For good and for bad, we are all personally familiar with the need to conform. A natural instinct and a group phenomenon that is reinforced by social uniformity, conformity is a universal reality. Founder of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud elaborated on this propensity when he suggested that the mental processes of power and safety that occur in the collective cannot be achieved in isolation.

Freud asserted that group identity is remarkably compelling as it offers a sense of potency one cannot experience individually. No doubt, his nephew Edward Bernays, aka The Father of Public Relations, applied these psychological insights to the ideology of consumerism and his adept manipulation of the collective’s subconscious desires.

In a nutshell, we humans have a herd mentality. Going along with the pack is integral to survival. As humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow explained, this urge to belong is influenced by innate psychological needs for status and security. It is also inspired by our fears of rejection and loneliness.

These potent variables encourage a willingness to conform to social norms, beliefs and conduct, irrespective of moral imperatives or even truth for that matter. In fact, more often than not we yield to collective trends so as to resist incurring the inevitable repercussions of upsetting the status quo.

A psychological study conducted by social psychologist Solomon Asch shed light on this disposition. Curious about the impact social pressure has on conformity, Asch devised an experiment in which arbitrary test subjects unknowingly participated in a group with scripted actors. Asked to make straightforward visual judgements about vertical lines, the test subjects would yield to the erroneous majority opinion touted by the actors, even though 99% of test subjects originally provided the correct answer.

These results drew attention to how conformity is shaped by the need to fit in as well as how beliefs that other people are smarter or more knowledgable persuade us to discredit our own authority. This leads one to speculate about whether majority opinions override perception or simply encourage compliance even when one trusts their perception.

Troubled by these results Asch wrote, “The tendency to conformity in our society is so strong that reasonably intelligent and well-meaning young people are willing to call white black. This is a matter of concern. It raises questions about our ways of education and about the values that guide our conduct.

Similarly, social psychologist Stanley Milgram explored his concerns with blind obedience to authority by designing a groundbreaking experiment inspired by the Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Milgram was intent on investigating how Eichmann and millions of Germans aided and abetted the Holocaust through ‘following orders.’

Milgram investigated this explanation at Yale University by testing whether paid study participants would comply with instructions to administer electric shocks to other participants. Although electrical voltage was not actually dispensed, test subjects believed that the cries of pain from those ostensibly hooked up to the shock machine, were real.

The findings revealed that authoritative pressure could usurp moral judgment. In fact, all participants administered 300 volts and 65 percent of participants fully complied with the commands to administer up to 450 volts of electricity (severe shock).

Milgram’s article The Perils of Obediencepresentedthe summation of his findings. He wrote, “Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.”

While Milgram’s results specifically emphasized the proclivity to acquiesce to authority, Psychologist and Harvard Professor of Social Ethics Herman Kelman expanded on the ideology of conformity by identifying the three major levels of social influence that bring about conformity. Naturally, how influence is accepted depends on an individual’s predisposing attitudes, beliefs and behaviors.

These levels of influence are;

• Compliance pertains to public conformity and is deemed the most superficial. It is motivated by the need for approval and the fear of being rejected.
• Identification is motivated byan attraction towardsa respected and admired celebrity or public figure.It is the relationship, as opposed to content that inspires conformity.
• Internalization occurs when ideas and actions are intrinsically rewarding. One’s value system conforms with behaviors and ideas that are intertwined with a sense of self.

Clearly, there are advantages to conformity, with the caveat that we do not relinquish our instinctual sense of right and wrong to accommodate a collective narrative. Positive peer groups that support life-affirming belief systems can encourage positive change. The instinct to conform encourages us to emulate and assimilate invaluable skills and lessons. There are rules and codes of conduct that assist us with navigating through life with discernment and security. Feeling a sense of shared belonging and like-mindedness with others is essential to mental health.

Most certainly, on basic fundamental levels conforming appears to be a safe bet. That is, until it becomes dangerous…such as when over-identification with a group leads to the inception of us-them dichotomies.

As the classic Stanford Prison experiment confirmed, with enough prompting conformity can lead to the sadistic dehumanization of those deemed inferior. Indeed, within six days a mock prison setting comprised of study participants assigned to prisoner and guard roles illuminated how immersion in group norms can unequivocally induce a loss of personal identity and moral responsibility. The Stanford University experiment led by psychologist Philip G. Zimbardo, came to an abrupt end when subjects in the role of prisoner evidenced signs of severe emotional breakdown and subjects in the role of guards escalated to depraved levels of aggression and abuse.

As the Stanford experiment confirmed, situational forces can incite evil behavior. Zimbardo’s findings underscore the destructive repercussions of conformity. Essentially, people adapt to the social roles they are expected to play.This has been evidenced throughout history. The Jonestown Massacre, models of obedience seen in Nazi Germany, The Jim Crow Laws, Pharaonic clitorectomies (aka female genital mutilation), the Salem Witch Trials, the Spanish Inquisition, and the torture done at Abu Ghraib. The list goes on.

