From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Sun Aug 25 2002 - 18:22:02 MDT
Sex, Drugs, and Cults. An 
evolutionary psychology 
perspective on why and how 
cult memes get a drug-like 
hold on people, and what 
might be done to mitigate the 
effects
By H. Keith Henson
Abstract
In the aggregate, memes constitute human culture. Most are 
useful. But a whole class of memes (cults, ideologies, etc.) have 
no obvious replication drivers. Why are some humans highly 
susceptible to such memes? Evolutionary psychology is required 
to answer this question. Two major evolved psychological 
mechanisms emerge from the past to make us susceptible to cults. 
Capture-bonding exemplified by Patty Hearst and the Stockholm 
Syndrome is one. Attention-reward is the other. Attention is the 
way social primates measure status. Attention indicates status and 
is highly rewarding because it causes the release of brain 
chemicals such as dopamine and endorphins. Actions lead to 
Attention that releases Rewarding brain chemicals. Drugs shortcut 
attention in the Action-Attention-Reward (AAR) brain system and 
lead to the repeated behaviour we call addiction. Gambling also 
causes misfiring of the AAR pathway. Memes that manifest as 
cults hijack this brain reward system by inducing high levels of 
attention behaviour between cult members. People may become 
irresponsible on either cults or drugs sometimes resulting in 
severe damage to reproductive potential Evolutionary psychology 
thus answers the question of why humans are susceptible to 
memes that do them and/or their potential for reproductive 
success damage. We evolved the psychological traits of capture-
bonding and attention-reward that make us vulnerable for other 
maladaptive functions. We should be concerned about predator 
and pathogen memes and the mechanisms that make us 
vulnerable. The possibility of modeling important social factors 
contributing to the spread of dangerous cult memes is discussed. 
The history of the authors experiences that led to understanding 
the connection between drugs and cults is related. 
Keywords: evolutionary psychology, memetics, Stockholm 
syndrome, capture-bonding, reproductive success, dopamine, 
endorphins, cults, drugs and attention rewards, brainwashing, 
mind control, deprogramming, scientology.
Introduction
Cult gatherings or human-potential trainings are an ideal 
environment to observe first-hand what is technically called the 
'Stockholm Syndrome This is a situation in which those who 
are intimidated, controlled, or made to suffer, begin to love, 
admire, and even sometimes sexually desire their controllers or 
captors. --Dick Sutphen 
"Drug addiction involves co-opting the same neural circuitry than 
normally provides motivation for eating and sex. I am interested 
in drug abuse because, in addition to its importance as a social 
and medical problem, it has the potential to illuminate profound 
aspects of vital human behaviour."--Robert Edwards, The Wheeler 
Center for the Neurobiology of Addiction. 
For those who need an introduction, memes are replicating 
information patterns--ideas you can pass on 1. With a few 
exceptions, they exist in the context of human carriers and their 
artifacts. Richard Dawkins invented the word and discussed the 
concept and its consequences in the last chapter of The Selfish 
Gene (1976). Memes, like genes, are in a Darwinian survival 
contest, in the case of memes for the limited space in human 
brains--brains that have evolved to be receptive to memes. The 
information that is passed from person to person and from 
generation to generation is the primary factor that gives humans a 
competitive advantage over other animals. A modern example of 
the power of memes is that human children do not have to learn 
that streets are dangerous places by potentially fatal trial and 
error. You only have to consider the relative number of cats and 
dogs killed on the streets to the number of human children with 
similar fatal encounters to see the value of the look-both-ways-
before-you cross meme.
In the aggregate, memes constitute human culture. Most of them 
are of the rock-chipping/shoemaking/vehicle-avoiding kind--they 
provide clear benefits to those who host them, i.e., learn 
behaviours or information. They are passed from generation to 
generation because of the benefits (ultimately to the genes of their 
hosts) they provide.
But a whole class of memes have no obvious replication drivers. 
Memes of this class, which includes religions, cults and social 
movements such as Nazism and communism, have induced 
humans to some of the most spectacular events in history, 
including mass suicides, wars, migrations, crusades, and other 
forms of large-scale social unrest. These memes often induce 
humans to activities that seriously damage or destroy their hosts 
potential for reproductive success. The classic example is the 
nearly extinct Shakers--whose meme set completely forbids sex. 
A more recent example is the gonad-clipping Heaven's Gate cult.
While inducing such behaviour makes sense from the meme's 
viewpoint (diverting host time and energy toward propagating the 
meme and away from bearing and caring for children) it makes no 
sense when considered from the gene's viewpoint for a 
susceptibility to this class of sometimes-fatal memes to have 
evolved.
Why are (at least some) humans highly susceptible?
To answer this question I must digress far into evolutionary 
psychology. Evolutionary psychology (EP) grew out of the same 
background as sociobiology. EP is based on the simple concept 
that our minds have been shaped no less than our bodies by 
evolution. Because evolution acts slowly, our psychological 
characteristics today are those that promoted reproductive 
success in the ancestral environment, i.e., our race's millions of 
years of living as social primates in tribes and small villages. EP 
asserts that our psychological traits are the constructs of genes that 
were selected in the ancestral environment. 
