# Social Category > South African Politics Forum >  Are you a sheep?

## ChrisNG53

In my book1 I relate how, as young lads at boarding school, we all claimed to be having sex during which process the girl would faint at the moment of penetration, whilst emitting a huge sigh of unbearable pleasure and surrender. These claims were shared with general enthusiasm, contributing to social bonding, comradeship and friendship. Some even paid others a fag or two for their "secret" as to how to make a girl succumb more spectacularly!
The reality was very different. No one was having sex. The claims about penetration and girls fainting were fatuous rubbish!
However, no one placed these claims in dispute. They were accepted as truth. Acceptance was as natural and easy as breathing. 
Why? Why was fatuous rubbish and monstrous lies accepted without dispute in our group? The answer is very simple. Human beings are "social animals". It is by bonding, cooperation and pulling together that we have achieved dominance over all other creatures on the planet. Psychologically we need to feel loved and accepted. We love the feeling of "belonging". To disagree with others is to risk rejection. To disagree with a dominant group is to invite being marginalized, even ostracized. So we are "hot wired" to have a "herd mentality".
At school the older boys, at 17 years+ age, were of sexual maturity. It was natural for them to have a need for sex. Since sex was simply not available at a Roman Catholic school they simply invented a false reality. Having no experience of sex fertile imaginations filled in the gaps in a way that flattered their egos. Since they were the dominant group, what they put out was accepted as truth and promulgated by the rest of us --- unthinkingly --- because a herd mentality and the need to belong are natural to human beings.
In his classic work Animal Farm, George Orwell quite spectacularly portrayed how the views of a dominant group become the norm for the rest. Because the rest accept and propagate these views unthinkingly, he rightly portrayed them as sheep. Sheep do not think for themselves. They simply follow whoever is leading. They are concerned only to be part of the herd. They have a herd mentality. Just one sheep dog can drive a whole herd of a hundred sheep in whatever direction it chooses.
How right George Orwell was!! Really! We see this phenomenon repeat itself amongst humans with incredible regularity. Consider how the 3rd Reich used it with the German people resulting in the Holocaust. White folk in Zimbabwe individually were the very best I have encountered. In my book I relate as to how some of them gave up time with their own families to come and give us an incredibly happy first Xmas party at the childrens Home I was in. However, as a group, they supported and followed Ian Smith on a course of sheer madness. The apartheid system, a most extreme form of social injustice, was perpetrated on account of otherwise very intelligent White people acting as sheep.
We have had some spectacular examples in our recent history in South Africa. Not one ANC Member of Parliament voted against the banning of the Scorpions even though 84% of ordinary South Africans were against it! We saw the same phenomenon recently when all the Black ANC members voted to support the now internationally infamous Protection of State Information Bill. There are countless examples here and in other parts of the World.
What amazes me about these folk is that surely they know that this is the age of information and that their children and successors will come to know of the grotesquely unprincipled way in which they have acted? Do they feel no shame? Do they feel no compunction about bringing shame and disgrace on their pedigree?
So each of us needs to ask ourselves a question, and ask it repeatedly. _Am I now acting as a sheep? Have I consciously, or even subconsciously, stopped thinking for myself and simply following the herd?  Have I conveniently suppressed my ability to distinguish right from wrong in order not to lose my place in the herd? Am I now a sheep?_
A very good example is the issue of gay and lesbian rights. People in the anti gay/lesbian camp simply refuse to accept the reality that gays and lesbians are the way they are on account of the same natural phenomenon that made them straight, or White, or Ndebele, or Tswana . over which no one has any control! What you are at the moment of birth is not in your hands. Typically they start off by putting themselves in the traditional or African culture camp and postulate all arguments in terms of the camp beliefs  not in terms of reason --- just as we believed the rubbish on sex as naïve school boys. I even had a friend in Namibia who candidly admitted that he and others routinely had sex with sheep and goats during puberty. However he was totally against gay and lesbian rights. He based his opposition on "African culture".
So too as regards politics. Most folk simply support the actions of the leaders of whatever political party they are in, or have decided to support, regardless of how wrong those actions may be. They consciously decide to abandon truth, and what is right, so as to ensure that they remain in their favourite herd. It gets worse. They will even set upon those who disagree, hound and persecute them just as dogs were set upon anyone seen as dissenting on Animal Farm. How many times has Archbishop Desmond Tutu been set upon and insulted for daring to simply disagree with the ANC herd and say - on this occasion, you are wrong.
Politicians, of course, take full advantage of this, just as the pigs did on Animal Farm. They rely heavily on the fact that their supporters will act as sheep and simply bleat _baaa  baaa  baaa  _ whatever they do or say. They demand that people should not think for themselves but simply accept whatever the leadership has cooked up. An extreme example is North Korea where the leader is institutionalized as a living God and the populace is denied the right to think at all! To a lesser extent Gadaffi, who so many of us sheep revered, was also trying this on a huge scale in Libya with his "Green Book".
If we perform an analyses of failed states we find that, in most cases, the failure became guaranteed once the populace behaved like sheep and put all its faith in leadership. We do not have to look far on this one! I also think that it is a sin to voluntarily forego your intellect, the most precious of gifts we have, that distinguishes us from other creatures. Hence my motto - "cogito, ergo sum".
So, with respect, you need to always ask yourself  _am I a sheep.? Am I unknowingly following a herd? Worse still, am I knowingly doing what is wrong just so that I can stay in the herd? Am I accepting fatuous rubbish and monstrous lies?_
*Am I a sheep?*
*Postscript  ----* 
Theres an annual contest at the University of Arkansas calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term. This years term was: Political Correctness. 
 The winning student wrote:Political correctness is a doctrine  fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rapidly promoted by mainstream media  which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end.
__________________________________________________  _______________________________
1 http://www.lulu.com/product/paperbac...udice/17794093

