vs thinking in images is unrelated to the original study but still a fascinating concept to ponder.  As someone who is constantly in my own head just thinking/talking to myself, being able to do it in images would be pretty cool.  Not to  be confused with visualization (at least I think, maybe i'm wrong on that.  Also a super cool thing to try out), which was another thing tangentially related that pol was running with.


----------



## L50LasPak (Apr 14, 2022)

ToroidalBoat said:


> What if there could have been an increased natural urge to cooperate or empathize, without having an "NPC state"?
> 
> Of course, centralized civilization - at least or especially technological - may have been unable to emerge then.


Cooperation and empathy don't overrule the basic problem of people being unable to communicate with each other or decided their loyalties between multiple factions. The main issues are time and communications. For something as complex as leadership in a human society, its often difficult for someone to fully explain even their point of view in a succinct manner. This is one of the major reason you see most factional issues being dumbed down as much as possible in public discourse; its not just because leaders think their people are stupid, its also because you by default are trying to avoid a nine hour lecture on what your position even is let alone what you intend to do. The average person has the time an attention span to deeply learn about a few sides to an issue, yes, if they are willing, but there are hard limits on that kind of thing and they'll be unlikely to fully understand more than one or two.

Besides, consider that someone has the instinct to cooperate by default, but then they are presented with multiple factions. Two factions, they will try to compromise between them of course. Three factions, compromise is still possible. Ten, now its getting difficult. One hundred? Compromise is impossible. Being able to empathize with many or all of these factions too would be a disadvantage in a situation where compromise is impossible, and it would prevent you from being able to ignore or sweep aside the chaff and focus on what you think would work best.

In both of these situations, it is therefore advantageous to have as few factions, and therefore as few leaders as possible.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 14, 2022)

L50LasPak said:


> In both of these situations, it is therefore advantageous to have as few factions, and therefore as few leaders as possible.


So with no "NPCs" or "hive mind", the biggest a society could get is something like a village, or at most a city state?

(Reminds me of what I heard: there's a genetic limit of knowing around 150 people - beyond that can be psychologically unhealthy.)


----------



## L50LasPak (Apr 14, 2022)

ToroidalBoat said:


> So with no "NPCs", the biggest a society could get is something like a village, or at most a city state?
> 
> (I heard _Homo sapiens_ has some kind of genetic limit of knowing around 150 people, but beyond that can be psychologically unhealthy.)


Probably even less than that honestly. That genetic limit of knowing about 150 people is actually the optimistic estimate, which is usually paired with an estimate of about 35 you're capable of having a very close relationship with and knowing very well. 

Even a relatively tiny group of friends like just four or five people can have crippling arguments or schisms if two or more members disagree on who's direction to take. At some point, you need the majority of the group to back down and not just accept the direction of the leader, but also be happy with it. A group composed of five leaders will equal five very frustrated and unhappy leaders, because even if four of the leaders submit and accept the judgement of a superior, they will always resent it and always be thinking they can do better, and always take the first opportunity to show that they can do so. Which leads to chaos. And of course the leader who is their superior will be unhappy because their authority is weak, constantly being questioned and their minions are always insubordinate. 

Human beings do have various artificial structures to deal with this problem in real life, like hierarchical command structures, but those can only do so much to mitigate the problem. I know business people who sometimes spend their entire workday in meetings, discussing bullshit, purely because company doctrine indicates that X amount of people are supposed to have a say in whatever, which means _every_ major descison and many non-major ones must be discussed at unwiedly all-company meetings. As much as it infuriates me to take the side of a large corporate machine, I agree that method makes it impossible to get anything done.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 14, 2022)

L50LasPak said:


> crippling arguments or schisms


So it seems civilization may have been unlikely if NPCs weren't there.

Unless most could somehow be "on the same page" in one way or another.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Apr 14, 2022)

ToroidalBoat said:


> So it seems civilization may have been unlikely if NPCs weren't there.
> 
> Unless most could somehow be "on the same page" in one way or another.


Perhaps, but that still rests on a few faulty assumptions. 