    The goal of research in evolutionary psychology is to 
    discover and understand the design of the human mind. 
    Evolutionary psychology is an approach to psychology, in 
    which knowledge and principles from evolutionary 
    biology are put to use in research on the structure of the 
    human mind. It is not an area of study, like vision, 
    reasoning, or social behaviour. It is a way of thinking 
    about psychology that can be applied to any topic within it.
    In this view, the mind is a set of information-processing 
    machines that were designed by natural selection to solve 
    adaptive problems faced by our hunter-gatherer ancestors. 
    This way of thinking about the brain, mind, and behaviour 
    is changing how scientists approach old topics, and 
    opening up new ones." Leda Cosmides & John Tooby. 
    (See http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/primer.html 
    for more on evolutionary psychology.)
There has not been enough time for human genes to adapt to the 
changes in the environment in the last few thousand years. In fact, 
most humans lived in tribes or small villages until relatively 
recent generations. I suspect that a substantial fraction of human 
problems in the world today, not just cults, result from the 
mismatch between the current--highly artificial--environment and 
the environment in which we evolved. (Though mismatch and all, 
I much prefer the modern world.)
In the Western culture block the tribal environment is largely 
gone--our success has greatly modified the world. We have to use 
the few remaining hunter-gatherer groups and our nearest relatives 
to give us a view into the past. While there was plenty of variation 
in what people did for a living, (depending on local resources) the 
picture that emerges for humans in the previous several million 
years is that of a social primate living in small bands and villages.
There may be other factors, but I see at least two major evolved 
psychological mechanisms emerging from the past to make us 
susceptible to cults. The Patty Hearst kidnapping 2 exemplifies 
one. We know that people can undergo a sudden change of 
thinking and loyalties under threat of death or intense social 
pressure and isolation from friends and family. Usually called 
"brainwashing," it is also known as The Stockholm Syndrome 3 
and mind control.
An evolutionary psychology explanation starts by asking why such 
a trait would have improved the reproductive success of people 
during the millions of years we lived as social primates in bands 
or tribes? One thing that stands out from our records of the 
historical North American tribes, the South American tribes such 
as the Yanomam, and some African tribes is that being captured 
was a relatively common event. If you go back a few generations, 
almost everyone in some of these tribes has at least one ancestor 
(usually a woman) who was violently captured from another tribe 
4.
Natural selection has left us with psychological responses to 
capture seen in the Stockholm Syndrome and the Patty Hearst 
kidnapping. Capture-bonding or social reorientation when 
captured from one warring tribe to another was an essential 
survival tool for a million years or more. Those who reoriented 
often became our ancestors. Those who did not became breakfast.
Tribal life was not very many generations in the past even for 
western people. Recent genetic studies in Iceland have found that 
many of the women who were the founding stock of Iceland came 
from England and what is now France. Some of them might have 
been willing brides, but some were probably captured and carried 
off in Viking raids only 40 generations ago.
Fighting hard to protect yourself and your relatives is good for 
your genes 5, but when captured and escape is not possible, giving 
up short of dying and making the best you can of the new situation 
is also good for your genes. In particular it would be good for 
genes that built minds able to dump previous emotional 
attachments under conditions of being captured and build new 
social bonds to the people who have captured you. The process 
should neither be too fast (because you may be rescued) nor too 
slow (because you don't want to excessively try the patience of 
those who have captured you--see end note 3).
An EP explanation stresses the fact that we have lots of ancestors 
who gave up and joined the tribe that had captured them (and 
sometimes had killed most of their relatives). This selection of our 
ancestors accounts for the extreme forms of capture-bonding 
exemplified by Patty Hearst and the Stockholm Syndrome. Once 
you realize that humans have this trait, it accounts for the "why" 
behind everything from basic military training and sex bondage 
to fraternity hazing (people may have a wired-in "knowledge" of 
how to induce bonding in captives). It accounts for battered wife 
syndrome, where beatings and abuse are observed to strengthen 
the bond between the victim and the abuser--at least up to a point.
This explanation for brainwashing/Stockholm Syndrome is an 
example of the power of EP to suggest plausible and testable 
reasons for otherwise hard-to-fathom human psychological traits. 
Some cults use abuse and confinement to induce capture-bonding, 
especially for those who try to escape. Others, particularly the 
Moonies, use fear as an element to get prospective members to 
bond. (In the 70s, those who went with them for a weekend found 
themselves 30 miles from the nearest town.) Historically capture-
bonding was important in the spread of some religions. (Convert 
or die, infidel!)
Capture-bonding does not by itself account for the influence cults 
have on their victims, though it does account for the success of 
classic "deprogramming" cult members by capture. To account for 
the success of most cults we need to look at a powerful 
psychological reward mechanism.