----------

Blurock (09-Mar-12), Dave A (09-Mar-12)

----------


## Blurock

Excellent post Chris. This is the reason why I have started doubting democracy. I believe in democracy, but it can never be a one-fits all solution. 

Some countries are just not mature enough to implement democracy. For democracy to work, the populace have to understand the principles of democracy and not follow a party or "leader" blindly. There are many examples of flawed democracies all over the world. People are suffering, sometimes being unable to feed their families, but they still support the so called leaders who are living in luxury. 

I therefore have adopted the somewhat flawed principle of never voting any one into power, but to always support the opposition to create a balance. :Hmmm:

----------

ChrisNG53 (25-Apr-12)

----------


## wynn

> I therefore have adopted the somewhat flawed principle of never voting any one into power, but to always support the opposition to create a balance.


I couldn't agree more, once the opposition get into power, keep voting for the opposition.

I try explain it to my staff as follows if everybody bought at Checkers eventually OK, PnP, Spar, Boxer etc, would go out of business, then what stops Checkers from charging what they want?

----------

ChrisNG53 (25-Apr-12)

----------


## ChrisNG53

> I couldn't agree more, once the opposition get into power, keep voting for the opposition.


Thanks guys. So you are definitely not sheep. But what name should we attach to those who will always vote for the opposition? What about "goat". A goat just loves to head butt whoever is in front. I  love it. I prefer to be a goat. Wonderfull!

Reasonable men adapt to the world around them; unreasonable men make the world adapt to them. The world is changed by unreasonable men.
Edwin Louis Cole

----------


## Blurock

I would not like to be called a goat. Hard headed, headbutting, horny creature.

What about libertarian? A libertarian stands for liberty and freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of association and a free economy.

Vote politicians out of power, not into power. :Lttd:

----------


## tec0

People will see what they want to see, they will hear what they want to hear. They will talk crap and lie because the situation demands it. Fact is none of us are different. A homosexual can just as easily have a normal sexual orientation as a normal person can pretend to be homosexual. Fact is nothing is written in stone and we tend to forget that, that the difference between a hero, a coward and a monster are our choices. 

An evil person can in a moment protect innocence just as easily as a good person can destroy a life. We are all capable to do whatever our enabler "our minds" tells us to do. So are we sheep or just susceptible to a mob mentality?  :Wink:

----------


## adrianh

Interesting...

We are born into a world of rules. You are taught to follow rules from day one, when to sleep, when to eat. You go to school and learn whatever is taught, you do as you're told and you are expected not to disagree. You are taught to follow a particular religious docterine, not to question the law but to accept it. You don'tdrive faster than 120 kph and you don't con the tax man because that would be breaking the law. 

But when it comes to politics it supposed to be different, you are expected to think for yourself and not be a sheep...the problem is that you are taught to follow society and its rules all your life and now you are expected to think differently. The point that I am making is it is easier said than done because our society is geared to creating robots.

The problem is that we define sheep as the 'other ones' who follow their leaders. What about the average American, isn't he a sheep for following his leaders into battle. Some would say that the leaders contrived the enemy and that the masses lapped the con up.

The problem with democracy is that those that are best at influencing the masses get to rule, i.e. decide how the game gets to be played.  The game is not about leadership or the good of the nation, the game is power and control.

So the question is this; how do we teach young people to think for themselves if we force our social, political and even religious views on them. When they are young and don't act like sheep then they are 'trouble makers, hardasses, difficult'.

----------

ChrisNG53 (25-Apr-12)

----------


## Blurock

> So the question is this; how do we teach young people to think for themselves if we force our social, political and even religious views on them. When they are young and don't act like sheep then they are 'trouble makers, hardasses, difficult'.


We teach them values. With the right values they will know what to do in a difficult situation, but they will still have their own choice of accepting those values. 

We all know the difference between what is wrong and what is right, we just need to tune in. :Cool:

----------


## Dave A

> We are born into a world of rules. You are taught to follow rules from day one, when to sleep, when to eat. You go to school and learn whatever is taught, you do as you're told and you are expected not to disagree. You are taught to follow a particular religious docterine, not to question the law but to accept it. You don'tdrive faster than 120 kph and you don't con the tax man because that would be breaking the law. 
> 
> But when it comes to politics it supposed to be different, you are expected to think for yourself and not be a sheep...the problem is that you are taught to follow society and its rules all your life and now you are expected to think differently. The point that I am making is it is easier said than done because our society is geared to creating robots.