L50LasPak said:


> Even a relatively tiny group of friends like just four or five people can have crippling arguments or schisms if two or more members disagree on who's direction to take. At some point, you need the majority of the group to back down and not just accept the direction of the leader, but also be happy with it. A group composed of five leaders will equal five very frustrated and unhappy leaders, because even if four of the leaders submit and accept the judgement of a superior, they will always resent it and always be thinking they can do better, and always take the first opportunity to show that they can do so. Which leads to chaos. And of course the leader who is their superior will be unhappy because their authority is weak, constantly being questioned and their minions are always insubordinate.



Firstly, we're coming to the conclusion that everyone who thinks more for themselves will automatically develop leadership ability and secondly, that they would want to exercise it. Leaders are important to society and their word can't be challenged too much if we want to keep a system running but it also runs on specialists and general labor. 
While intelligence and independent thought could predispose people towards leadership, it could also lead to them simply being above average versions of the workers I just talked about. These workers include scientists, inventors, engineers and scholars. Each of them may not be leaders but they require independent thought and above average creativity.


----------



## L50LasPak (Apr 14, 2022)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> Firstly, we're coming to the conclusion that everyone who thinks more for themselves will automatically develop leadership ability and secondly, that they would want to exercise it. Leaders are important to society and their word can't be challenged too much if we want to keep a system running but it also runs on specialists and general labor.
> While intelligence and independent thought could predispose people towards leadership, it could also lead to them simply being above average versions of the workers I just talked about. These workers include scientists, inventors, engineers and scholars. Each of them may not be leaders but they require independent thought and above average creativity.


I should have clarified: intelligence and creativity do not disqualify a person from being an NPC (or commoner as I prefer to call them). I consider the matter to be entirely a measure of a person's willingness to default to authority and how content they are in doing so, as well as to some extent the strength of their personality. Being a genius does not mean you'll show imitative or even have a terribly well developed sense of self preservation. A lot of extremely intelligent people are actually very content following along with the herd or defaulting to the first strong leadership figure that makes an impression on them.

Intelligence also has seemingly no bearing on whether or not a person develops a personality either. intellect and creativity can help you _express_ your personality better, but if you have a weak one or none at all the begin with you're shit out of luck.


----------



## Shadfan666xxx000 (Apr 14, 2022)

L50LasPak said:


> I should have clarified: intelligence and creativity do not disqualify a person from being an NPC (or commoner as I prefer to call them). I consider the matter to be entirely a measure of a person's willingness to default to authority and how content they are in doing so, as well as to some extent the strength of their personality. Being a genius does not mean you'll show imitative or even have a terribly well developed sense of self preservation. A lot of extremely intelligent people are actually very content following along with the herd or defaulting to the first strong leadership figure that makes an impression on them.
> 
> Intelligence also has seemingly no bearing on whether or not a person develops a personality either. intellect and creativity can help you _express_ your personality better, but if you have a weak one or none at all the begin with you're shit out of luck.


That's all true but then we have to ask ourselves the issue of how much being an NPC is inversely correlated to being a leader or perhaps a hermit. Can someone with a strong impulse to leadership be an NPC? How do we find out what exactly denotes an independent personality or how to develop one? We know the NPC concept itself isn't necessarily new (Gnosticism, old Chinese folk religion and even arguably Calvinism have takes on it) but how much truth is there and isn't can be hard to denote. For all we know, we're just looking at different levels of sheer stubbornness.


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (Apr 14, 2022)

Getting tard comed said:


> Not to insult you, ignoring the incel vibes, men generally aren't looking for the same things in a friend as they are in a partner who could potentially be the mother to their kids. Being pleasant and fun to be around is way more important that being smart and someone you can "debate" with when you come home to that person every day.


