Interaction between Persona and Group

Over the past few months, I have been watching the likes of Dr Jordan Peterson and Stefan Molyneux, and I wanted to write this to clarify my thoughts on what they have to say. From Dr Peterson, I thought the view that different desires were personas manifested in yourself in various levels of resolution was a powerful explanation of behaviors. From Stefan, I bring in thoughts on Identity, Ego and Ego Defense. Pulling these two things together should be a way of expressing what we see in the world, and particularly recently in politics. Group dynamics make it so that we reinforce in each other a persona. You see this with Republicans and Skeptics; Democrats and Social Justice Warriors. Each persona is a carrier for a set of ideas, behaviors, signals and shibboleths.

I come from a highly religious background, but I’m no longer religious. When I was in my pre-teen years, I was in the highly religious group. My parents and the church we went to had cultivated in me this persona that viewed things through a particular lens. This persona brought an identity that I could manifest in the world, and gain from it drive, motivation, and most importantly group acceptance. I reflected the ideas, signals, and shibboleths that clearly marked me as a member of the group.

Early on in my life, however, members of another group I was a part of saw those shibboleths and did not understand them, and as pre-teen boys are want to do, they turned any form of difference from the group into an excuse to insult and focus attention on an individual. This caused me to suppress this persona around other groups that weren’t already part of the in crowd. I would go to youth devotionals, I would go on retreats, I would sing the songs, and express the behavior expected of me when I was in the company of members of the ‘church going’ group, and with members of the ‘school going’ group, I would be silent.

This division in the two natures of myself, led to two separate personae developing. Thus, in high school, when I started talking with religious people of other groups, such as Catholics, or Mormons, and with non-religious people, such as those who played video games, or even the groups I secretly played Dungeons and Dragons with, I didn’t approach these other people with the… bombast, for lack of a better word, I would have as a member of the evangelical ‘church going’ group. I would sit back and watch the discussion, or listen and nod, but not confront the difference between the persona I had been indoctrinated into, and the persona I had developed through these other groups. This schism can’t last, though. Mine came to a head at some point early in high school.

The inciting incident that led to the murder of a persona is a fascinating tale. As all good tales from a young man’s perspective, this tale begins with a wonderful, fascinating young lady. We’ll call her J. J was scientific, and creative, and very clever. Her smile inspired in me the most wonderful of feelings, like I wanted to take on the world just to see it come out. She valued cleverness, and conciseness of thoughts. She was Catholic, and I came from a literalist branch of the Campbell and Stone Reformation. I had my bible, and she had hers.

One conversation had her quoting from the book of the Wisdom of Solomon. She talked about Righteousness, and how it comes from outside man. Those who don’t listen to it will fall into circular reasoning, and will not be open to reasoning. While she was talking about it, it was all similar to what I had heard in my church, but it quoted books that we did not have in the bible. See, my version of history, everyone knows the bible contains 66 books: 39 in the old testament and 27 in the new. And she was quoting from a book that wasn’t one of those.

This inspired an internal conflict between three personae. The Proselytizer in me wanted to argue with her, she was wrong. This did not exist. It was apostate! The Voltaire in me wanted to duel wits with her over it, and woo her. The Scientist wanted to understand, figure out how we came to different understandings. Voltaire and the Scientist conspired to silence the Proselytizer.

Thus, a conversation on the history of the deuterocanonicals happened. And why were various writings included into the Bible included? Why were some excluded? I learned a lot. Voltaire and the Scientist were strengthened. The Proselytizer though, fought on. Realizing he needed assistance, I went and talked to an Elder at my church. The Proselytizer brought forth the data: the Council of Nicea, the divine inspiration of the word of God, the expectation of written examples in specific languages for those works, the later discovery of scrolls written in the appropriate language for other works, all of these thngs, laid out to discuss and understand why the church believes what it does. And the Elder’s response sticks with me to this day. Never you mind that, son. These are all distractions. It is hog wash. Follow what we have said, and don’t question it. You will understand one day. This girl is leading you astray from your faith.

And with that, the Proselytizer died. A new persona was put in place. As long as I lived with my parents, I would have to exhibit the same signals and shibboleths, but the ideas were gone. The mask was born. It wasn’t the girl that was leading me astray. I was fragmented. Several personae inside my head conflicted, and I couldn’t live like that. One side had to be silenced, or I would go mad. If it hadn’t been for the earlier fragmentation, I could easily see it being the Scientist and Voltaire having been silenced.

The root of the problem here is simple, and here’s where I get offensive. The Church had lost its animus. No longer did it have a living growing ideal that could defend itself against changing circumstances and bring a unified harmony out of the discord. No longer could it explain itself in a consistent manner. Instead of a fluid intelligence, everything was down to the crystallized version. It was now about orthodoxy, and control. Anything that challenged the structure that was still in place was a disease that had to be attacked. By talking to the Elder, I was showing the signs of sickness, and for the good of the whole, I had to be brought into line or excommunicated, lest I cause an ideological plague.

If this conversation makes you feel uncomfortable right now about a group you are in, you may consider examining that. Are you chasing away people who share your interests, who would reflect back ideas that a persona of yours holds dear, because they are questioning associated ideas and behaviors? Does the act of questioning ideas and beliefs kill the persona that manifests those ideas in you? Can you talk with people who express beliefs that seem contradictory to yours? Are your theories falsifiable? Are you suppressing a persona you don’t hold in common with other people you interact with to avoid conflict? Does the shared persona in your group have an animus, or is it a zombie?

Related posts:

The United States faces an unprecedented and unparalleled crisis of incarceration. At 716 per 100,000 people, it has the world’s highest prison population rate, and while the U.S. population accounts…

A few weeks ago I decided to devote some serious effort to my flexibility. I found a few stretches that were most important to my goals and I started working on them daily. Nothing too serious. Just…

Das Ausleiten von Aluminium und Schwermetallen aus dem Körper kann eine schwierige Aufgabe sein. Eine Möglichkeit, dies zu erreichen, ist die Verwendung von Zeolith. Zeolith ist ein natürliches…