Ultimately that makes an interesting argument as to why the voting age shouldn't be set too low.

My thoughts turned to paradigms and where free thinking comes from. 

As you say, it's inevitable that our earliest paradigms during our formative years are pretty narrow; a reflection of th emore dominant folk around us. 
I suggest it's only when we start getting exposed to alternative paradigms that we start having to make our own choices.
From there it's probably only once we've experienced a few instances where our own paradigm was actually wrong that we start heading into the territory of true free thinking - where we start routinely questioning what is presented to us as "unquestionable truth" before we accept it.

It's not something that's going to happen without building up a base of different experiences...

----------

ChrisNG53 (25-Apr-12)

----------


## adrianh

> We all know the difference between what is wrong and what is right, we just need to tune in.


I do not believe this for one moment. What is right and wrong for a Christian may not be the same for a Moslem. What about having 6 wives and 21 children or gay marriage or abortion or war or euthinasia etc

----------


## tec0

Well the "mob-individual" comes to mind. They pride themselves to be different politically and free thinking but yet they are still acting as a group because they believe in the same principles set by each other. So even if you consider yourself not to be influential and you have a few friends believing the same thing then already you are a "mob-individual" 

Basically for every ideal, idea and concept you will find someone with similar views even more so tanks to the internet. Thus it rings true unification is in our wiring. It may also be for this reason that we cannot see past a monetary system and why political systems are so successful in keeping the populace enslaved.   

So how do you become a true individual? In all honesty there is just no way to become unique. Unless if you are born in another galaxy and are effected by green rocks or get bitten by a radioactive spider and have constant PMS maybe....  :Stick Out Tongue:

----------

ChrisNG53 (16-Mar-12)

----------


## tec0

> I do not believe this for one moment. What is right and wrong for a Christian may not be the same for a Moslem. What about having 6 wives and 21 children or gay marriage or abortion or war or euthinasia etc


For each thing that you just mentioned there is someone that will take a stand for and against it... All of them individuals  :Wink:

----------


## wynn

> I prefer to be a goat. Wonderfull!


I think I would like be considered a 'benign wolf in sheeps clothing', I won't bite unles provoked.

----------


## ChrisNG53

> I do not believe this for one moment. What is right and wrong for a Christian may not be the same for a Moslem. What about having 6 wives and 21 children or gay marriage or abortion or war or euthinasia etc


It is apparent that, understandably, the point of the thread has because confused with some more exotic philosophy.

It is not about what is right or wrong in terms of any particular test such as morality or philosophy.

It is concerned with people opting for the wrong option, in terms of their own understanding of the difference between right and wrong. As said, many just decide to follow the camp leadership position for no other reason than to be part of the herd even, in terms of their own understanding, that position is wrong.

Obviously we will genuinely differ on a whole range of matters/issues. The post is not concerned with views and beliefs genuine and sincerely held.

 It is concerned with submerging one's own understanding of what is right in order to follow a wrong path as part of a herd.

----------


## adrianh

Chris I am not confused. Most people follow rules although they know that the rules are rubbish. We follow the rubbish rules because we accept the the law or the religious powers that be made those rules and we are supposed to follow them. The fact that I don't buy beer on a Sunday is not because I think the rule is good, I think its a stupid rule but I have no choice in the matter. 

Now be this all as it may, I still contend the the population is programmed to follow rules (mostly legal and religious) and are also programmed to do as their leaders and elders tell them (The Judge, the Priest, the school teacher). They are taught to shut up and follow those rules and if they do they will be good citizens, stay out of jail and go to heaven...

...but we expect them to think for themselves.

Nowhere, not in church, school or even university are people taught how to think. They are taught to act like sheep and to follow the herd, be it on a narrow path.

----------

ChrisNG53 (16-Mar-12)

----------


## tec0

> It is apparent that, understandably, the point of the thread has because confused with some more exotic philosophy.
> 
> It is not about what is right or wrong in terms of any particular test such as morality or philosophy.
> 
> It is concerned with people opting for the wrong option, in terms of their own understanding of the difference between right and wrong. As said, many just decide to follow the camp leadership position for no other reason than to be part of the herd even, in terms of their own understanding, that position is wrong.
> 
> Obviously we will genuinely differ on a whole range of matters/issues. The post is not concerned with views and beliefs genuine and sincerely held.
> 
>  It is concerned with submerging one's own understanding of what is right in order to follow a wrong path as part of a herd.


I may not agree with you on this. People agree with something because they want the same. As an example, let's say you go to the municipality office. Your hands are shaking with anger frustration knowing that the bill is so high that you will not be able to pay it. 

But you also know for a fact the bill is wrong. Thanks to a third party instrument that is correctly installed and certified to give you a correct reading. 

The municipal worker insists that you pay the bill NOW or face all kinds of penalties chargers and even the risk that you may end up black listed. Now another person at the back starts to scream franticly picking up lose furniture and attacking the guard for reasons unknown. 

At this point you are angry, you are frustrated and this person before you has every intention to take your Livelihood away. What do you do? 

The answer is simple you will react with the person and become violent because you feel it is the right choice. OR you don't… now each option will represent a group. There is no getting around it. 

Every situation will cause a group mentality.

