Mind Engineering, Habit, and Human Nature

This paper attempts to do the following things. First, it reinterprets notion of “mind engineering” from a more neutral standpoint and offers totally new approach phenomenon. Thus, instead looking at phenomenon wholly negative perspective (such as identification mind engineering with “brainwashing,” control” other manipulatory techniques), defines process “design/redesign, implementation/reimplementation, evaluation/reevaluation minds.” In itself, this can be deliberate or forceful. Here, author looks primarily.
 Secondly, “mind” is defined set beliefs, latter, Charles Peirce, interpreted habits. The habit pragmatically-hermeneutically “‘fixed’ functional interpretation world one’s place in that either works does not work.” If specific constantly works, constitutes “good” habit. work, means “bad” Unlike current social-psychological approaches goal-independent automatic, therefore “mindless”/non-cognitive, claims habits are essentially goal-dependent, cognitive. habit’s main goal resolve problematic situation organism in. Habit’s cognitive element grounded organism’s interpretive effort allows specify problematic. Therefore, connection between direct/immediate but rather mediated via meaning. end, must taken “habit engineering,” and, thus understood, question seen one key phenomena clarify human nature.