Blinded by the Heard

Inherent tension exists between our desire for individuality and our desire for social acceptance. On one hand, we’re encouraged to develop unique individualistic qualities. While, on the other hand, we’re also encouraged to be part of a group or community.

In balancing these competing desires there are some colloquial labels—which describe how a person acts and associates with others—that are to be avoided. In the pursuit for individuality, you’ll be shunned if you’re a ‘poser’, who creates an identity around something they can’t do, or a ‘biter’ who copies the styles of other people. In addition, people will also look down on you when, in the quest for belonging, you’re a ‘follower’, who goes along with whatever is popular or trendy at any given time. But, what does it mean when someone is found to be a member of ‘the herd’? Is this just another way of calling someone a ‘follower’, or is there something more to this label?

Ordinarily, when someone is described as a member of ‘the herd’, an analogy is being drawn between the way a person acts and associates with others, and animals—such as sheep—that travel and live in large groups. Herd-animals are the focus of this analogy because they are conceived as lacking the capacity to act autonomously, and thus, are also conceived as being easily controlled. As a result, when a person is described as a member of ‘the herd’, they are presumed to be dependent on others because they lack the capacity to think for themselves, and consequently, are easily influenced and manipulated. Thus, it seems like calling someone a member of ‘the herd’ is just another way of calling them a ‘follower’, as both labels describe a person as being dependent on others for direction.

At the same time, however, an additional critique of how a person acts and associates with others can be drawn from the same analogy, when it’s observed that herd-animals also lack individuality. Herd-animals are commonly thought to lack individuality because there is few, if any, distinguishing factors or character traits among the individual animals which make up the herd. As a result, when emphasis is put on how herd-animals lack individuality, the member of ‘the herd’ seems more like the ‘poser’ or ‘bitter’ who takes on the identity of others because they lack a sense of self or individuality.

Thus, identifying someone as a member of ‘the herd’ can be seen as a broad critique of how a person acts and associates with others, in that, the person is dependent upon others for attaining a sense of direction and individuality. Accordingly, accessing how a person becomes part of ‘the herd’ will help us think about how we can live more authentically, by relying on our own abilities and talents to find direction in our lives, and to gain a sense of individuality for ourselves.

To help us think about how a person becomes part of ‘the herd’, we can use the teenage girl found in the lyrics of “Rodeo Clowns”. Because she only makes a brief appearance in Johnson’s lyrics, it’s helpful to make some broad generalizations. For instance, if we project ourselves into the shoes of Johnson’s character, most of us can probably relate to her teenage struggle to fit in with a new crowd or environment. And, it’s likely that most of us can also relate to being overwhelmed, like Johnson’s character, with adolescent dreams to do ‘grown-up’ things.

Like many teenagers, this character dreamed of getting a body piercing, and doing other kinds of things which symbolized being ‘grown-up’. Body piercing and other activities—like getting a tattoo, driving a car, smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, or having intercourse—are commonly conceived by teenagers as being ‘grown-up’, because they are symbolic of gaining control of one’s body and the ability to chose without the consent of a parent or guardian. However, as Johnson’s character illustrates, doing these things are not categorically fulfilling. She engages in activities that are symbolic of being ‘grown-up’, but instead of becoming an autonomous individual, she winds up becoming part of ‘the herd’.

So, why did she become part of ‘the herd’? One explanation is that the “dreams” she perused were not her own. Rather, the activities she engaged in were someone else’s conception of what one should do if they want to ‘fit in’ or be ‘grown-up’. In other words, the character became part of the herd because she mindlessly went along with what others demonstrated or suggested that she do, instead of exercising the forethought and responsibility of an autonomous individual.

Although the character engaged in activities that were symbolic of having control of her body and mind, Johnson’s character illustrates that it’s not the mere act of engaging in ‘grown-up’ activities that makes a person an independent individual. Rather, this example illustrates that it’s how a person engages in activities that makes them more or less autonomous and authentic. As a result, it’s not the overt action of engaging in any particular activity that makes a person a member of ‘the herd’. Instead, it’s the person’s subjective motivations that should be scrutinized to determine whether they are acting authentically as an autonomous individual, or inauthentically as a member of ‘the herd’.

To further investigate how the character in Johnson’s lyrics became part of ‘the herd’, it’s helpful to speculate about her subjective motivations for being a disco queen with dreams of body piercings and other things. One of the main motivational factors for the character engaging in these activities was probably her own desire to ‘fit in’. Not to mention, the pressure to ‘fit in’ was surely compounded by those she associated with and the environment she put herself in. An additional contributory factor was probably a weak sense of identity, in that, she did not have a strong sense of what she valued, what she wanted to become, or what she wanted to achieve in the future.