----------


## Dave A

> I may not agree with you on this.


And then your example supports Chris's point?  :Confused:

----------

ChrisNG53 (16-Mar-12)

----------


## tec0

So I did, basically I wanted to show that it is not always a group mentality and that sometimes we react purely because the situation existed and one had limited options on how to react.

----------


## ChrisNG53

> Chris I am not confused. Most people follow rules although they know that the rules are rubbish. We follow the rubbish rules because we accept the the law or the religious powers that be made those rules and we are supposed to follow them. The fact that I don't buy beer on a Sunday is not because I think the rule is good, I think its a stupid rule but I have no choice in the matter. 
> 
> Now be this all as it may, I still contend the the population is programmed to follow rules (mostly legal and religious) and are also programmed to do as their leaders and elders tell them (The Judge, the Priest, the school teacher). They are taught to shut up and follow those rules and if they do they will be good citizens, stay out of jail and go to heaven...
> 
> ...but we expect them to think for themselves.
> 
> Nowhere, not in church, school or even university are people taught how to think. They are taught to act like sheep and to follow the herd, be it on a narrow path.


I could not agree more ... and I suppose that  I should have qualified the post by including the reality that, when you are compelled to "conform", you are not being a sheep, provided that, in your mind, you are aware of being so compelled. It is a fine distinction,but valid.
So I suppose we have a whole segment of folk that are "sheep under sufferance", lol. 

Your penultimate point has bugged me all my life ... for being so frustratingly true. If I were a dictator tomorrow, the first thing I would do is to decree that philosophy be made a compulsory subject right from junior school stage.

Your last point appears to contradict what goes before, but this is only on a simplistic take of your post. The point is, in fact, well taken.

----------


## adrianh

The last point doesn't contradict what goes before. What I mean is this. As one specializes more and more the path that you are on narrows, but the path still tends to follow the herd (although the herd is smaller) Look at scientists, they tend to stick together in tight knit packs. Those little communities can be totally irrational when it comes to views of scientists that are no part of the group. They would fight tooth and nail if a view doesn't fit in with theirs. The thing is, all the members of the pack may not hold the exact same view, they become brothers in arms for _their_ "common good"

Now here is a dangerous phrase that fits in nicely with what you've been saying Chris "The common good" - people do things that they do not always agree with; in the guise of doing it for "The common good"

----------


## ChrisNG53

> The last point doesn't contradict what goes before. What I mean is this. As one specializes more and more the path that you are on narrows, but the path still tends to follow the herd (although the herd is smaller) Look at scientists, they tend to stick together in tight knit packs. Those little communities can be totally irrational when it comes to views of scientists that are no part of the group. They would fight tooth and nail if a view doesn't fit in with theirs. The thing is, all the members of the pack may not hold the exact same view, they become brothers in arms for _their_ "common good"
> 
> Now here is a dangerous phrase that fits in nicely with what you've been saying Chris "The common good" - people do things that they do not always agree with; in the guise of doing it for "The common good"


I had already said that the contradiction was, in effect, more apparent than real -- and that the point was well made

As regards the "common good syndrome", I am inclined to substitute it with "self interest". Firstly it is difficult to see how the common good is served by bad things? So when you go along with nonsense you, in effect, are failing to serve the common good, even though that is your "excuse".

I think it is more correct to say that the motive, in these situations, is *self interest.* So you have a mother lying to cover up the fact that her husband has committed murder. The common good (societal) is certainly not served by the lie. However her own interests are.
I think the same holds true as regards the example of the pack you have adverted to. It is in this sense that we have ANC voting against their consciences. I do not believe, for a nano second, that they believe the common good is being served.

The above applies to situations of obvious wrong. If one cannot be sure that one's own stance is correct, then "compromise" is indicated. That is not what we are concerned with when we talk about being " a sheep".

----------

Dave A (15-Mar-12)

----------


## Blurock

I think sometimes we are just too damn lazy to get off our butts to do something about all the crap we are chirping about. Its much easier to leave it all to someone else to do.

This is evident in corporate institutions, in government and all over. In bodies corporate is is even more noticeable. It is always the same small group of individuals who sees that things get done. The others just agree to everything because it is easier to just do nothing.

----------

ChrisNG53 (16-Mar-12)

----------


## Butch Hannan

I have come in rather late on this one but I find it very interesting. My first reaction is "to sheep or not to sheep" Just about every creature on this earth of ours has an inborn herd instinct. Humanity is different from the other species in that it can choose what herd it belongs to. Much mention is made about the concept of what we consider right and wrong whether this is based on religious, legal or moral grounds. I believe that when an individual starts compromising his beliefs and morals he is then in troubled waters. If you have to justify doing or supporting anything that you know is wrong then you are on the wrong track. Unfortunately most of our population in South Africa are battling to just stay alive. They will tell you they have freedom!! I believe that this occupies their minds most of the time so that they do not question what the Government is doing. A wake up call for our citizens would be if our people in power were prosecuted for all their wrongdoings and received lengthy jail sentences. What makes them different from us ordinary citizens.