What part of "all else equal" do you mongs not get? Of course being pleasant is more important, I'm saying that I've seen numerous men IRL say they don't consider it an advantage even as a tiebreaker or a direct disadvantage. For what it's worth, one of them comes across as being real insecure and the other's a hedonist. But to summarize some implications:
1) Apparently being more intelligent/learned (not the same thing) has nothing to do with the quality of a mother
2) Apparently being able to have discussions about things that interest you has nothing to do with being fun to be around (that should probably go, too, for having things like hobbies in common)

Also, since some others were sperging about MBTI, I did an experiment and took an estimate of percentage of male and female population in each category, sorted from largest to smallest share, and graphed. Naturally men have a larger distribution. That's both a common sense and scientifically proven thing, men tend to have more variance in lots of things (height and IQ are the two main ones I'm familiar with), the argument being that evolution rewards using men as experiments but keeping women more similar. Being more variable is not in itself an advantage, it depends on what you're looking at.



			https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis#:~:text=A%202014%20review%20found%20that,and%20the%20causes%20remain%20unknown.
		









Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> SJ types in general are known to basically be the biggest conformists for the most part.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ESFP sounds way better to interact with than ESFJ. I like people who have a strong sense of self.

It's too bad most MBTI breakdowns are mainly concerned with jerking off how great each special snowflake type is. Even when they go into weaknesses you tend to see that "their weakness is caring too much about others" type stuff.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 14, 2022)

Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> What part of "all else equal" do you mongs not get? Of course being pleasant is more important, I'm saying that I've seen numerous men IRL say they don't consider it an advantage even as a tiebreaker or a direct disadvantage. For what it's worth, one of them comes across as being real insecure and the other's a hedonist. But to summarize some implications:
> 1) Apparently being more intelligent/learned (not the same thing) has nothing to do with the quality of a mother
> 2) Apparently being able to have discussions about things that interest you has nothing to do with being fun to be around (that should probably go, too, for having things like hobbies in common)
> 
> ...


To be fair, what snowflake would want to buy their premium service if they’ve been told they’re a soulless NPC or drone worker bee. I mean, You can’t go too hardcore on telling people they’re boring and bland and used for menial labor in society. You have to use words like “stable” and “harmonious” and “hard working.”


----------



## L50LasPak (Apr 14, 2022)

Shadfan666xxx000 said:


> That's all true but then we have to ask ourselves the issue of how much being an NPC is inversely correlated to being a leader or perhaps a hermit. Can someone with a strong impulse to leadership be an NPC? How do we find out what exactly denotes an independent personality or how to develop one? We know the NPC concept itself isn't necessarily new (Gnosticism, old Chinese folk religion and even arguably Calvinism have takes on it) but how much truth is there and isn't can be hard to denote. For all we know, we're just looking at different levels of sheer stubbornness.


Maybe this is a matter of interpretation but I've always seen the insult of NPC being this kind of deep philosophical cut that basically says to the target that they are incapable of choosing their own path in life. Its not like there aren't NPCs in vidya that aren't well-liked, or that players get attached to, or even that they're all stupid as enemy AI can actually be quite brilliant and capable of doing exploits the average player can't. But something an NPC can never do is overcome its programming, its always a slave to where the mechanics, or more often, the narrative will take it. 

Obviously if you look at it scientifically we're all inherently slaves to the laws of physics and so forth, so I've always figured the NPC term related more to society. How able you are to defy society's mechanics and society's narrative, for better or worse.


----------



## ToroidalBoat (Apr 15, 2022)

If there could be civilization that somehow works without "NPCs", yet many in the civilization are jerks - like IRL - there'd probably still need to be government and law.


----------



## Getting tard comed (Apr 15, 2022)

Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> What part of "all else equal" do you mongs not get?


The part where you actually typed it. 


Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> Of course being pleasant is more important, I'm saying that I've seen numerous men IRL say they don't consider it an advantage even as a tiebreaker or a direct disadvantage.


Dont consider being nice an advantage? Dont see a personality as a disadvantage? What are you saying here? 


Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> For what it's worth, one of them comes across as being real insecure and the other's a hedonist. But to summarize some implications:
> 1) Apparently being more intelligent/learned (not the same thing) has nothing to do with the quality of a mother


It doesn't. Which is why it doesn't matter to most men. 


Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> 2) Apparently being able to have discussions about things that interest you has nothing to do with being fun to be around (that should probably go, too, for having things like hobbies in common)


It doesn't which is why most men don't care how smart the girl they are with is. And why most smart men actively avoid "smart" girls. It gets annoying AF to have to argue with someone all the time when you know you're right and they are wrong.


----------



## Fish Fudge (Apr 16, 2022)

Jimjamflimflam said:


> To be fair, if I remember the study correctly it wasn't "no inner speech" but that most (like 70%) people when randomly asked throughout the day what are they thinking reported nothing.  Implying that they are just passively navigating life on autopilot for the majority of the time.    Imo its not that they aren't capable of it just that they don't.
> 
> The whole thinking in words vs thinking in images is unrelated to the original study but still a fascinating concept to ponder.  As someone who is constantly in my own head just thinking/talking to myself, being able to do it in images would be pretty cool.  Not to  be confused with visualization (at least I think, maybe i'm wrong on that.  Also a super cool thing to try out), which was another thing tangentially related that pol was running with.



I think that's what a lot of people got wrong about the whole topic - the claim mistakenly being that most people think in complete sentences.

Personally, my thought process feels a bit overlapped - a combination of inner visualisation and some form of 'inner speech'.  Obviously it's hard for me to conceive what it's like for individuals who have no ability to visualise images, but I'm not about to label them as subhuman troll people. Likewise for people who don't really use any inner speech - I'm horrendous at mathematics, and it's a completely alien process to me in terms of how people hold complex numbers and equations in their head. If we didn't have these divisions in terms of thought process, we wouldn't wind up with specialists in fields of architecture, engineering, graphic-design, programming, etc.

The bizarre bit as you pointed out, is when people _don't have any of that_. People self-reporting that they operate on an almost purely instinctive basis, reacting to situations out of muscle memory more than anything else. Which, to me, sounds like how a wild animal operates. That's the bit that disturbs me, that there's people fundamentally missing the cognitive element that defines us as human.

There's certainly people in the world who are cognitively incapable of it - where I get a bit lost, is with the whole NPC angle. It's really not clear if it's an innate inability with them, or - like you're angling towards - a passive apathy towards even trying. 'Thinking' often involves challenging yourself - breaking down ideas, and rigour-testing new ones. I'd wager a lot of people spare themselves that hardship purely for the sake of social cohesion/comfort.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 16, 2022)

Fish Fudge said:


> I think that's what a lot of people got wrong about the whole topic - the claim mistakenly being that most people think in complete sentences.
> 
> Personally, my thought process feels a bit overlapped - a combination of inner visualisation and some form of 'inner speech'.  Obviously it's hard for me to conceive what it's like for individuals who have no ability to visualise images, but I'm not about to label them as subhuman troll people. Likewise for people who don't really use any inner speech - I'm horrendous at mathematics, and it's a completely alien process to me in terms of how people hold complex numbers and equations in their head. If we didn't have these divisions in terms of thought process, we wouldn't wind up with specialists in fields of architecture, engineering, graphic-design, programming, etc.
> 
> ...


I’m not entirely sure about the last part. I think it’s familial.

I am constantly thinking - constantly. I think in insanely vivid images and in long dialogue. Either way, I’m always “on.” It can be frustrating being lost in thought because I sometimes have little awareness for what is directly in front of me. I’m literally watching a screen of ideas or having an internal conversation. 

However, when I ask people around me “what are you thinking about?” The answer is almost always “nothing.” And not nothing as in, I don’t feel like talking or It’s personal. They mean nothing as in NOTHING. Which links back to the animal instinct, lump of meat operating on a primitive level idea.

I’ll get hate for this but whatever: I used to think this phenomenon was a “male” problem. As in, men just don’t think. That’s because the women in my immediate family all agreed with the observation that men tend to having “nothing” in their head for the vast majority of the day - save for what might be right in front of them. (Aka, “I am driving.” “I am filling paperwork.” Is all the thoughts they tend to have. Nothing new, fun, creative, or hypothetical.) When asked for creative inputs or ideas on business, innovation, politics, philosophy, etc etc most males had nothing to say. When pressed, they literally couldn’t come up with ideas. Their brains just didn’t operate like that. Of course there were a few exceptions but they were the exception.

