To be human is to be a myriad of different things. Different people will provide different answers when posed with the question “What does it mean to be human?” Some may speculate that to be human is to experience love in all its forms. Others may say it is human to create and to dream. While answers like those are all well and pleasant, some realities may not be all that heartwarming. It can also be argued that to be human is to lie; to be human is to hurt. No matter the definition given, here I will provide my perspective on a trait exclusive to the human race, something that, from my observation, is a defining trait of the average individual: humans are easily manipulated. Be it by means of media, shopping trends, or religious movements, manipulating a human into giving up his or her logic isn’t so difficult at all.
Before I get into the thick of it, I want to introduce a certain novel that I will be referencing quite often, as it illustrates my claims quite excellently. Subjectively one of the best explorations of a post-apocalyptic future in store for earth, Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep provides a fantastic study of the concept of humanity. In this alternate future, Earth has been ravaged by war and has become almost uninhabitable, so the majority of humans have escaped to Mars and other colonies in space. Very few humans have remained on Earth, including the novel’s protagonist, Rick Deckard, a bounty hunter of androids. The entire story takes place over the course of a day, where Deckard hunts some escaped androids and faces the pressing questions regarding the humanity of cyborgs and the morality of humans. While the novel is chock full of fantastic messages and interesting food for thought, it shines in its exploration of humanity relative to these hypothetical androids.
Seeing as Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? covers many aspects of humanity, it more than addresses humans’ shortcomings in the realm of allowing other humans to manipulate them. Utilizing the literary tool of hyperbole, the novel uses its exaggerated potential future for mankind to paint a picture of humans as unknowing slaves to various “systems,” if you will, set up by various third parties. The most obvious example of this manipulation of the humans in the novel that is extremely relatable to our society today lies in the influence of Buster Friendly, the world’s most popular and well-received T.V. personality. Basically, Buster serves as a talk show host of his very own talk show “Buster Friendly and his Friendly Friends,” a program that airs constantly on T.V. that just about everyone watches religiously. One character in the novel even claimed, “I watch [Buster] every morning and then at night when I get home; I watch him while I’m eating dinner and then his late late show until I go to bed” (Dick 63). Throughout the novel, Buster Friendly and his friends are ever present, building up hype for his important expose that he’d been working on for years and reporting on current events in the universe. Buster Friendly’s news is important to people; whatever Buster says, his dedicated viewers are sure to accept and believe, as he is their primary source of entertainment and news. When a T.V. personality gains a dedicated following, people tend to idolize them, which leads to the conclusion that these personalities can convince people to believe whatever they tell them. In our society today, there are numerous T.V. personalities with strong supporters who will believe just about anything the personalities tell them. Celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres, Oprah, Jimmy Fallon, Bill O’Reilly, etc. likely come to mind. When people are put in a position of authority over others, they can easily sway the masses who support them in their favor; there’s a reason the fans of these celebrities scream and cheer when they’re in the audiences of the various shows. For example, multiple celebrities have taken their picks for the upcoming presidential election: personalities and celebrities such as Ellen DeGeneres, Julianne Moore, and Morgan Freeman endorse and encourage votes for Hillary Clinton, while Kirstie Alley, Gary Busey, and Hulk Hogan have voiced support for Donald Trump. With the amount of influence these celebrities possess, they can significantly affect the results of the election by encouraging their fans to vote for their preferred candidate; they make a point of sharing their opinion on a candidate with the goal of influencing their followers in their favor. Just like how Buster Friendly convinced almost the entirety of humans to watch and enjoy his show and news, T.V. personalities today can sway the masses. Humans are easily manipulated into following and supporting these idols of theirs merely because those personalities are their offering them something to watch and support.
It’s not just T.V. personalities that can serve to manipulate humans, however—humans can also be easily swayed by group movements, such as religious trends and social movements. When groups of people band together, there grows a sort of mob mentality that people become willingly a part of because they’re participating in the group; they want to be accepted and included, so they become a part of a group without possibly questioning why. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? this group is a new religion called “Mercerism.” This religion, whose figurehead is named Wilbur Mercer, encourages the sanctity of all life and a sort of oneness with everyone who uses their Penfield empathy boxes to take the “climb with Mercer.” This climb, called “fusion,” is a simulated climbing experience each person feels when using their box; they feel that they are climbing a mountain with Mercer himself and various other followers of him, feeling the same pain as each other and taking the journey together. Iran, the wife of the main character Rick Deckard, describes the experience as such: “And I remember thinking how much better off we are . . . when we’re with Mercer. Despite the pain. Physical pain but spiritually together; I felt everyone else, all over the world, all who had fused at the same time” (Dick 173). The appeal of this religion seems to be the togetherness everyone feels; they will endure the pain of fusion because they are happy to be experiencing it together. This is characteristic of numerous religions and modern movements; people may do irrational things for the sake of their religion or movement but do so willingly because they are happy to be part of a group. If a group or religion were to be corrupt, as some are, people can easily be manipulated into doing things they normally wouldn’t do.