Of all the factors that have been measured in such representative 
ancestral environments as we have (including chimps), social 
standing (or social status) is the most predictive of reproductive 
success. This is true for both sexes, but the potential rewards for 
obtaining high social status were--and still are--higher for males. 
High status males had multiple wives or additional mating 
opportunities in the ancestral environment (and for that matter, 
still do). See http://www.clark.net/pub/wright/chaptwel.htm, 
heading Men, Women, and Status and the classic studies of the 
Yanomam. Yanomam males obtain high status to a 
considerable degree by taking part in killing males from rival 
tribes. The high status Yanomam males have about 3 times as 
many children as low status males 6.
If anyone doubts that males can convert high status (represented 
by wealth) into additional children, you can consult the historical 
records right up to a few years ago when Gordon P. Gettys 
second family with three children came to light 7. Brigham Young 
had 47 children, and over 50 women as wives.
High status females, from what we can see in chimpanzees and 
humans, have no more offspring than low status ones, but their 
children are more likely to survive. (In bad times, much more 
likely to survive.) The evolutionary consequence is that humans 
have evolved to be exquisitely sensitive to changes in status. With 
the big genetic payoff looming, it is no surprise that over 
evolutionary time humans have become so sensitive to status and 
work so hard for it. Status was (and to some extent still is) highly 
correlated with reproductive success. As Henry Kissinger noted, 
"Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac." (Power is, of course, another 
word for high status.)
Activities that lead to feelings of increasing status are highly 
rewarding: that is, they cause the release of chemicals (dopamine 
and endorphins), which induce highly pleasurable states in the 
brain. This reward system is fundamental to human motivation, 
and in the ancestral environment it worked to enhance 
reproductive success most of the time.
Of course, people repeat behaviour that leads to flooding their 
brains with pleasurable chemicals. There are two causal loops 
involved here. The short-term reward loop acts over hours to 
years, and the long-term reproductive success loop over 
generations. The long-term loop sets up susceptibility to the short-
term loop.
In other words, an Action (such as hunting success, for example) 
leads to Attention (an indicator of status) that in the short-term 
releases Rewarding brain chemicals and in the long term improves 
reproductive success. Simple operant conditioning will move 
some of the reward release "upstream," so that the actions that 
later result in reward chemical releases will themselves become 
rewarding.
In time humans discovered drugs that shortcut this Action-
Attention-Reward (AAR) brain mechanism and directly flood the 
brain with pleasurable chemicals. The behaviour of eating, 
drinking, smoking or injecting drugs that simulate the natural 
chemicals is highly rewarding, and (in people genetically 
predisposed) leads to the repeated behaviour we refer to as 
addiction.
The brain reward system involved in drug addiction can be 
stimulated in other ways, for example by running (runners high) 
or by gambling. People who liken compulsive gambling to drug 
addiction are right; the rewards that compulsive gamblers get are 
only one step removed from exogenous chemicals--with the 
"Attention" step diminished (unless you are a big winner).
Gambling and addictive drugs cause misfiring of the AAR 
pathway, and often result in severe damage to reproductive 
potential, but both are recent on the time scale of evolution. In our 
tribal past, evolution usually favoured those who were motivated 
by the mechanism.
The importance of the AAR mechanism is hard to underestimate. 
It may well be that social attention rewards are the most 
important motivating mechanism behind human activities. In our 
tribal past status indicated by social attention was tied directly to 
reproductive success, and it is still a major factor in this 
endeavour.
It should come as no surprise that this powerful reward 
mechanism can be taken over by drug-induced rewards, but this is 
not the only way the brain reward system can be hijacked. Memes 
(we finally get back to them!), which manifest as cults and related 
social movements, have "discovered" the brain's reward system as 
well. Successful cult memes induce intense social interaction 
behaviour between cult members. This trips the attention 
detectors. Tripping the detectors causes the release of reward 
chemicals without having any more connection to "real world" 
improvements in reproductive success than abusing addictive 
drugs. Anyone who has ever had the feeling of being higher than a 
kite after giving a public speech is well aware of the effects of 
attention.
Examples of cults using focused attention include "love bombing" 
in Rev. Moon's Unification Church and "training routines" and 
"auditing" in Scientology. (Scientologys training routine 0 (TR-0) 
has people staring at a partner, in some cases without blinking, for 
extended times.) An explanation consistent with evolutionary 
psychology for the propagation of the hard-to-explain memes at 
the top of this article is that successful memes of this class induce 
focused attention between those infected with the memes.
That attention in turn results in the release of pleasure inducing 
chemicals into the reward system of the brain. This release of 
chemicals results in the reinforcement of behaviours that led to 
the attention--identical to the process we see in addicts. Thus, it 
should come as no surprise that the behaviour of people under the 
influence of cults is similar to that we observe in addicts. Typical 
behaviour for both includes draining bank accounts and education 
funds, selling or mortgaging property, neglecting children, 
destroying relations with family and friends and losing interest in 
anything except the drug or cult. (Not all people become this 
irresponsible on either cults or drugs, but many do.) 8
Becoming dependent on drugs or cults is a feedback process on 
the brain reward system as well. Once a person is using drugs or 
alcohol to "excess" their non-involved friends withdraw attention-
rewarding contact because who wants to deal with a strung out 
junky or a drunk? The same loss of attention rewards happens 
when friends withdraw from a person who tries to recruit them 
into his new cult. The result is to make the drug or cult a major if 
not exclusive source of brain rewards.