The problem is that I didn’t know many unrelated females to sample as well - except females in my immediate family. Now that I’ve talked to and worked with a lot of women, I know it’s not a male dominated problem. Instead it’s a problem across the board. Remember 70% have no thoughts through our a given point in the day? 70% of the world is “S” according to Meyer-Briggs, which I think is the same demographic. 

So, that leads me to believe that there’s a largely genetic or familial component. You’ll see that NPCs breed NPCs either by nature or nurture. Families that are a bit more eccentric, odd, pioneering, or entrepreneurial will beget children in the same vein: non-NPCs. 

There are some flukes, obviously. But it appears inherited. And This isn’t directly tied with IQ or intelligence either. Or even political persuasion. The eco-warrior, frog venom huffing hippie can be just as non-NPC as the conservative military kid, for instance. 

Also, the non-NPCs will tend to be in higher positions of authority, power, or wealthy compared to NPCs. I thinks it’s survival strategy adaptation. NPCs survive, as do non-NPCs. They just choose different routes. 

NPCs can’t become “not an NPC” because there is something fundamentally different about their brain. It’s not a lack of effort. If you force an NPC to generate thoughts they become frustrated, stuck, and annoyed. Their brain is developed for what is in front of them and for taking orders. 

So with that information, the best we can do is control what programming we send to the NPCs (in a happy world: by a quality education and honest/healthy media.) 

We have neither. So we’re fucked. 

Anyway, this is just a shitpost theory of mine. I’m not particularly sentimental towards it.


----------



## gang weeder (Apr 16, 2022)

Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> The problem is that I didn’t know many unrelated females to sample as well - except females in my immediate family. Now that I’ve talked to and worked with a lot of women, I know it’s not a male dominated problem. Instead it’s a problem across the board. Remember 70% have no thoughts through our a given point in the day? 70% of the world is “S” according to Meyer-Briggs, which I think is the same demographic.



I can second this. I've interacted with tons of women who were, to put it frankly, vapid empty shells.



Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> NPCs can’t become “not an NPC” because there is something fundamentally different about their brain. It’s not a lack of effort. If you force an NPC to generate thoughts they become frustrated, stuck, and annoyed. Their brain is developed for what is in front of them and for taking orders.
> 
> So with that information, the best we can do is control what programming we send to the NPCs (in a happy world: by a quality education and honest/healthy media.)



I think your "theory" has a large degree of truth to it and also implies that the ideology of democracy, in which every person is theoretically assigned an equal voice via their single vote, is fundamentally flawed. After all, NPCs don't really have a "voice" of their own, they just parrot whatever programming they've internalized.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 16, 2022)

gang weeder said:


> I can second this. I've interacted with tons of women who were, to put it frankly, vapid empty shells.
> 
> 
> 
> I think your "theory" has a large degree of truth to it and also implies that the ideology of democracy, in which every person is theoretically assigned an equal voice via their single vote, is fundamentally flawed. After all, NPCs don't really have a "voice" of their own, they just parrot whatever programming they've internalized.



The problem is that you can’t test who is an NPC and who is not an NPC. It transcends education, intelligence, wealth, sex, race, etc. absent of testing everyone, it’s not feasible. Plus a lot of wealthy NPCs may be excluded & build resentment. I’ve met a few medical students and attorneys that couldn’t think outside the box if their life depended on it. But they knew the formulas required. (I bet most attorneys that go into personal injury are just intelligent NPCs, for example.) 
Also, NPCs do have their merits. An NPC that works on a farm may not be capable of independent thought… but he still can dominate a discussion about traditional farm practices against say a quick witted LA attorney. Their practicality and concern with the immediate can be beneficial for a healthy democracy assuming they have useful training for what’s in front of them and can consider to some degree basic policies that would impact their profession. 