----------


## adrianh

How does a cannibal "know" that the rest of us frown on his way of life? The notion of "when an individual starts compromising his beliefs and morals he is then in troubled waters" is very problematic. What about the Sociopath - he has absolutely no idea other than what he is told. Do you run around with an R5 when the goverment says its the right thing to do even though you feel its a crock? Do you always tell the truth and nothing but the truth when your kids ask you awkward questions or do you tell white lies? Again, the problem goes to social norms. Zuma believes that it is perfectly ok to have 6 wives. Moslems believe it is perfectly ok to do all the things that they do. How does one judge what is right and wrong, using religion - difficult to do considering there are so many flavours (even of the same basic religion), the law - it has been proved over and over that the application of the law is a total farce.

I do not profess to have the answers, but I can clearly see that the answers are not black n white - they are shades of grey determined by the lens you are looking through.

----------


## Blurock

> How does a cannibal "know" that the rest of us frown on his way of life?


I suppose it also has to do with evolution and civilisation. An uncivilised cannibal knows that his actions are harmful, but for him it is satisfying his basic needs and he does not care about anyone else. Same as the bunch of uncivilised animals who raped the retarded girl in Soweto...

People know when they do wrong and when their actions are harmful to others and to nature. 

God gave ALL of us the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. That is what differentiates us from animals, no matter which religion you are from. It is up to us to listen to God's word and to do onto others what we expect others to do onto ourselves. :Flowers:

----------


## adrianh

hmmm...I think we should agree to disagree on this one given that there are so many opposing views who all believe that they are right and that their way is God's way.

----------


## Mike C

At the risk of curtailing the discussion (which is not my intention) this thread makes me look back with happy memories to the many hours spent over a mug of coffee/glass of wine as a student discussing various beliefs, norms, values, rules and philosophies.  Ah - good times!

Whereas it expanded our minds and challenged our own thinking, I don't know that it did very much to change the world.

Just like the illustration used in starting this thread:-



> ... young lads at boarding school, we all claimed to be having sex during which process the girl would faint at the moment of penetration, whilst emitting a huge sigh of unbearable pleasure and surrender. These claims were shared with general enthusiasm, contributing to social bonding, comradeship and friendship. Some even paid others a fag or two for their "secret" as to how to make a girl succumb more spectacularly!
> The reality was very different. No one was having sex.


So I tend to end up asking - what can we do (or what can I do)?  Am I a sheep?  To be brutally honest - yes.  There are times that I am a sheep.  But there are also times that I am a goat - and sometimes even a shepherd.

I presume that the essence of this discussion is to challenge us to look at ourselves - and to see if we can change or if we even want to change some things in and around us.

----------


## AndyD

> I suppose it also has to do with evolution and civilisation. An uncivilised cannibal knows that his actions are harmful, but for him it is satisfying his basic needs and he does not care about anyone else.


Peoples perception of what's right and what's wrong is formed by the environment they live in. Why would a cannible perceive that killing a person to feed his family is wrong? Surely he would see it as putting food on the table.




> God gave ALL of us the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. That is what differentiates us from animals,


The way people interpret Gods word has lead to some of the worst human behaviour in history. It's been the cause of deep rooted hatred that's lead to acts of genocide and wars and it's been the cause of some of the worst human rights violations ever committed.

----------


## Blurock

> Peoples perception of what's right and what's wrong is formed by the environment they live in. Why would a cannible perceive that killing a person to feed his family is wrong? Surely he would see it as putting food on the table. 
> 
> The way people interpret Gods word has lead to some of the worst human behaviour in history. It's been the cause of deep rooted hatred that's lead to acts of genocide and wars and it's been the cause of some of the worst human rights violations ever committed.


I agree that organised religion has been the cause of millions of people being killed over the centuries. I believe that God's word is not organised religion. It is being quiet enough to hear the voice of reason. It your conscience. It is believing in right and wrong and doing the right thing.

Too many people think that a specific church, sect or religion will get them into paradise. There may be a lot of surprised people at the judgement day. Those people that shape religion into some self-serving club with man made rules...

We may all have different perceptions of God, but we all know right from wrong.

----------


## adrianh

@Bluerock - your arguement doesn't make sense - to believe that there is such a thing a judgement day or paradise for that matter one has to believe in a particular flavour of religion. These notions are rather meaningless to those who believe in reincarnation. How can religion not be of man made rules? I've never seen anybody or anything come and make rules of any sort. We blindly accept that Emperor Constantine's assemblage of stories is the be all and the end all, whatabout the stories that didn't fit his particular bill and were simply discarded.

We have to agree to disagree on this too. The world is not black or white and right and wrong is not a simple straight line that can be drawn by anybody at a whim because they feels it to be so. Right and wrong is a social standard. We do have built in notions of fairless, which generally entail "why should you have more than I do" and a built in cooprative drive (to a degree provided that I benefit from the cooperation) but thats about it.