In the most extreme forms of cult meme possession, victims are 
so influenced by memes using the attention reward pathway that 
their own survival becomes inconsequential. I have used the term 
memeoid to describe people who fly airliners into skyscrapers, 
or strap explosives to their bodies and set them off in a crowd. On 
March 1, 2002 there was a news story on CNN about a Palestinian 
mother of two who was expounding for a TV crew how she was 
ready to strap on explosives. She was obviously revelling in the 
attention, but ambivalent about the reality of leaving her children 
orphans. Hopefully she will not carry through.
Evolutionary psychology thus provides answers to the question of 
why humans are susceptible to memes that do them and/or their 
potential for reproductive success so much damage. We evolved 
the psychological traits that make us vulnerable because social 
status is so important for reproductive success. Cults and drugs 
both take advantage of the same essential motivational reward 
pathway.
What we might do with this knowledge
If we are concerned about the future of our species, we should be 
concerned about predators and pathogens.
In articles and lectures I point out that the vast majority of memes 
are cultural elements that are either useful to us (and our genes) or 
at least not harmful. This is analogous to the biological world 
around us. Microorganisms make beer, cheese, and decompose 
leaf litter. Useful, interesting, but not a matter of intense concern. 
(Unless, of course, they quit working!)
On the other hand, HIV, anthrax, smallpox and avian derived flu 
are deadly pathogens. We are rightly concerned about them.
We should be equally concerned with pathological memes, those 
behind cults and related social movements. As an example, the 
Pol Pot mutation of the communist meme did as much damage to 
the people of Cambodia as a major plague.
A lot of human history such as the religious wars that swept back 
and forth over Europe were meme driven and can be modeled in 
those terms. Given all the grief Nazism, Communism, and now 
splinters off Islam have caused and are now causing, the study of 
memes and (as important) the evolved pathways which cause us to 
be susceptible to cult memes should be a major topic of research, 
particularly modeling, with the models guiding public policy 
decisions.
The analogy might be the application of germ theory in guiding 
public policy on health. A sign that evolutionary psychology and 
memetics may be approaching the stage of guiding public policy 
decisions is that on Feb 19, 2002, the New York Times carried an 
article, Hijacking the Brain Circuits With a Nickel Slot 
Machine. The article reported on the work of Dr. Gregory Berns, 
a psychiatrist at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, 
Dr. P. Read Montague, a neuroscientist at Baylor College of 
Medicine in Houston, Dr. Wolfram Schultz, a neuroscientist at 
Cambridge University in England, and Dr. Jonathan Cohen, a 
neuroscientist at Princeton. The information coming out of their 
work is essentially consistent with the views in this paper.
Knowledge of the deep-seated and highly evolved brain 
mechanisms involved in drug and cult addiction also permits 
analysis of how existing treatments work. For example, the 
rewards model derived above indicates that twelve-step programs 
work not because of the specific steps involved, but because they 
provide attention rewards from the group--substituting an 
endogenous "natural" chemical reward for a exogenous chemical 
reward. Success in getting out of the programs without returning 
to the exogenous chemical reward would be expected to depend 
on resuming relationships that provide attention rewards or 
forming new relations. Some people recovering from drugs or 
alcohol stay with the programs indefinitely making the recovery 
program their family or tribe and a long-term source of 
attention rewards.
Deprogramming, which was used to get people (generally young 
people) out of cults, almost certainly worked by invoking the 
capture-bonding social reorientation mechanism. Specific 
programs designed around an EP-based understanding of the cult 
bonding mechanisms discussed here have yet to be designed, but 
the application of concepts seems fairly obvious. The converse is 
also true. Cult recruiting methods based on dosing victims with 
the brain chemicals released during capture bonding would make 
cults even more of a problem than they are now.
A number of people including Paulette Cooper (author of one of 
the first books about Scientology, and a victim of the cult's attacks 
for 30 years) have said that as a group former Scientologists (and I 
presume this would hold for other cults) were not distinguishable 
except for being more easily deceived or duped than average 
people. Scientology members have been subjected to an unusual 
number of scams, including a $500 million Ponzi scheme that you 
can read about in a number of magazine articles and at 
http://www.slatkinfraud.com/. A long term Toronto Scientologist 
in a thoughtful moment commented to me that the local 
Scientologists he knew had been defrauded dozens of times, much 
more often than any other group he could think of. As the NYT 
article mentioned above put it Some people seem to be born with 
vulnerable dopamine systems that get hijacked by social rewards. 
Scientologists seem to be selected out of the population to be 
particularly vulnerable to attention rewards.
If a reliable psychological measure of this trait could be devised, 
could people be trained to be less gullible? Or are you as stuck 
with gullibility as you are with skin colour?