I think Plato may have been on to something with the gold/silver/bronze groupings tbh Gold is PCs. Silver is intelligent NPCs. Bronze is average to below average NPCs.

The goal then is for the “Playable Characters” (or whatever you want to call them) to control and inspire the NPCs for the good of society so that their equal vote is a positive force.  Unfortunately, power corrupts & the imaginative nature of PCs make them capable of conjuring up destructive or greedy ideas. 

But, yes. Democracy has its flaws. I just don’t see a way around it that wouldn’t cause more destruction.


----------



## Fish Fudge (Apr 16, 2022)

Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> I’m not entirely sure about the last part. I think it’s familial.
> 
> I am constantly thinking - constantly. I think in insanely vivid images and in long dialogue. Either way, I’m always “on.” It can be frustrating being lost in thought because I sometimes have little awareness for what is directly in front of me. I’m literally watching a screen of ideas or having an internal conversation.
> 
> ...



Makes a lot of sense. I suppose I just wondered if there was a subset of people who had the capability, but chose not to engage with it - because in this day in age - social cohesion/comfort can be a powerful driver for some.

The "what are you thinking about / nothing" element has always caught me off-guard. My brain never stops - it's what drove me to abuse cannabis/alcohol in my younger years, desperately searching for some sort of off-switch so I could just be-present and 'fit in'. I'm willing to admit though, there's definitely an element of just being a bit neurotically inclined going on with that. 

It definitely makes a lot of sense for there to be some sort of genetic factor. I'm not sure how much the hypothesis holds water these days, but I was reading a little bit about the Bicameral Mind approach - the general idea being that some humans heard "voices" that they couldn't understand originated from their own mind, instead assuming them to come from an external God/entity, before finally our minds developed to the point that we resolved that division.

Whether or not it's bullshit, I don't know, but it did make me wonder if there wasn't an even larger section of the population that never even went through that evolutionary process. Historical figures who had 'visions' or 'phrophecies' may well have been misinterpreting the conclusions of their own minds as coming from some external source, while the NPCs of the time, incapable of that kind of thought, got drawn into whatever the compelling message was.

Equally just shitposting around the topic, but it's interesting.


----------



## Dilbert (Apr 16, 2022)

Jimjamflimflam said:


> To be fair, if I remember the study correctly it wasn't "no inner speech" but that most (like 70%) people when randomly asked throughout the day what are they thinking reported nothing.  Implying that they are just passively navigating life on autopilot for the majority of the time.    Imo its not that they aren't capable of it just that they don't.


I never really understood the idea of thinking about "nothing". Whenever I tried meditation I always got that suggestion and never knew what to do with it. I end up just thinking about the idea of thinking about nothing which just turns into me thinking about stuff.  Even when I am doing nothing and/or being an idiot I still have thoughts behind it so the concept is odd to me.  

Also what do they mean by "nothing"? I would be kind of self-conscious about answering what I was thinking about (even if its not really embarrassing) and would possibly just respond with "nothing" just to get out of answering. Maybe a lot of them are also doing the same. 



Jimjamflimflam said:


> The whole thinking in words vs thinking in images is unrelated to the original study but still a fascinating concept to ponder.  As someone who is constantly in my own head just thinking/talking to myself, being able to do it in images would be pretty cool.  Not to  be confused with visualization (at least I think, maybe i'm wrong on that.  Also a super cool thing to try out), which was another thing tangentially related that pol was running with.


Wait so can you not picture images in your mind or do you just not really rely on it or use it much? I know there are people who have a disorder that makes them unable to visualize things but I'm sure it exists as a spectrum (like a lot of disorders) so maybe some people can do it but less so than normal? 