----------


## tec0

> I had already said that the contradiction was, in effect, more apparent than real -- and that the point was well made
> 
> As regards the "common good syndrome", I am inclined to substitute it with "self interest". Firstly it is difficult to see how the common good is served by bad things? *So when you go along with nonsense you, in effect, are failing to serve the common good, even though that is your "excuse".
> *
> I think it is more correct to say that the motive, in these situations, is *self interest.* So you have a mother lying to cover up the fact that her husband has committed murder. The common good (societal) is certainly not served by the lie. However her own interests are.
> 
> I think the same holds true as regards the example of the pack you have adverted to. It is in this sense that we have ANC voting against their consciences. I do not believe, for a nano second, that they believe the common good is being served.
> 
> The above applies to situations of obvious wrong. If one cannot be sure that one's own stance is correct, then "compromise" is indicated. That is not what we are concerned with when we talk about being " a sheep".


I find it difficult to sustain someone else's prospects and demands. Especially if my own is absented in there train of thought. Thus a single-minded liberation occurred and today we call it a "dog eats dog world" The concept however is as old as greed itself.    

Serving self-interest or the common good amounts to the same thing to a point. That said the question needs to be raised; who's common good are you serving? Your own? You're leader's vision?

Fact is how many decisions is placed on necessity/survival and how many of them can be contributed to "group pressure" and social laws? The answer to this question my bring a better understanding to what a mob mentality really is. A shared necessity There is safety in numbers and we can survive in groups. 

Bing completely alone in every decision is a scary prospect and it asks for more than just a mindset and will. It asks for utter commitment and facing the consequences alone. Fact being alone in everything is against our very human nature.

So maybe we are sheep because we have to be?

----------


## wynn

Hold those thoughts!!
I just need to refill my coffee cup and make some popcorn, this promises to become good entertainment.

----------


## Blurock

@adrian - maybe you should read my post again. I am not promoting any church or religion which is man made. I do however choose to live believing that there is a God, than to live believing that there is no God and then finding out that I was wrong. :Wink:

----------


## Martinco

> I do however choose to live believing that there is a God, than to live believing that there is no God and then finding out that I was wrong.


 :Clap:  :Clap:  :Clap:

----------


## vieome

Gold Star post Chris, really enjoyed reading that. 

random thought!
Hypothetically if we say that in a nation of sheep, 1% are aware that they are not sheep, this one percent then spreads its belief and frees some sheep from the herd mind, and these become the goats, then more and more sheep become goats(revolution). A new herd mind is formed from the goats who have cleansed themselves of the sheep mind, and in a sense the new goats become the sheep of the goat herd mind.  

Larry Wachowski "human beings have thisyou know, we're social animals, it's like so much of our reality is our construction based on communication.  We have a point of view about the world and we validate it through finding another human being that has a similar point of view, and thus we say ahhh!  You know, it's like, because we can't really know anything, so if we just get enough people together, we can believe in castles in the sky..."

----------


## adrianh

> 


...and of course God isn't going to work out that you simply applied Pascal's Wager.

Look, we all have different beliefs and we all have the right to it. I am just way to skeptical to buy into religion. I do think though that we agree about spirituality on some level. Maybe on the level of the belief in the interconnectedness of all things.

----------


## Mike C

Bluerock is saying something important, and I think that we are being sidetracked into discussing where these perceptions of right and wrong come from.  Steven Covey, in his book "7 Habits of Highly Effective People" would agree with Bluerock in suggesting that there are basic principles or natural laws which are not esoteric, mysterious or religious ideas.  Things such as fairness, integrity, honesty, human dignity, excellence, potential etc.  seem to exist in all human beings, regardless of social conditioning.
Let's also, in our discussion remember that we must take into account, not only the worst of the human condition, but also the highest that people strive for - and some even achieve.

----------

Blurock (23-Apr-12)

----------


## Phil Cooper

The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
WINSTON CHURCHILL

Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right.
H.L. MENCKEN

Democracy consists of choosing your dictators, after they've told you what you think it is you want to hear.
ALAN COREN

Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people.
OSCAR WILDE

Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half the time.
E.B. WHITE

Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers.
ARISTOTLE

----------


## adrianh

@Phil Cooper - too true

----------


## Blurock

> Bluerock is saying something important, and I think that we are being sidetracked into discussing where these perceptions of right and wrong come from.  Steven Covey, in his book "7 Habits of Highly Effective People" would agree with Bluerock in suggesting that there are basic principles or natural laws which are not esoteric, mysterious or religious ideas.  Things such as fairness, integrity, honesty, human dignity, excellence, potential etc.  seem to exist in all human beings, regardless of social conditioning.
> Let's also, in our discussion remember that we must take into account, not only the worst of the human condition, but also the highest that people strive for - and some even achieve.


You may also find this in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. :Big Grin:

----------


## Mike C

The spirit of democracy is not a mechanical thing to be adjusted by abolition of forms. It requires change of heart. 
Mahatma Gandhi 

Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honourable form of government ever devised by man. 
Ronald Reagan

Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. 
Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

An ideal form of government is democracy tempered with assassination. 
Voltaire

Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.  
George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

----------


## wynn

I would propose that the reason humans have an inate sense of what is right (moral) and wrong (immoral) is that over the millenia we, as a species, have tried every possible system and found that we get the best results as a group/tribe/nation by respecting others rights as well, not just your own.

At present (that is the last few thousand years)we are in a, religion is the blueprint for society model.
As we can see there are now a number of behemoth monotheist religions who tend to want to impose their rules on society to the exclusion of others.