Possibly the answer is different for different people. While my 
wife lived in British Columbia, she watched a half dozen cults 
wash through the local community during the 70s. Her 
observation was that the subset of people who joined and left a 
cult would become immune from one experience or not at all.
Sceptics and other groups have been trying for years to get more 
critical thinking into schools with little success. It would be a 
radical approach, but perhaps teachers should be instructed in a 
program where they lie to their students on a regular basis to 
sharpen up their skills at detecting lies.
It is possible that lie detection is like language; there is a learning 
window. Telling whoppers to small children seems to be a 
family tradition in many families. (There were some great 
examples in the comic strip Calvin and Hobbs.) Generally the 
tradition is to tell lies so blatant that even small children spot 
them. A study of the outcome of this variation in child raising 
might be of great interest.
Understanding that the religious wars in Europe were meme 
driven and given all the grief Nazism, Communism, splinters off 
Islam and Christianity have caused and are now causing, the study 
of memes and more important why we are susceptible to memes 
like these should be a major topic of research, particularly 
modeling, with the output guiding public policy.
It is not.
Some of this can be attributed to the slow spread of some classes 
of memes. Take the handwashing meme as an example:
    In the late 1840's, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was an assistant 
    in the maternity wards of a Vienna hospital. There he 
    observed that the mortality rate in a delivery room staffed 
    by medical students was up to three times higher than in a 
    second delivery room staffed by midwives. In fact, women 
    were terrified of the room staffed by the medical students. 
    Semmelweis observed that the students were coming 
    straight from their lessons in the autopsy room to the 
    delivery room. He postulated that the students might be 
    carrying the infection from their dissections to birthing 
    mothers. He ordered doctors and medical students to wash 
    their hands with a chlorinated solution before examining 
    women in labor. The mortality rate in his maternity wards 
    eventually dropped to less than one percent.
    Despite the remarkable results, Semmelweis's colleagues 
    greeted his findings with hostility. He eventually resigned 
    his position. Later, he had similar dramatic results with 
    handwashing in another maternity clinic, but to no avail. 
    Ironically Semmelweis died in 1865 of puerperal sepsis, 
    with his views still largely ridiculed.
    In the 1870's in France, one hospital was called the House 
    of Crime because of the alarming number of new mothers 
    dying of childbed fever within its confines. In 1879, at a 
    seminar at the Academy of Medicine in Paris, a noted 
    speaker stood at the podium and cast doubt on the spread 
    of disease through the hands. An outraged member of the 
    audience felt compelled to protest. He shouted at the 
    speaker: "The thing that kills women with [childbirth 
    fever]... is you doctors that carry deadly microbes from 
    sick women to healthy ones." That man was Louis Pasteur. 
    Pasteur, of course, contributed to the germ theory of 
    disease (the founder of this theory was Robert Koch). He 
    was a tireless advocate of hygiene, but his efforts too were 
    initially met with skepticism. Skepticism, however, was 
    not the only problem facing advocates of hygiene.
    In 1910, Josephine Baker, M.D. started a program to teach 
    hygiene to child care providers in New York. Thirty 
    physicians sent a petition to the Mayor protesting that "it 
    was ruining medical practice by... keeping babies well." " 
    http://www.accessexcellence.org/AE/AEC/CC/hand_backg
    round.html
When you think about it, it is in the interest of a lot of people not 
to have widespread understanding of memes or related predictive 
social models. Of course the fact that these models are based in 
evolutionary biology sets them up for automatic opposition by 
certain meme driven groups, particularly in the US.
Like the doctors who would not accept handwashing, even the 
most knowledgeable of the anti cult people dont seem inclined to 
accept the concepts of memetics and evolutionary psychology that 
lie behind our vulnerability to the mad social movements caused 
by predatory memes. See for example, Combating Cult Mind 
Control by Steven Hassan and John Walker and the fatal flaw in 
our war on terrorism!, FACTnet Newsletter, 24th January, 2002: 
    The US Intelligence community, the US military and the 
    US State and new Home defense departments have failed 
    America and the World Community by neglecting to pay 
    attention to the root causes of Terrorism. John Walker 
    Lindh the "American Taliban" is the embarrassing proof of 
    this failure
    It does not make sense to Americans that John Walker 
    Lindh should be found amongst the Taliban and, 
    seemingly, willing to take up arms against fellow 
    Americans. Unless he is seen in the more probable and 
    logical context that he is a victim of modern mind control 
    and cult techniques. At which point he becomes a shining 
    example of what destructive powers a religious cult using 
    mind control can bring to bear on a fellow citizen.
    The American public well knows how mind control cults 
    can turn members into martyrs, like with Jonestown and 
    Hale Bop, or how cults can turn members into terrorists, as 
    in the Aum Shinrikyo sarin gas attacks in the Tokyo 
    subways.
