You're scrolling through your feed.
A headline catches your eye. Something alarming. Something urgent. Something that makes your heart rate spike.
You read it. You feel anxious. You share it. You check back for updates.
You know this feeling, right? This is your brain on information chaos.
The Fear Instinct
In 2018, Hans Rosling identified ten instincts that systematically distort human judgment. The first and most powerful is the Fear Instinct.
We pay more attention to frightening things than important things.
This isn't a bug. It's a feature. For millions of years, this instinct kept us alive. If you heard a rustle in the bushes, you assumed it was a predator. Better safe than sorry. Better anxious than dead.
But in the information age, this instinct is weaponized against us.
How It Works
Here's what happens when you encounter a frightening claim (real or false, doesn't matter). Your amygdala activates—that's your fight-or-flight response kicking in. Your prefrontal cortex, the part that does rational thinking, takes a back seat. You feel urgency. This requires immediate attention. So you share it—warning others is a social instinct. You check for updates, seeking more information to reduce anxiety.
The problem? The information that reduces anxiety is often buried. The information that increases anxiety gets amplified.
The Algorithmic Amplification
Social media algorithms know this. They optimize for engagement. And nothing engages like fear.
Fear triggers sharing. Fear triggers comments. Fear triggers return visits. Fear triggers ad views.
The algorithms don't care if the fear is justified. They care if it drives engagement.
So frightening claims get amplified. Calming corrections get suppressed. Your feed becomes a fear amplifier, and you're caught in the middle.
The Information Chaos Problem
When you're exposed to constant frightening claims, you enter a state of Information Chaos:
- You can't distinguish real threats from false alarms
- You can't prioritize what matters
- You can't make clear decisions
- You feel overwhelmed and anxious
- You lose agency
You're not thinking. You're reacting.
The Traditional Response
The traditional response to misinformation is fact-checking:
- A frightening claim spreads
- Fact-checkers investigate (takes time)
- They publish a correction (boring, doesn't spread)
- You might see it (if you're looking)
- You might believe it (if you're not too invested)
This doesn't work because:
- Corrections don't spread like lies
- By the time they're published, you're already anxious
- They don't address the underlying pattern
- They don't help you defend yourself
The Veremet Approach: Cognitive Self-Defense
Veremet doesn't just fact-check. It helps you practice what we call Cognitive Self-Defense.
Instead of reacting to the loudest voice, you learn to look at the distribution of evidence. Instead of trusting your fear instinct, you learn to verify before you react. Instead of feeling overwhelmed, you regain agency.
It's a skill you can build, not a system you have to trust blindly.
The Consensus Gauge as a Calming Tool
The Consensus Gauge is designed to counteract the Fear Instinct. Here's how it helps.
First, it shows distribution, not just verdicts. Instead of "TRUE" or "FALSE," you see how much evidence supports the claim, how much contradicts it, where the consensus actually is, and how confident that consensus is. You see nuance, not binary panic.
Second, it shows process, not just results. You can see how evidence accumulated, how consensus evolved, what sources were consulted, and who contributed what. You see the work, not just the conclusion.
Third, it shows confidence, not certainty. The gauge shows confidence levels—high confidence means strong evidence (act accordingly), medium confidence means mixed evidence (proceed cautiously), low confidence means insufficient evidence (wait for more). You see uncertainty, not false certainty.
How to Use It: A Simple Process
When you encounter a frightening claim, try this. First, pause. Don't react immediately. Don't share. Don't panic. Just pause. Breathe. Recognize that your Fear Instinct is kicking in.
Then check the Consensus Gauge. Look up the claim on Veremet. Ask yourself: What does the evidence distribution show? How confident is the consensus? What sources were consulted? How has the consensus evolved? Look at the distribution, not just the loudest voice.
Finally, act based on evidence, not fear. If the evidence supports the claim, act accordingly—but do so based on evidence, not panic. If the evidence contradicts the claim, ignore it—but do so based on evidence, not denial. If the evidence is mixed, wait for more—but do so based on evidence, not paralysis.
