Without a doubt a simple statement that we have all heard before, and in many scenarios an accurate description of our behavior. But I think the oversimplification on this observation has made us walk away from a constructive analysis.

Is our apparent herd mentality beneficial?
Is it really a negation of individuality?
If we can learn to recognize it, can we avoid it? And what would be the consequence?

It's not an obscure fact of history that humankind has relied on its social structures to thrive. And from a simple idea of a family, we went from forming tribes to developing cities, countries and governments based on ideology and morality.

I think it's undeniable that we do tend to follow a herd, and it’s not so far fetched to imagine how this could have been beneficial to us when the world was a much dangerous place. Imagine if you will a small group of people running away from danger, it would only be reasonable for others to run in the same direction even if they have not fully understood the threat.

But, is this behavior a negation of our individuality?

Maybe the answer is too nuanced as to be explained with a clever sentence. Individualism and consequently new ideas have led us to move forward in our understanding of life. It’s because of this fact that it is boxed as a positive package. But realistically we all seem to have these two conflicting elements of our mind dancing in a delicate equilibrium. Too much individualism and the person becomes not beneficial to its surroundings, and just the opposite it's true as well.

Can we recognize when we are acting a sheep? Can we go against our initial compulsion to react in compliance?

I would argue that in most cases we can recognize it. I would hesitate to call it an easy task, but many of humanity’s religious and spiritual rituals are in various ways an attempt of self analysis and reflection.

Imagine if you will that the individual that you identify as yourself is a complex web of ideas that you have accumulated over the years. Some ideas are deeply rooted and very close to your self image or core, some live in the outskirts of this web and are replaced often or even forgotten.

Now these ideas would not be specific to any particular subject and would probably if represented graphically would vary in size and color. But what i find the most interesting is that this web is also its own gatekeeper and cleaning agent.

I mean, we are met with new ideas every day of our lives, most of them bounce right off. Maybe because we don’t understand them, or simply because we flat out disagree with them.

But just like a computer system there are hackers and hacks for lack for a better terms that bypass these filters, and some of them are quite effective, establishing new ideas very close to the core of who we are.

I would argue that it is precisely because of this that we find it hard to talk about charged topics. And it seems to be close to impossible to disagree respectfully with somebody about religion and politics.

So, what is the point I'm trying to make?

I do not intend to light the path to follow, to endorse rebellion or compliance, but to invite people to adopt a more pragmatic analysis of their stance, to their deepest convictions. To attempt to recognize when an Ideology has truly been the result of careful analysis or simply a hack and make an effort to approach disagreements with a our fellow humans always equipped with the lens of empathy.

MenO

All images: Pixabay