I’d like to contemplate the human tendency to look up to their examples. I recently read that all people do that. The idea made sense.

Are you susceptible to idolatry? Myself, I used to cling to male figures when I was a kid, because I lived in a house with only my mom and my sister. Then, from my puberty till my twenties, I fell in love with many girls and lifted some of their characteristics into an unreachable space. But I never had idols such as writers or TV personalities or, and especially not, gurus. I do think that many people do.

One can wonder if this tendency is part of our physical code or that it’s a mental thing we acquire as we grow. It would fit the bio-belief to assume that as monkeys we needed to look up to our leaders, or else our communities would have fallen apart, and we’d have lost the struggle for survival to other groups.  I vaguely remember a phase in high school when your identity was defined by whom you looked up to. Even now, the characters you like give shape to who you think you are yourself, and how you present that person to others.

Some religions condemn “worshiping an image of the divine”. In the context of society, I think they’re right. It is probably quite a pragmatic ethical decision to keep some initiative to yourself instead of blindly following whoever you think holds truth or has the X-factor. Still, idolatry exists, and what’s more: masses simply obey strong individuals on many occasions.

I just wonder: how would a society look which is not based on this deep inner urge to follow impressive individuals? Would it be leaderless? Would such a society have brought us to where we are now? Could it even exist?


One thought on “Idols”

  1. Following or sharing
    Based on my experience as a numerologist I think that this deep inner urge to follow impressive individuals is a given characteristic as all others are. You have it or you don’t. It is personal vibration that estimates all aspects of this tendency (approach, depth, lasting…).
    There are certain qualities that are attractive to us personally and those that are not. With people whose charisma is attractive to us we communicate easier as they awake similar qualities we have. The question is how we treat those others, those who stay at the opposite site of that what we consider as virtues, as this shows how we approach personal growing, superficially or ready to dig deeper. Because that we do not like is also part of us or it will not attract out attention, nevertheless the way how we show it. My theory is that those who follow gurus want to see themselves in the same light and glory as somebody who is only that- light and glory. In fact, I think that something like that doesn’t exist. And all people we encounter serve us to become aware of aspects in us, aspects of light and aspects of darkness.
    Turning back to your question, I do not believe that such a society is possible. Even in so called equal sharing, there is always a certain initiative that starts everything. I do believe that a society in which everybody will live personal purpose or reason for which s/he is here (lesson that initiated the birth in this reality), would be the right one. In such a society where each individual will be aware of uniqueness of another being, people would be aware that we are all here to point something to each other. Utopia? Maybe.  I have always had a tendency to belong to the world that seemed utopian to many people around me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s