Act on evidence. Not on fear.
Real-World Example
Here's how it works in practice. You see a claim: "New study shows [product] causes [serious health problem]."
Your Fear Instinct kicks in: This is urgent! This is dangerous! I need to warn people!
The traditional response? Share immediately. Check later (maybe).
With Veremet, you pause and recognize the Fear Instinct. You check the Consensus Gauge. You see the evidence distribution: one study (preliminary, not peer-reviewed), multiple experts questioning methodology, no replication, consensus at "Under Review" with low confidence.
So you act accordingly: wait for more evidence. Don't panic. Don't share unverified claims.
You've defended yourself cognitively. You've regained agency.
The Pattern Recognition
As you use Veremet, you start recognizing patterns:
Pattern 1: Rapid Convergence Toward "False"
A frightening claim appears. Evidence quickly accumulates contradicting it. Consensus stabilizes at "False."
Pattern: False alarm. Ignore it.
Pattern 2: Oscillation
A frightening claim appears. Evidence supports it. Then contradicts it. Then supports it again. Consensus oscillates.
Pattern: Insufficient evidence. Wait for more.
Pattern 3: Slow Drift Toward "True"
A claim appears. Evidence slowly accumulates supporting it. Consensus gradually shifts toward "True" with increasing confidence.
Pattern: Real threat. Act accordingly, but not in panic.
Pattern recognition helps you respond appropriately, not just reactively.
The Factfulness Framework
This connects to Rosling's Factfulness framework. The Fear Instinct is one of ten instincts that distort judgment:
- Fear Instinct - We focus on frightening things
- Gap Instinct - We see divisions where none exist
- Destiny Instinct - We assume things don't change
- Single Perspective - We prefer simple explanations
- Blame Instinct - We seek scapegoats
- Urgency Instinct - We feel we must act immediately
- Size Instinct - We misjudge proportions
- Generalization Instinct - We stereotype
- Negativity Instinct - We notice bad news more
- Straight Line Instinct - We assume trends continue
Veremet helps you recognize and counteract all of these.
The Agency Restoration
When you use Veremet for Cognitive Self-Defense, you regain agency:
- You're not just consuming information. You're evaluating it.
- You're not just reacting to fear. You're responding to evidence.
- You're not just trusting algorithms. You're verifying claims.
- You're not just feeling anxious. You're taking action based on clarity.
Agency is the antidote to anxiety.
The Community Effect
When enough people practice Cognitive Self-Defense, the entire information ecosystem improves:
- False alarms get verified quickly
- Real threats get identified accurately
- Panic is reduced
- Clarity increases
Individual defense becomes collective resilience.
Practical Tips
Here are some practical ways to use Veremet for Cognitive Self-Defense.
Check before you share. Before sharing a frightening claim, check the Consensus Gauge. If it's unverified or false, don't share it.
Monitor your emotional response. If a claim makes you feel urgent fear, that's a signal. Pause. Check. Verify.
Look at evidence distribution. Don't just look at verdicts. Look at how evidence is distributed. That tells you more.
Wait for consensus. If consensus is still forming, wait. Don't act on incomplete information.
Contribute calm. When you contribute evidence, contribute calmly. Don't amplify fear. Amplify clarity.
The Limitations
Cognitive Self-Defense isn't magic. It has limitations:
- It requires effort: You have to pause and check
- It requires time: Verification takes time
- It requires judgment: You still have to evaluate evidence
- It's not perfect: Some claims take longer to verify
But it's better than reacting to fear. It's better than information chaos. It's better than losing agency.
The Bottom Line
Information chaos is real. The Fear Instinct is powerful. Algorithms amplify fear for engagement.
But you're not powerless. You can practice Cognitive Self-Defense.
Use the Consensus Gauge. Look at evidence distribution. Act on evidence, not fear.
Regain agency. Reduce anxiety. See clearly.
This is what Veremet provides. This is how you defend yourself cognitively.
The era of information chaos is ending. The era of cognitive clarity is beginning.
Be curious again.