Together, her want to belong and her weak sense of identity are probable explanations for why this character engaged in activities in a way that resulted in her becoming part of ‘the herd’. Although we have not exhausted all the possible factors and motivations that might contribute to a person becoming a member of ‘the herd’, the analysis provided above is helpful because it points out that it’s not the actions that make a person part of ‘the herd’, but the subjective motivations that makes a person more or less a member of ‘the herd’. Keeping this in mind, let’s switch gears, and think about how one can overcome the factors and forces that lead one to become part of ‘the herd’. To aid our inquiry, let’s take a look at the philosophy of Nietzsche, as he identifies some additional causes that contribute to a person becoming part of ‘the herd’, provides a powerful critique of herd mentality, and suggests how to overcome it.

Nietzsche begins Untimely Meditations by making some observations about the causes of herd mentality. In general, he noticed that people have a tendency to be lazy and not think for themselves. Nietzsche described this as the tendency to “sloth”, and found that people in a lazy and sloth-like state would follow the path of least resistance and greatest social acceptance. Instead of speaking their mind, or pursuing goals that they found worthwhile or meaningful, Nietzsche observed that these people would “hide themselves behind [the] manners and opinions [of others]”.

In addition, Nietzsche found that the tendency to sloth inhibits people from exercising their autonomy and actualizing their potentials. In other words, he found that sloth-like people would not exercise their freedom to do what they want, or work toward becoming their best. As a result, Nietzsche criticized lazy sloth-like tendencies because they make people avoid “the truth that each human being is a unique marvel”.

Instead of aspiring to achieve greatness, people who give into their tendency to sloth developed a herd mentality. And, like herd-animals, these people follow the direction of others rather than taking the risk and the initiative to figure things out for themselves, and do things that others find worthwhile or meaningful.

To combat herd mentality, Nietzsche said that educators play an important, but limited role. Educators serve to liberate us from herd mentality by revealing the fundamental components of our true being. Nietzsche called these fundamental components the “real groundwork and import of [our] being”; and went on to suggest that this being is not to be found inside ourselves. Rather, this true being lies at “an infinite height above [us]”, and educators play an important role in helping us see this. That is, educators serve to liberate our vision beyond “blind instinct”, and help us strive toward attaining our true being—toward becoming a “true human being”.

After learning that we should strive to achieve our true being, the rest is left up to the individual. According to Nietzsche, each person has their own particular being to achieve. There is not a universal standard we can all measure and compare ourselves against. Rather, Nietzsche claims there is a “fundamental law of your own self” which each person has and should pursue. Thus, encouraging one to pursue their personal best is important because it will help them achieve a greater state of being when such encouragement results in the person autonomously acting to fulfill their potentials.

In short, Nietzsche wants us to overcome our tendency to sloth and exercise our capacities to achieve greatness. We learn that greatness is a quality to be actively pursued—by taking on challenges and striving to do our best—when we look beyond our “blind” or “beast-like” instincts. And, once we understand that we have our own unique capacities, Nietzsche believed that we should strive to exercise these capacities because pursuing our subjective potential will elevate our being.

In a latter passage, Nietzsche claims that we would be more apt to pursue our true being, and liberate ourselves from following ‘the herd’, if we were taught from a young age that we are “a failed product of nature’s handiwork and a testimony to her grand aspirations.” Although it sounds a bit harsh to think of ourselves as “failed projects”, Nietzsche wants to drive home the point that we shouldn’t be complacent with our current state of being, and that we should aim toward attaining subjective greatness.

But, are we really “failed projects”? No, I think we should read this passage metaphorically; a literal reading of this passage takes us away from Nietzsche’s message. The point he is trying to make, is that we should look at ourselves as an unfinished product with great potential. Thinking of ourselves as “testimonies to the grand aspirations of nature”, reminds us that positive qualities—like those of greatness and excellence—are to be achieved by changing ourselves to do better and work harder.

In sum, Nietzsche wants us to realize our potentials by waging an “unceasing war against everything that hinders our fulfillment”, whether it be accepting mediocracy, or selling ourselves short by thinking that we can’t do any better. Nietzsche wants us to realize that we each have a unique potential, and that achieving our personal best will only be done by candidly observing that we are unfinished products that can always strive to do better.

In closing, it’s important to evaluate if we are thinking for ourselves when we act. By thinking for yourself, you’ll be acting autonomously, in that, you’ll be creating the forces that motivate and drive your actions. Thus, in the quest to live more authentically, in so far as not being a member of ‘the herd’, it’s up to each individual to fight the tendencies and desire that lead people to go along with whatever is popularly accepted, or settle for achieving less than their personal best.

Pete, the Self-Deceived Hypocrite