    The Al-Qaeda terrorist network is, at its core, a religious 
    cult that is also manufacturing mind controlled cult 
    martyrs and terrorists. These terrorists and martyrs have 
    become of a similar mind to those people that played out 
    the tragedies in Jonestown, Hale Bop and in the Aum 
    Shinrikyo attacks and, not much different to the religious 
    martyrs now turning Israel into a living hell. 
    http://www.factnet.org/letters/FACTNewsJanuary2002Wal
    ker.html?FACTNet
Using the search function on FACTnet for meme, memetics or 
evolutionary psychology comes up empty.
Nazism/communism caused more deaths this century than the 
plague did in the 14th century. We understand what caused 
plague, even our leaders understand. But the world's leadership 
has no clue as to what are the root causes Aum Shinrikyo or Bin 
Laden's cult. Mind control is a label to hang on it, but without 
understanding why mind control works it may be like trying to 
advocate handwashing before Koch and Pasteur explained 
microbes as the reason behind why handwashing reduced death 
rates.
The upcoming trial of John Walker Lindh could be used to 
educate people on the subjects of memes and the evolutionary 
psychology bases reasons we are vulnerable to them. But more 
likely it will be an example of primates continuing to play social 
games without the least insight into what is killing them.
Models, we need models! Predictive models, evolutionary 
psychology based social dynamics models. And we need to do 
experiments on those models before we take steps that seem right 
but only cause more problems later.
The Scientology connection--applied memetics--how it 
happened
Scientology has a deep connection to this article. Back in the 
1950s, pulp writer L. Ron Hubbard published the first article in 
Astounding Science Fiction on Dianetics, an amateur 
psychological practice that eventually became incorporated into 
the Scientology cult. Scientology is, of course, a meme of the cult 
class. It is distinguished by such sub-memes as "fair game," the 
practice of suing and otherwise abusing those to speak out against 
its excesses. (See http://www.lermanet.com/) Scientology 
allegedly spends between $20 and $30 million a year pursuing its 
critics through the courts. (They admitted in Federal court to 
spending at least $2 million suing me for exposing one of their 
allegedly illegal medical practices and it may be as high as $5 
million if funds for all the private investigators they have used on 
my friends, my relatives and me are included.)
I had mentioned Scientology a time or two in my memetics 
articles, but had taken no serious interest in it before January 
1995. At that time a lawyer for Scientology issued a command 
(rmgroup) to remove the Usenet news group 
alt.religion.scientology from the Internet, apparently thinking that 
this "denial of service" attack on the Internet would end critical 
discussion about Scientology.
This attack on free speech backfired, having somewhat the effect 
of a gang of thugs riding into town and burning down the 
newspaper. This attempted censorship drew in dozens of Internet 
free speech advocates, me among them. "A.r.s.," as it is known, 
became one of the most popular groups on the net, with a 
readership estimated as high as 100,000. Surveys place it in the 
top ten and sometimes in the top 5 news groups.
This news group is a real-life soap opera, with dramatic subplots 
on a regular basis. Popular topics include accounts of people 
exiting Scientology, and a stream of reports on the cult's abuses 
(up to and including the "treatment" of a woman who died of 
dehydration--see http://www.lisamcpherson.org/). See 
http://www.lisatrust.net/ media section for claims of how the 
government and police of Clearwater, Florida have allegedly been 
corrupted, or put Scientology booger into Google.
The a.r.s. newsgroup has survived everything done to get rid of it. 
After the rmgroup, it was attacked by cancelling articles. Then it 
was hit with a denial of service storm of over four million forged 
nonsense postings in 1998 and 1999. The forged postings were 
eventually said to have been traced to group of cult operatives led 
by Italian Scientologist Gavino Idda, as publicly reported by 
former Scientologist Tory Christman. 
http://www.lermanet.com/cos/toryonosa.htm - Part5 (Tory's story 
of leaving Scientology and being attacked is a saga in itself.) In 
between Scientology has had a rotating group of agents posting 
anti-psychiatry articles and attacking people on the group. 
(Identifying some of these people is a major topic. Are they really 
agents of Scientology? Or are they critics trying to make 
Scientology look bad?)
The long running battle on the net has the horrid attraction of a 
train wreck in slow motion. Several hundred of the spectators 
have stepped out of the audience and taken a place on the stage 
creating Web sites (http://www.xenu.net/ is a prominent site), 
picketing Scientology locations, and being involved in many other 
activities open and covert. My personal involvement reached the 
state where I became a political refugee in Canada. (See 
http://www.operatingthetan.com/ for the latest update.)
The discovery of the deep connection between drugs and cults, 
like many discoveries, started as a set of chance observations.
First was a woman who was only 16 at the time I knew her about 
30 years ago. One thing that stuck in my mind from those days 
was her effusive praise of the RUSH she got from a mixture of 
heroin and methamphetamine she injected into a vein she found in 
her thumb. (Heroin stimulates the endorphin reward pathway and 
methamphetamine stimulates the dopamine reward pathway.)
Second was a woman who sought me out at a party early in 1996, 
about the time Scientology first sued me.
She said: "I know now it is BS, but the time I spent in Scientology 
15 years ago was the peak experience of my life!"