Another method of manipulation humans can easily relate to within our society today is the desire to have what everyone else has, to be caught up on the most recent trends. This one undoubtedly hits home as something just about every human can relate to; try watching commercials on television and not wanting something they’ve advertised to you. This is tricky to do, because once an advertisement has put the idea in our heads that some cool new product is all the rage among our peers, we suddenly want it. If everyone starts buying a new drink at Starbucks and posting on social media about it, suddenly we feel inclined to try it and do the same. For us today these desires can range anywhere from clothes to food; in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? there was a more universally desired item to acquire: a real, live animal to keep and care for. The average citizen was more socially accepted if he or she had an animal, preferably a rare one or multiple, to have as his or her pet. This pet couldn’t be a fake robotic creature; it had to be a living, breathing animal for it to be socially acceptable: “[Rick] wished to god he had a horse, in fact any animal. Owning and maintaining a fraud had a way of greatly demoralizing one. And yet from a social standpoint it had to be done, given the absence of the real article” (Dick 9). Socially speaking, in Dick’s version of the future, owning a living animal was the way to social acceptance. In our society, owning whatever is trendy and “in” at the moment whether we actually want it or not is the way to social acceptance. When seeking to manipulate humans, those with malicious intent target the desires of people to have what others have to feel like they are all part of a group. Marketing an item by claiming everyone has it is a clever way to trick someone into purchasing that which they wouldn’t normally consider buying. Humans can easily be convinced (i.e. manipulated) into participating in certain trends merely because everyone else is participating in them, yet another of the numerous examples of how humans effortlessly fall prey to manipulation.
Of these examples from both our society and Dick’s novels, there is a commonality with all of these manipulative means that answers the nagging question “Why do such things serve to so perfectly manipulate humans?” To answer this, we have to explore the concept of empathy, another trait uniquely attributed to humans. “Empathy” is defined as “The action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner” (Merriam-Webster). In other words, one can empathize with someone else by understanding him or her and his or her experiences and emotions; it’s how people relate to each other and find commonalities on a human level. So how does empathy relate to how humans are manipulated by others? Empathy is inherently a social concept. To feel empathy, there must be two parties involved. This itself is a very human trait, as psychology professor Keith Oatley explains, “The most important characteristic of being human is that our lives are social. What’s distinctive about humans is that we make social arrangements with other people, with friends, with lovers, with children, that aren’t pre-programmed by instinct” (“Reading books and watching films makes you kinder in real life”). Given that humans are social creatures striving to connect with and empathize with each other, it is no surprise that humans can be manipulated under the pretense of being social with fellow humans. Someone may feel connected to Ellen DeGeneres when watching her show to the point where he or she emulates Ellen as an idol and lets Ellen dictate his or her decisions, as radical as that sounds. Another person may join a new religious cult out of a desire to feel a part of something with fellow humans but commit heinous acts as part of the cult’s rituals. Yet another person might waste money and go into debt purchasing expensive clothing because those clothes are popular and trendy according to this person’s friends on social media. All of these examples stem from a desire to empathize with other people, but when these means of community have manipulative natures, people will fall prey to these ploys without stopping to think about the possibly harmful consequences.
Although manipulation is easily integrated into these situations, that doesn’t mean participating in all of these actions is inherently wrong or damaging. T.V. personalities are not always out to manipulate the crowds; not every group requires wrongdoing and harmful actions; and sometimes keeping up with trends is harmless fun. My touching upon this flaw of humanity is not to condemn humans for being too “mainstream” with society but to encourage critical thinking on top of attempts to empathize with fellow human beings. As hard as it is to accept, not everything is beneficial and good for people. There are terrible people in the world with ulterior motives, and they can use their manipulative tricks to sway innocent people just wanting to connect with other people. When people fall prey to these trappings, genuine relationships and empathy are dead in favor of manipulation and false appearances. Clinical psychologist Arthur P. Ciaramicoli accurately comments on our society’s viewpoint on the matter by claiming, “I think we have become a society where we rate status over relationships. We relate image over character and when you do that, you place much less emphasis on the skill or the ability of empathy” (“Empathizing 101“). When humans are manipulated into accepting a viewpoint or blindly joining a group, it becomes more about status and image, as Ciaramicoli stated, than about genuine connections. This is not true empathy; status, especially among peers, does not achieve empathy, as manipulators strive to make people craving empathetic connections with others believe. If status is viewed as more important than empathy, less people will empathize with each other in favor of their social standing, whether they realize they are distancing themselves from others or not. The solution is not to never attempt to empathize with others—the solution is to be aware at all times, to put morality and genuine connections above appearances of being part of a collective group. So the next time a T.V. personality attempts to sway you to his or her side, an exclusive group tempts you into joining in, or a new trend beckons you to participate, think carefully about what you’re getting into. Compare your situation to the various instances I mentioned from the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Finally, consider your desire for connections with others. Will you truly achieve empathy by risking letting certain groups/personalities/trends control you? Think critically, stick to your beliefs, and don’t be afraid to connect with others—just keep an eye out for those who seek to manipulate your good intentions.
Works Cited
Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? 1968. The Random House Publishing Group, 1996.
“empathy.” Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, 2016. Web. 2 Oct. 2016.
Grasgreen, Allie. “Empathizing 101.” Inside Higher Ed, 24 Nov. 2010, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/11/24/empathy. Accessed 2 Oct. 2016
Surugue, Léa. “Reading books and watching films makes you kinder in real life.” International Business Times, 19 July 2016, https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/reading-books-watching-films-makes-you-kinder-real-life-1571434#annotations:_MOsQlpyEeaiesf9ed4wVw. Accessed 2 Oct. 2016.