We carry in our minds ideas that are analogous to biological viruses. Ideologies that we download from an external source, without fully understanding them and judging them as good or bad or manipulative. These ‘mind viruses’, as I’ve started calling them, are present in most people and can be seen without any special powers. Mind viruses are counterproductive and often manipulative, contagious versions of ideas embodied as tools and technologies in the psyche. These are technologies learned from an external source, which we build our lives upon. Technology, as we are all well aware, can be used for good or for bad goals. Acceptance of others and their differences is a wonderful thing, but adapting another’s ideas is dangerous. And we often confuse accepting someone as the automatic adaptation of their beliefs and their psychological tools. Because people who have mind viruses are unaware that they have mind viruses and may argue vehemently that they arrived at their own conclusions, or they understand where the ideas well enough to adopt them. But the most effective and dangerous mind viruses, just like the best computer viruses, are sneaky and hide in plain sight. A virus that is clearly harmful, we can usually judge immediately as being harmful to the individual. But mind viruses that are sweet as candy on the outside, but bitter on the inside, are much more difficult to resist or to detect.

We all have, to varying degrees, the ability to filter out ideas as they come at us. We filter ideas because if we simply adopted each new idea, we would be scattered and easily manipulated. In the information age, there are many different ideas flying around, and we disagree to a great extent on what methods we should use to judge ideas as good or bad.

Now, we trust ideas that come from sources we trust. From people who are close to us in our network, or close (similar) to us in the way they see the world. For people who are high trust and high integrity in our eyes, we filter ideas less intently. We are less skeptical of our close friends, as we should be. That’s a strategic move, not one based on naivety. Similarly, we are more likely to accept computer viruses if our trusted friends send them to us. This is why we choose our friends carefully and take time to build trust with people before we can really have a flowing and loving conversation with them. Because as soon as we detect the signs of a mind virus being projected onto us, and the virus is asking to be downloaded by someone we trust, we are likely to agree with them and download it. But if we listen to our conscience and intuition (antivirus protection), we recognize the mind virus for what it is, and the flowing dancing conversation comes to a halt.

Now, this is where the really interesting part comes in. We then either leave the conversation or adopt a more rigid and skeptical posture towards the person with the virus. And all of this is unconscious. The conversation, if continued, usually becomes more argumentative. Because psychological and emotional distance is increased, to allow us time and space to judge ideas more intently. This is (again unconsciously) immediately obvious to the host with the virus, who takes offence to the distance created and the attitude of the accusor. The host goes ‘oh no, they think my idea is a virus!’.

The right attitude in that situation, as a possible host of a virus, is to dig as deeply as possible into why someone we trust is treating us as a host, because they may be right! The ego finds this difficult to the extent that the mind virus has latched onto the host and the extent of its influence on the host’s life. However, if you are very confident that this is not a maladaptive idea/tool/technology, that you don’t have this mind virus, but instead THE ACCUSER is the one who actually has the mind virus, then you have a problem. One or both of you has a mind virus, and you will now begin to argue to figure out who has it.

We now enter the arena where the individuals have to separate the virus or technology from their identity to the extent they can and allow their idea/tool/technology (which is potentially a mind virus) to fight to the death. The host of the virus must embody and bring on the strongest case they have for their potential virus, and allow it to fight the other’s technology or virus, so the strongest may win. We want conflicting ideas to fight to the death because we want to get along with each other. This process doesn’t have to be personal, but it often is, because we struggle to be mindful enough to separate our identity and ego from the idea. We must learn to tell apart the ideas in us that are based on our own experience in the world from those adopted from an outside source. The extent to which we can let go of our ego’s grasp on ideas we hold, and let them battle, is the extent to which we can remove from ourselves mind viruses and adopt increasingly useful and good ideas/tools/technologies on top of which we can build our lives.

If we refuse to let our ideas fight with other ideas, we risk building our lives on ideas that are maladaptive or actively harmful to us and to others. If we are unable to temporarily remove our identity, our sense of self, from our ideas, and let them fight on their own merit rather than be supported by our sense of self, then we make it very, very difficult for those who love us to help us find and remove mind viruses. Because when we tie our identities and emotions into the battle of ideas, our ideas are given a leg up in the fight, and we make it more difficult for others to battle with us. We make it unpleasant to do so, we make it seem that they are harming us in the battle. This is a dirty trick that the mind viruses use to protect themselves.

And this is where the virus analogy really shines. The virus uses the host, sabotaging them, to propel themselves forward. So the more tied up our egos are with our mind viruses, the more the viruses win and we lose. We as humans put ourselves in harm’s way, conversationally and operationally in the world, to defend mind viruses that are actively sucking the life force out of us and killing us slowly from the inside. Just like a biological virus.

One way to actively purge ourselves of mind viruses in a conversation with someone we love is to strongman the other’s argument. Consciously and actively help the other, who might struggle (for various reasons) to make a good case against our mind viruses. We help them, encourage them, to go further and further and help us recognize and understand our potential mind viruses. In doing so, our ego disentangles from the mind virus (it must, to steel man someone else's argument), and we direct the defence system inward, with humility and in the spirit of love. We actively seek to understand our mind viruses with the intention of cleansing ourselves. And we show those we love that we take their accusations seriously when we are accused of being the hosts of mind viruses. We show that we appreciate others for helping us see what we couldn’t, and encourage them to do so again.

Wouldn’t that be good?