Recently I watched Hellbound, a compelling Netflixseries that depicted the horrifying consequences of conformity, brought about by ubiquitous fear. Set in Seoul South Korea, the frenzy is ignited by prophesies condemning people to Hell. Spiritual teacher Jung Jin Su construes that the monstrous infernal creatures carrying out the brutal executions are enacting God-given decrees intended to discourage sin and inspire righteousness. Desperate to make sense of these horrific occurrences the masses blindly accept Jin Su’s explanation.

Concealed behind Jin Su’s charismatic mask of virtue is a seething sadistic malevolence fomented by two decades of lying in wait for his own prophesied Hell-bound condemnation to come to fruition. When the curse is leveled and Jin Su ‘disappears,’ his teachings are systemized through The New Truth Society. They capitalize on the accepted tenet that God is a moral gatekeeper who incites his agents of Hell to violently obliterate sinners.

All are convinced that conforming to piety is the path to redemption or at least a path to dodging Hell-bound condemnation. What is idealized (all good and virtuous) is permitted and what is deemed shameful (all bad and sinful) is hated. The nonconformists who dare to question this indoctrination are viewed as immoral subversives. Although these subversives side with humanity in that they recognize that no one can live a life completely without sin, as this perfectionistic ideal does not align with the human condition, they are stigmatized and ostracized.

Hellbound reveals the senseless cruelty of human beings and our willingness to conform to flawed narratives. This message cautioned me to consider what has taken root in contemporary culture with contrarian information being censored and our eagerness to latch on to one-dimensional generalizations that denounce and simplify. It made me question if the choices that I make emanate from blind obedience or consciousness and humanity. Most of all it prompted me to appreciate how choosing not to conform is a courageous act of self-will.

Unfortunately as Hellbound emphasized, more often than not we are prone to support evil agendas cloaked in virtue. After all, belief systems and ideologies require the support or at the very least the compliance of the citizenry. Hence, we are methodically seduced by proclamations equating conforming with superior moral character. Eventually to ensure compliance public opinion is policed and injurious speech becomes a criminal offense. Traitors who fail to conform to prescribed narratives are exposed and annihilated.

This was a course of action seen in both the French and Russian revolutions. The Reign of Terror, under the leadership of Maximilien Robespierre, achieved its political goals by executing enemies of the revolution. Euphemistically referred to as the Committee of Public Safety, this powerful war council leveled extreme measures to protect the security of the new regime. Similarly, the Bolshevik’s Red Terror emulated the Reign of Terror. The removal of state enemies entailed the imprisonment of hundreds of thousands of suspected subversives, many of who were tortured and executed. Any hint of opposition signified guilt.

Undoubtedly, fears of being attacked or even assassinated for deviating from conventional views breeds either unbridled aggression or silence and deference. Although neither posture is conducive to embodying true power, navigating the challenges of being envied, scapegoated, rejected, and ostracized, especially in a climate of acrimony and censorship, is no easy feat.

Notable whistleblowers like Karen Silkwood, Martin Luther King, Frank Serpico, Edward Snowden, and Julian Assange, who incurred egregious consequences for standing up to concealed wrongdoing can attest to that. Reflecting on what these whistleblowers exposed and considering the once proclaimed conspiracy theories and heinous operations that are now actually known to be fact, affords us all a harsh dose of reality.

As philosopherFriedrich Nietzschereminds us, “the surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.”

His words caution us to examine whether the moral aptitude of the masses will encourage future generations to ascribe to personal principles and abstract reasoning, irrespective of societal mandates or even the need to belong. This capacity is referred to by Dr. Lawrence Kohlberg as the post-conventional level of moral development. Although moral conduct doesn’t necessarily require the involvement of emotions or even critical thinking, clearly conformity is not the apex of morality.

On the contrary, an evolved state of moral development involves the pursuit of self-actualization, in which the application of free will challenges societal pressures and norms. Although this condition is more the exception than the rule, if the dark underbelly of conformity is to ever be managed then we will need to our excavate our moral depths to go up against the many threats associated with nonconformity.

While embracing the nonconformist’s path may mean braving marginalization, dealing with disapproval of one’s family, enduring guilt and shame, facing survival fears and even forgoing a secure place in the social domain, when society’s rules demand unconscionable ways of being, thankfully for many, the repercussions of standing in one’s truth pale in comparison. Without brave trailblazers willing to sift through the lies to expose difficult truths and shape a better more ethical society, we are doomed to conform to the crippling effects of choosing illusions of security over embodying unshakable character.