In a few more thousand years (the near future in the scheme of things) we will have some or other model to follow, if we survive as a species.

----------


## adrianh

How can you say that humans have an innate sense of right and wrong? Unless this can be shown by scientific study it is merely an opinion. The thing to keep in mind is that social model has always offered some group within the religion special privilidges. The masses are to do something or the other for the church. Why are so many religions based on the fear of the unknown and the notion that you will get a noddy badge if you are a good boy. How is it that if you follow a couple of rules and kowtow you get to live happily forever - its a bit too easy if you ask me. How come none of the relious texts have anything to say about how to care for animals, or the earth for that matter, I would have expected a bit about nuclear weapons, genocide, world wars, space travel, aliens, science, natural laws but all there is is little anecdotes about unimportant things that are significant to 20,000 people 2000 years ago. Remember, there was a time when only a select few were allowed to read and write, the working class are expected to give 10% to the church, etc. We call it morality, we have gone around this circle many times, the notion of morality is a social standard of the time.

We have to seperate spirituality from religion. I would think that all people have some sense of spirituality because we all wonder where we come from and why we are here. Religion is then thrust upon people as a means of control. There is nothing better to control a man than to provide him with all the answers to the eternal questions. But remember that the answers have riders of conformity. Of course if you are a Zen Buddhist then the only conformity is for you to find yourself and in so doing find your own connection to the greater universe.

Call me cynical, I am for sure. I cannot accept a circular dogma that answers questions by saying that the answers are pulled out of thin air. How is it that when God speaks to you then you are truly spiritual but when Napoleon speaks to you you are Shizophrenic. How come you can quote any sentence out of context even though that sentence contradicts another? Howcome one group gets to murder another yet both believe that they are right and serving their diety. The Germans and the British mothers both prayed for their sons to be spared. How come when one asks these questions you are told that the questions are irrelevant because the diety does what he does and he has plan.

The western world created a model based on consumption, consume to make more to consume more. We live our lives chasing the buck to buy more trinkets to be better than others who buy useless trinkets. We are unable to care for ourselves unless we are supported by all sorts of system, running water, electricity, etc. The problem is that we are breeding and consuming faster and faster. Its not going to take long for the entire stack of cards to come down. Our lives are centered around absurdities, money; a notional concept that describes our worth, trinkets; cars, houses, cellphones and other totally over the top assets that describe our standing in society. As far as I am concered, we are going to cause ourselves to have to reevaluate our way of life, when the bubble bursts, its not going to be the wealthiest man left standing, its going to be the man who knows how to live off the land.

Anyway, these are thought that roll around in my head and are not directed at anybody. It is merely the ramblings of a person who has many more questions than answes. I'll say this much, the older I get the more I know that I actually nothing for sure. Our lives are based on models based on our perceptions, our perceptions are easily fooled and our models are never perfect. We are happy to accept that a photon is wave or a particle depending on how we choose to observe it but this model may simply be incomplete because we are using inappropriate tools to make our observations, yet we believe that we know evrything there is to know about religion. For how long exactly did we believe the world to be flat and the earth to be the centre of the universe? Call me doff, but I do not 'believe' anything, I simply accept that some models are more appropriate than others until better models come along.

----------

ChrisNG53 (25-Apr-12), Dave A (25-Apr-12), tec0 (24-Apr-12), wynn (25-Apr-12)

----------


## tec0

Indeed if anything everything is best guess. I cannot argue with this as it is the bases of science. What of spirituality? Well it seems that it is the sum of all fears. We fear that there is a deity and we did wrong by its laws. Or that there is no deity and the afterlife will be an echo of nothingness and thoughtlessness. Regardless death and spirituality remains a scary uncertainty. 

So are we sheep-people? It comes down to your choices really. Every choice will break a link or create a link, that I think is the reality of the situation. Does it matter? Only if you want it to matter The answer is really that simple. I also think we do things that benefit us. Sometimes we make sacrifices. Depending on the benefit or sacrifice you may end up acting alone or in a group. It boils down to the situation at hand really. 

But it doesnt really matter, we dont matter because most of us will have good lives or bad lives, regardless we will probably not end up in the history books. Truth is in less than a hundred years from now people may not remember us at all. Nor will they care what we thought to be true or what we held dear.  

In the end it is all just a drop in the ocean

----------


## adrianh

Are we sheep? 
Of course we all are to some degree. The question is not whether we are sheep, but whether we can survive if we stray to far from the herd.

----------

tec0 (25-Apr-12)

----------


## Mike C

> How can you say that humans have an innate sense of right and wrong? Unless this can be shown by scientific study it is merely an opinion.





> I would think that all people have some sense of spirituality because we all wonder where we come from and why we are here.


That was quite a long post there Adrian - and you make some very good points.  I found the comments above a little contradictory, however.  Can one not link the two together?  If you agree that all people have some sense of spirituality, then why can't the same be said of the sense of right and wrong?  They might come from the same source - whatever you understand that source to be.

It may be that I have misunderstood your definition of "spirituality".  Often misunderstanding happens because we use the same words but have different meanings to them.