She said this in the same awed tone of voice and expression as the 
first woman talking about her drug rush. The tone of voice was so 
similar that the memory of the 25-year previous conversation was 
immediately recalled. At the time, I was at a loss to explain why a 
drug experience and a cult experience evoked such a similar 
emotional description.
An evolutionary psychology related understanding came about at 
a party late in 1996 in a conversation with Kennita Watson about 
the similar effects of drugs and cults. (Kennita is a brilliant 
computer hacker from Silicon Valley.) Kennita was familiar with 
the attention highs from EST (a cult derived from Scientology) 
and we both had been reading books about evolutionary 
psychology. Applying EP was the key to understanding. Shortly 
after that conversation in late 1996 I wrote the first article tying 
cults and drugs together with the reward mechanism that underlies 
both of them. The reward mechanism has roots deep in our 
evolutionary past.
The World Trade Center
First drafts of this article were written well before the terrorist 
events of September 11, 2001. The importance of EP and 
memetics lies in their ability to form plausible models for 
understanding the psychological mechanisms behind the creation 
of fanatical totalitarian cult groups such as Usama Bin Laden's Al-
Qaeda organization. I suspect that its root is the ratio of wealth to 
population (and perhaps as important the rate of change in that 
wealth) and the undermining of one society's culture by another. 
The largest known "suicide" example is the 1856-1857 Cattle-
Killing in South Africa in which perhaps 60,000 of the Xhosa 
people died of self-induced starvation. (They destroyed their food 
supplies.)
Most of the suicide hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, a place not 
lacking in wealth. But due to rapid population growth, the wealth 
per capita has fallen by about half in a generation. Furthermore, 
those aspects of Islamic culture that are rooted in Medieval 
Islamic fundamentalism are under attack. Though there is little 
conscious effort to do so, the meme set of western culture appears 
to be displacing parts of Islamic culture and in Saudi Arabia there 
is highly organized resistance to this displacement--to the point 
the religious police would not let improperly dressed young 
women leave a burning building.
In regard to the WTC suicide hijackers, what could people have 
done in the tribal days that translate today into strapping on 
explosives as they do in Israel or crashing airplanes into 
buildings? You have to understand the concepts of the famous 
evolutionary biologist William Hamilton about inclusive fitness 
for this to make sense. Bees kill themselves defending a hive 
because shared genes to do so become more common in their 
relatives when they do so.
The same is true of humans. William Hamilton figured out that 
genes for saving more than two brothers or more than 8 cousins at 
the cost of death should spread in an environment where such 
choices happened. These kinds of selection choices most likely 
were frequent for a million years or more of tribal warfare.
It should be noted that copies of the suicide hijackers genes in 
their relatives seem to be doing rather well, even though the 
hijackers themselves are dust. This is also true of the suicide 
bombers in Israel. To the (unknown) extent that reality feeds into 
the emotional and mental states driving suicide attacks, this 
suggests that large organized responses against those gene copies 
might curb such behaviour.
Before jumping in either side of such an argument, remember that 
EP is about the selection of genes that shape us psychologically in 
our tribal past when life was often very brutal. Life was brutal for 
the simple reason that humans have no serious predators, and in 
the pre-modern era human populations always expanded to and 
beyond the ecological limits--whatever they were. (See the history 
of Easter Island for a population crash example.) One of the 
reasons the western culture block has had relatively little strife 
recently is that technology has expanded carrying capacity faster 
than population growth.
Back to the WTC. Questions EP might help understand are: Why 
4-5 people in the hijacker groups? Were there just physical 
reasons or did they have psychological support reasons for these 
numbers as well? Is this group size be related to the size of the 
smallest practical raiding party from tribal days? This has direct 
relevance to spotting airline suicide hijacker groups (though it 
seems extremely unlikely another will be permitted by the 
passengers).
Other questions that could be modeled include: What economic 
and psychological conditions does it take to foster the growth of 
meme based groups fanatic enough to commit murder suicide? 
Can education make it less likely that people will get involved in 
such cults? (In analogy to learning about germs leads you to avoid 
drinking ditch water.) Can we measure from personality traits the 
likelihood a person will get involved with a cult? Can we improve 
the ability of more conventional groups to satisfy people's need for 
attention? Are some societies more likely to give rise to suicide 
cults than others? Are heterogeneous populations less likely or 
more likely to give rise to suicidal fanatics? Are there ways to 
modify societies that would make suicide cult formation less 
likely? Could and should western societies crack down on high-
control cults the way we do on drugs? In the case of Scientology, 
France this has already done this through new laws.
These examples are only the tip of what might be done with 
application of evolutionary psychology/memetics models. It is 
worth a considerable effort because even small cults are a serious 
cost on the world economy, to victims, their families, employers, 
friends, and credit-card companies. They cause by illness due to 
improper medical, psychiatric and psychological treatment, 
hospitalization, lawsuits, bankruptcies, and finally dump old 
people who have made no social security payments on the welfare 
system. Cults or related social movements such as the Taliban in 
Afghanistan result in massive military expenses.