Tbh I always found the idea/topic of how people think and how everyone's thinking varies to be interesting.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 16, 2022)

Fish Fudge said:


> Makes a lot of sense. I suppose I just wondered if there was a subset of people who had the capability, but chose not to engage with it - because in this day in age - social cohesion/comfort can be a powerful driver for some.
> 
> The "what are you thinking about / nothing" element has always caught me off-guard. My brain never stops - it's what drove me to abuse cannabis/alcohol in my younger years, desperately searching for some sort of off-switch so I could just be-present and 'fit in'. I'm willing to admit though, there's definitely an element of just being a bit neurotically inclined going on with that.
> 
> ...


Yes, bicameral mind! I found the old book in my college library and stole it years ago. They never noticed it was missing or fined me. You’re the first I’ve met that’s heard of it.

The idea that cognition evolved or presented differently in our not-so-distant ancestors is fascinating. Even more so if you consider it’s applicable to a % of modern man. If it is an inherited or familial trait, even more interesting 

Now, hate on the Jews all you want, but my best friend is of Ashkenazi Jew descent. Smartest fucker I’ve ever met and an obvious Playable Character. Sometimes I wonder if the success/intelligence of Jewish people isn’t related to their PC status. But that’s just race sperging I’m really not committed to


----------



## gang weeder (Apr 16, 2022)

Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> The problem is that you can’t test who is an NPC and who is not an NPC. It transcends education, intelligence, wealth, sex, race, etc. absent of testing everyone, it’s not feasible. Plus a lot of wealthy NPCs may be excluded & build resentment. I’ve met a few medical students and attorneys that couldn’t think outside the box if their life depended on it. But they knew the formulas required. (I bet most attorneys that go into personal injury are just intelligent NPCs, for example.)
> Also, NPCs do have their merits. An NPC that works on a farm may not be capable of independent thought… but he still can dominate a discussion about traditional farm practices against say a quick witted LA attorney. Their practicality and concern with the immediate can be beneficial for a healthy democracy assuming they have useful training for what’s in front of them and can consider to some degree basic policies that would impact their profession.
> 
> I think Plato may have been on to something with the gold/silver/bronze groupings tbh Gold is PCs. Silver is intelligent NPCs. Bronze is average to below average NPCs.
> ...



Well, you could start by narrowing it down to some principles that the rulers, PC or otherwise, are bound to and which can't simply be overruled because 51% of the sheep voted a certain way. But again, that wouldn't be "democratic" so it's typically considered a non-starter.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Apr 16, 2022)

gang weeder said:


> Well, you could start by narrowing it down to some principles that the rulers, PC or otherwise, are bound to and which can't simply be overruled because 51% of the sheep voted a certain way. But again, that wouldn't be "democratic" so it's typically considered a non-starter.


Almost like a bill or declaration of inalienable rights or something… hmm, that’s a pretty interesting idea.


----------



## gang weeder (Apr 16, 2022)

Sailor Kim Jong Moon said:


> Almost like a bill or declaration of inalienable rights or something… hmm, that’s a pretty interesting idea.



Yes, but without the part where idiots can vote to ignore it. Mob rule was one of the founders' greatest fears and in hindsight I think they were completely justified in that fear.

Another issue with the Bill of Rights is that it's about exactly that--Rights. It bestows rights to individuals, which is all well and good, but there isn't an agreed-upon set of base principles binding government's duty to the people. It's "you can't do these things," not "these are the things you must do." For instance, binding politicians to serve the actual population of their nation and forbidding them from participating in globalist institutions like the UN.

I recognize that this is obviously a novel problem since the 1700s, but it's a hole in the American approach IMO. It creates a perspective where everything has to only be framed in terms of rights, never responsibilities, thus leaving people free to be complete degenerates so long as don't technically violate another person's rights.


----------



## Michael Pemulis (Apr 17, 2022)

I've known a lot of low IQ individuals who would still form somewhat profound thoughts from time to time, and I've known a lot of high IQ individuals who would simply refuse to think about things happening around them. It's obviously not *just* decisions and outside influence but nurture is way more influential than nature here.


----------



## Stoneheart (Apr 17, 2022)

Hey dickholsters!  we first need to make sure that we are all talking about the same thing, so a common definition of NPC should be the first thing we do.

I think the 4chan definition is the best. NPCs are people without inner monologe and the abilitiy of visualizing things in their mind.


