There is an additional conflict in the Middle East. There is a war in Europe. There are pockets of political violence. There are several divisions around the world across religious, ethnic, economic, gender, social, political, migratory and several other lines. Ideologies often seem etched in the mind, such that even if an individual forgets regular stuff, ideology hardly slips. So, what exactly is ideology—as a mental state? What is the difference between a regular memory, of something, and ideology—that a person carries everywhere, sometimes with prompts for extreme decisions and actions? If every tool ever invented has been adapted to ideology and since AI is likely to be the most versatile of all, how can the impact of ideology in AI be minimized? How can ideology be modeled in the brain, to show its conceptual mechanism, to explore conflict resolution, negotiations, AI alignment and safety?
Ideology can be described as a function of the mind that is closely associated with emotions. There are four principal functions: memory, emotions, feelings and regulation of internal senses. This means that there are four major functions [or divisions] of the human mind. These divisions have several subdivisions. Emotion, for example, has anger, hurt, extremism, belief, sadness, depression and so forth. This is different from feelings with subdivisions as pain, thirst, appetite, cold, heat and so forth. Memory includes, intelligence, language, thought, perception and so forth.
These are labels to ease description of functions, but none of these are mind components or mechanisms. To model ideology in the mind, the components of mind and the mechanisms [involved] can be postulated.
In conceptual brain science, what is usable, at this time, to explain functions of mind, based on evidence in neuroscience—are electrical and chemical configurators.
This indicates that electrical and chemical signals of neurons are not for communication or transmission but are the basis of functions.
The human mind, distinct from the body, can be conceptually described as the collection of all the electrical and chemical configurators—with their interactions and attributes, in sets, in clusters of neurons—across the central and peripheral nervous systems.
Simply, the human mind is the set[s] of [neuro]configurators. Interactions means the strike of electrical configurators on chemical configurators, in sets.
This means that anything that can have an effect on electrical configurators or chemical configurators can influence the mind.
So, functions are from interactions. While attributes qualify the functions or determine the limits or extents for those functions.
What is the Difference Between Ideology and Basic Memory?
This question can also be rephrased as the difference between emotions and memory. For example, trauma is an emotion. It could result in a heavy and painful experience long after the occurrence. However, the memory of a chair or hat can be light. So, what is the difference between what makes neuroconfigurators result in some heavy formation [or assembly, architecture, event or structure]?
There is an attribute called prioritization. This is the set of configurators of the most priority or importance in an instance. The common label for this attribute is attention. There is just one prioritized set, while there are several pre-prioritized sets. There are fast and numerous interchanges between the only prioritized set and several pre-prioritized sets, even within a second.
Prioritization is obtainable in a set if the electrical configurators have the most strike intensity on chemical configurators. It is also possible if the chemical configurators have the most volumes among other sets. Or, if a chemical configurator, common to several sets, is more in a set, than in others.
While prioritization is common and regular among sets of all functions, there is a something called the principal spot or position. This means a particular lock for that set that is not exactly subject to angular displacements. Usually, as high-intensity electrical configurators strike at chemical configurators in sets, there is often slight displacements for sets, which become positions in the array [or ranking] for likelihood to be prioritized after been pre-prioritized, or to spend longer in prioritization.
Now, with principal position or spot, there is a stickiness property that allows the set to linger, dominate [or return more to prioritization], and then attract electrical configurators that are not supposed to relay there.
This principal spot explains major depression, trauma, anxiety and so forth.
In summary, a common difference between [the functions] memory and emotion is that when there is high intensity [of electrical configurators] in a set or large volumes [of chemical configurators] in a set, for memory, there is [an] almost negligible angular displacement, but for emotions it is non-negligible. As this displacement increases there is a likelihood to end up in the principal spot. This would then result in the heavy, unpleasant experience, conceptually.
While a depressive or traumatic episode may last a while, ideology often lasts longer, but they both use similar mechanisms.
Ideology
Sets for ideology often file at a displacement that is near the principal angle or position. So, while memory sets may have little to no angular displacements, those of emotions often do, sometimes reaching into the principal spot [like in trauma]. Sets [of ideology] are often displaced [angular] as well, carrying a large experiential heft, when electrical configurators arrive.
Also, because of the angular displacements of [a set of neuroconfigurators for] ideology, several electrical configurators of other sets that do not fit [or necessarily have to interact with it] come by to try, becoming a constant check or reminder, with effect for other sets, including for functions: memory, [other] emotions, and internal senses, like circulation, respiration and so forth.
This is a conceptual explanation of how ideology works in the human mind. It is possible to display this, as the state of mind in ideology and to also use it to track changes or possibilities in conflict resolution, towards adjustments or coexistence in several thorny cases across the globe.
**To simplify, there are two components, electrical and chemical configurators. They interact—in sets. Electrical configurators have intensity. Chemical configurators have volume. The event of the interaction results in functions. The interaction is defined by strikes of electrical configurators on chemical configurators. The strikes result in angular displacements for functions labeled emotions. This angular displacement for some functions makes the set [of neuroconfigurators] enter a principal angle. This results in some heavy emotional states like depression, trauma and so forth. However, some intensities or volume swells do not enter the principal angle, but close enough to be dominant and lasting. This is where ideology resides, conceptually.
Hate and Political Violence
Hate can be a prompt of ideology, resulting in actions where consequences are sometimes ignored.
Hate has its set of neuroconfigurators in the human mind. It’s electrical configurators often relay towards the sets of an ideology or those of promoting, resulting in planning and action.
It is possible to predict hate or prevent actions that may follow hate like political violence, using this model.
AI Safety
Aside the possibility for AI advancing into goal-direction or total autonomy, one risk for AI, for now, is misuse, such that actors adapt it for conflict, destruction, hurt and offense.
With a model of mind on ideology, exposed and useful for simulation, it is possible to explore mitigation architecture for vulnerable cases, shaping AI safety and alignment, in the near term and future.
There is a recent [June 3, 2025] press release, Statement from U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick on Transforming the U.S. AI Safety Institute into the Pro-Innovation, Pro-Science U.S. Center for AI Standards and Innovation, stating that, “Commerce Howard Lutnick announced his plans to reform the agency formerly known as the U.S. AI Safety Institute into the Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI).
AI holds great potential for transformational advances that will enhance U.S. economic and national security. This change could ensure Commerce uses its vast scientific and industrial expertise to evaluate and understand the capabilities of these rapidly developing systems and identify vulnerabilities and threats within systems developed in the U.S. and abroad.”