It seems to me it would be a wise investment to put serious effort 
quantifying the damage cult-like movements cause and modeling 
the world wide social environment to see where it is going and 
what might be done about it. 
[Thanks to Kennita Watson for the conversation where 
understanding of the cult reward mechanism emerged and to my 
wife, Arel Lucas, for suggesting the term "memetics," editing, and 
many long engaging conversations on these subjects.] 
Notes 
1. My published article on this topic "Memetics and the Modular 
Mind," appeared in Analog Magazine. 
If you can't find a copy of Analog from Aug. 1987, and want to 
read the article, it's on http://groups.google.com. Use advanced 
search with "Keith Henson" as author and "original" in the subject. 
Since I wrote that article, a remarkable meme distribution system, 
the Web, has arisen. Nowadays you can measure how common a 
concept is in our culture (at least to some degree) by putting the 
term in a search engine. You can calibrate on the major topics, 
such as "nanotechnology" which gets (mid-2001) about 160,000 
Web pages-up from 80,000 a year ago--on the Google search 
engine. Try "evolutionary psychology" and you get about 23,000 
Web pages. By comparison, "memetics" gets about 50,000 Web 
hits. 
2. For those who do not recognize the reference, Patty Hearst was 
kidnapped, subjected to crude abuse, and joined the people who 
captured her, ultimately being sentenced for helping her captors 
rob a bank. 
3. "In the summer of 1973, four hostages were taken in a botched 
bank robbery at Kreditbanken in Stockholm, Sweden. At the end 
of their captivity, six days later, they actively resisted rescue. They 
refused to testify against their captors, raised money for their legal 
defense, and according to some reports one of the hostages 
eventually became engaged to one of her jailed captors. The 
Stockholm Syndrome comes into play when a captive cannot 
escape, is isolated and threatened with death, but is shown token 
acts of kindness by the captor. It typically takes about three or 
four days for the psychological shift to take hold." 
http://www.syntac.net/hoax/stock.php; 
http://homepages.together.net/~whbw/WHBWstockholm.html.
4. About 1980 John Tooby, then in graduate school, discussed the 
concept of capture-bonding with various other students--
reportedly reaching the same conclusion as the author about its 
evolutionary origin and widespread effects on humans and human 
societies. (Personal communication with Leda Cosmides.) 
Astonishingly, neither he nor anyone else known to the author has 
published on the subject. 
5. Your relatives have copies of your genes. This is at the root of 
why people are generally nicer to relatives than they are to 
strangers. The late William Hamilton explained in one of his 
papers that evolution should have made him willing to die if doing 
so would save more than two brothers or more than 8 cousins. The 
reason is that genes for altruism on this level would spread 
through a population (where such choices happened) because for 
each gene copy lost more than one copy (statistically) would be 
saved. 
6. In the years that followed, Chagnon took various academic 
posts and continued to return to Yanomam territory, conducting 
censuses and collecting detailed genealogical data. (Appropriately 
enough, the Yanomam, unable to pronounce Chagnon's name, 
dubbed him "Shaki"--their word for a pesky bee.) Then, in 1988, 
he published a paper in Science in which he reported that 40 
percent of adult males in the 12 villages he sampled had 
participated in the killing of another Yanomam; 25 percent of 
adult male deaths resulted from violence; and around two thirds of 
all people age 40 or older had lost at least one parent, sibling or 
child through violence. 
Perhaps most stunning of all, he found that men who had killed 
were more successful in obtaining wives and had more children 
than men who had not killed. "The general principle is not so 
much that violence causes reproductive success. It's that things 
that are culturally admired and strived for are often correlated 
with reproductive success," Chagnon explains. "It may be wealth 
in one society, or political power. You don't have to be violent to 
have political power. But in the primitive world, where the state 
doesn't exist, one of the most admired skills is to be a successful 
warrior." http://www.mugu.com/pipermail/upstream-list/2001-
February/001365.html
If this tendency of larger numbers of children for killers has gone 
on long enough for an evolutionary stable strategy (ESS) to 
emerge--a likely situation, then the actual reproductive success 
over a lifetime for the killers and non-killers (read low and high 
status) must be about the same. The adjustments you have to 
make are that killers are more likely themselves to be killed, so 
we are counting the children of the survivors. As one critical 
paper said, fathers cant be certain they actually were the father, 
and spending a lot of time on the warpath may give the women a 
chance to sample the stay at home lovers as well as the warriors. 
7. 
http://www.polygamyinfo.com/plygmedia%2099%20187trib.htm. 
8. Some people seem to be born with vulnerable dopamine 
systems that get hijacked by social rewards. February 19, 2002, 
Hijacking the Brain Circuits With a Nickel Slot Machine By 
Sandra Blakeslee. This is an excellent article that came out after 
most of this paper was written. It reaches much the same 
conclusions. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/19/health/19REWA.html or 
through http://www.ucsf.edu/cnba/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:55 MDT