----------



## Wormy (Apr 17, 2022)

Considering NPC just means "Anyone not hard right wing" according to the internet, and is thus is purely based on adopted ideology? Made.


----------



## Screamer (Apr 17, 2022)

Stoneheart said:


> Hey dickholsters!  we first need to make sure that we are all talking about the same thing, so a common definition of NPC should be the first thing we do.
> 
> I think the 4chan definition is the best. NPCs are people without inner monologe and the abilitiy of visualizing things in their mind.



That's a whole different thing.

NPCs are people who hold opinions, facts, narratives and vocalise them with absolute certainty. Yet lack any background knowledge or information for why they hold that opinion. They have adopted it completely uncritically. Often very passionately. Yet as they just have the opinion.  They can instantly swap it out with a different opinion, often completely contradictory and logically inconsistent. They didn't know why they had the previous opinion, they don't know why they have the current one. As they aren't thinking, they seem to not even notice the contradiction or change in opinion. It's just the opinion to have. 

They can strongly hold many opinions which are logically inconsistent and not realise it. 

They don't like to be challenged on any of this, because it creates strong emotional stress. As they don't know why they think what they think. When pushed to critically think, when asked questions, asked to explain or have contradictions in their opinions pointed out. They have nothing. They literally can't think about these opinions because they know so little about them. Which creates immense frustration. They just KNOW what they think is correct.

This happens on all sides of politics and is probably fed by whatever information bubbles they're in. They are just the correct opinion to have.

It's the difference between, someone having a bunch of information and reasons why they hold an opinion. Versus just having an opinion.

So they can't be talked or reasoned to. It is often highlighted by claims that people just need to "listen." Or telling others to do the research, because they can't explain why they think what they know. They only want to be around people who also just uncritically have the same opinion. Say the same things. Never question it. Just repeat the correct things to say. Like an NPC in a video game.

It's worth noting, that everyone can be an NPC on certain topics, opinions and facts.

In general, it's used to refer to people who are highly passionate and outspoken about political and social issues. Yet are just spouting what they believe are the correct opinions to have. Often for virtue signalling reasons. If you don't agree or question it, it's a sign of being a bad person. Especially for the woke left's version of it. These are the opinions a good person has. As they didn't come to the opinions themselves, they don't understand how someone could not hold that opinion.

Or that is roughly how I see it.

EDIT: This has always been a thing. Whatever the mechanism that feeds people NPC opinions, it has been amplified with social media and the current culture in general. So people have more NPC opinions about things than ever before.


----------



## Certified_Autist (Apr 17, 2022)

Michael Pemulis said:


> I've known a lot of low IQ individuals who would still form somewhat profound thoughts from time to time, and I've known a lot of high IQ individuals who would simply refuse to think about things happening around them. It's obviously not *just* decisions and outside influence but nurture is way more influential than nature here.


I think its 2 scales. An intelligence scale and a "conformity/creativity" scale. Like you said, there's otherwise "smart" people that can't or won't think for themselves, and there's stupid people that can still independently think. As well as other combinations of intelligence and creativity.

If you want to visualize it, imagine a geometry graph kind of like this.


Spoiler: 10,000 hours in MS Paint


----------



## veri (Apr 18, 2022)

personably i believe people are born with hardwired traits that can't be changed. those traits determining your personality, skillset, strengths, weaknesses, view on/interpretation of life, intelligence, and likes/dislikes... there are people who naturally more empathetic and view their life and events through that lens, the downside of that being that they're easily manipulated to emotional appeals and unquestioning. there are people who naturally are more critical and view things objectively who don't buy into things as easily. neither of these traits on their own are necessarily bad though. empathy isn't a bad trait but it can be, and is, exploited. there are people who are independent, and people who have the need to be socially accepted at any cost

these traits along with location, family, life experiences/development, socialization, self awareness etc determine whether someone will be an npc imo. i believe social conformity is becoming more necessary nowadays because of the younger and younger age people start being influenced


----------