----------


## adrianh

I don't think that the two are related. Wondering where you come from doesn't mean that you have an understanding of the notion of right and wrong. I've watched a number of documentaries on animal behaviour. Animals only seem to cooperate if there is something in it for all the members that cooperate. An animal doesn't seem to be able to assist another just because the other needs it. Of course there is anectotal evidence of it happening but it doesn't seem to be the norm. There is a lot of footage of animals expressing fairness. In each case it gets expressed when the individual feels that he is treated unfairly. I've seen footage of elephants cheating - they are clever enough to figure out how to get something for nothing. The problem with the notion of right and wrong is simply that it is a social norm. We have to seperate the notion of right and wrong from instinctual species based values. It is not in the interest of a lioness to kill another in the pack if the other adds value to the group. This is not right vs wrong. The lioness doesn't think I shouldn't kill the other lioness because its wrong, she simply acts on instinct. Now one could argue that we gave the instincts the words right and wrong, but it is just too simple to say that because we have created all sorts of right and wrong values that are social and religious. Look, I don't know what the answers are, I am simply rolling ideas around in my head. The only thing I can do is to speculate based on my understanding of the topics at hand. I think that people are free to believe whatever they want provided that they don't impose those beliefs on others (but the reality is that they do and we accept it as a part of fitting into society...Don't get me wrong, I don't think it is a bad thing, people need something to bind them together and being bound together by a system that has "good" values can only benefit society as a whole) But I do think that we should be open minded to the beliefs that others hold.

----------

ChrisNG53 (25-Apr-12)

----------


## ChrisNG53

Thanks guys. 

Phew! Could never have imagined that the thread would be so stimulating and provoke so much wisdom on a plethora of philosophical, moral and intellectual aspects. I have copied and pasted so many "pearls of wisdom", as I am a serial plagiarizer. 

However, I have to respectfully insist, as is my nature, that the central point of the thread was that you are a sheep when you go with the herd either unthinkingly or despite, in terms of your own understanding of the issues, to do is wrong. 

The thread seeks to attack political cowardice and political naivete, that is now rampant.

A most credible riposte, with respect, is that sometimes it is not cowardice that makes us do this but a conscious assessment that the indicated "wrong" presents as a necessary evil. I suspect that this explains why, even some judges in South Africa accept that the current immoral, racist and absurd transformational model (AA and BEE) should be acquiesced in. That does not make them sheep ... because they are going with the herd after consciously deciding that the "wrong" is "right" for the greater good or whatever reason.

I think the other credible riposte that emerged is that you cannot be a sheep if you support the herd in your own interests, because that is not "sheepish" unthinking behavior, but an intelligent choice, albeit self serving and and wrong. 

I accept that the thread should have been qualified to include these bastards as part of the herd. 

So I now do that. The herd always has, in the lead pack, those who are seeking to lead the rest to serve their own mostly, but not always, nefarious, stinky, unwholesome objectives.

----------


## wynn

There should also be a caveat for the sheeple to beware of the 'Judas Goat'
He is the politician who will lead us into the 'cr@p'

----------


## wynn

In a discussion on Atheism etc. Jacques Rousseau touches on exactly what I was trying to say in my earlier post, talk about synchronicity?  
see the whole article at http://www1.dailymaverick.co.za/opin...till-gathering

Part of the problem might be that we forget how young we are and, therefore, how little experience we have of making sense of each other. While modern humans originated around 200,000 years ago, most of us still lived as nomadic hunter-gatherers until around 10,000 years ago, when agriculture started allowing for the formation of permanent settlements, trade, cooperation and the formation of complex societies.

If you start the clock those 200,000 years ago, we’ve only lived in societies for 5% of our existence, and in complex societies for less than 2%. The skills most useful for flourishing during the other 95% of our history aren’t equally useful today, yet they continue to determine many of our responses to modern challenges. Essentially, we’re pattern-making creatures, who’ve survived through being able to do things like predict the movements of animals and the changes of seasons. We look for structure, and we’re so well-trained and efficient at this it happens without thinking – and perhaps often in ways that are entirely inappropriate to a more complex modern world

----------

ChrisNG53 (25-Apr-12)

----------


## adrianh

Well here is another thing worth thinking about**: We did more damage to the environment in that 2% of time where we live in complex societies than the entire 98% where we didn't. Another thing is population growth. Our population growth is exponential and the curve is now practically straight up

----------


## tec0

Leadership more often than not bestows bearing upon its nation. They can do so via the media or with a believe system. As they amass momentum it is almost impossible to create enough friction to bring the masses to a stop and take a second look. Reality and truths has no meaning once the momentum peaks and maximum velocity can be maintained with perpetual historic events that keeps the old fears and truths alive. 

So there is no sheep mentality when it comes to following leadership "any" leadership. There is only cause and reaction. If you join the masses the cause will be aimed at their intentions and the outcome will be whatever they wish it to be. If you dont join the masses you become an instant outcast and with it consequences. 

Simple physics can calculate the rest but I fear that emotionally you will find some systems are spinning out of control and it will cripple its intended path eventually like truck spinning out of control on a highway. It will take some time to restore function and then the system will just repeat itself. By its design the system cannot change because there is no alternative.

----------

