Morality of mind control…

[tetrasodium]

Yes, my definition of mind control includes those things.

You confirmed my suspicion but having read into some of the books written by people like Milton Erickson Milgram and others who seemed to be involved in some of the questionable/sometimes unexpectedly horrifying 1940s &1950s research into the topic and even done a bit of hypnotism on other willing subjects for fun I'd say that it and everything else real world falls extremely far short of even the most limited ttrpg mind control options to the point that the best book I can recommend on it contains the words there is no such thing as hypnosis in the title because it talks about so many tangentially related things and drops book citations left and right for solid reading into those subjects.

You yourself used real world medical practices as a reference point for multiple posts, and came to the conclusion that intent and consent were the basis of whether something was a poison or a medicine. If the discussion about mind control is based on intent and consent, why does it matter if someone is brainwashed via a magic spell, a sci-fi virtual reality mental assault, or an injection of real chemicals and psychological conditioning? IMNSHO, not only is the discussion the same, but the crossover points are the most important ones to consider because they're the only parts that can be deconstructed with real world moral implications (those "settled cultural and legal" parts you mentioned, although I don't 100% agree about the "settled" bit).



Calling things "propaganda" or "indoctrination" isn't really an argument one way or the other. It's just relabeling things, and doesn't mean they aren't just a different version of mind control. I consider them relevant examples.

What type of examples are you looking for? There are many narcotics that could emulate a "Calm Emotions" spell. Basic enchantments like "Sleep" are even easier to replicate with drugs. Deep Brain Stimulation is basically an implementation of mind control that would have been considered pure science fiction just a few decades ago. We're currently using it in experiments most people would call "good" for things like depression and OCD. But the same attempts at this through lobotomies and electro-shock therapy are considered pretty evil today (and it's arguable if/which people at the time were attempting to do good or not).

Starting with that bold bit. Those terms refer to specific things and I even mentioned a specific flavor of indoctrination. They were only used for clarity rather than as some kind of moral judgement, but even at their most effective the things that make them work show how far short they fall from the most rudamentary trrpg mind control and potentially beyond more advanced flavors.

It's probably telling in showing how different from ttrpg mind control that those real world options fall when the most well known and deeply studied example of widespread deployment of those practices led to things like the Milgram experiment Stanford prison experiment paradox of tolerance and the theory of stupidity

Spoiler: relevant conceptual groundwork

Pretty sure three of those are covered in that book

Cult indoctrination and certain forms of propaganda can use those kinds of things to go well into deeply unethical brainwashing type results but there is a difference between mind control and convincing someone that they are better than people of another group so it's important to protect someone or something they care about even at a cost of actions that would be beyond the pale if done to an equal rather than someone so far below good upstanding folk like them.... that italicized thought process can involve all 4 of those[/spoiler]
Teacher you must administer the corrective punishment shock to ensure that the learner improves appropriately. This is for the learner's benefit and valuable data will be obtained from their progress

Edit: helldivers makes a great example of a society rooted in some of those things and does it without needing mind control.

 

[Reynard]

In popularity maybe, but I think a world with more depth is a better one.

I can appreciate that, but for me personally Star Wars is about the next weird planet and crazy superweapon and long lost force tradition*. These things don't need much "lore" and I don't want established lore getting in the way. Clone Wars did a ton of this.

*when it isn't the space French resistance vs the space Nazis, I mean.

 

[kermit4karate]

I can appreciate that, but for me personally Star Wars is about the next weird planet and crazy superweapon and long lost force tradition*. These things don't need much "lore" and I don't want established lore getting in the way. Clone Wars did a ton of this.

*when it isn't the space French resistance vs the space Nazis, I mean.

As opposed to the typical fantasy theme, where <something random> has awakened an <insert ancient evil>, plunging the good people of <insert fantasy town name> into a crisis that only <insert random hero's name here> can save them from.

 

[Reynard]

As opposed to the typical fantasy theme, where <something random> has awakened an <insert ancient evil>, plunging the good people of <insert fantasy town name> into a crisis that only <insert random hero's name here> can save them from.

Now there's some amoral mind control via madlibs.