jmik58's Blog
There is no such thing as a hero, only ordinary men. And in some cases, ordinary men who make horrible decisions and painful mistakes.
Heroes are a fallacy born in the human mind, created to crush the fears and limitations we believe are pressing down on our existence. The world is falling down all around us, but our saviors are the ones who keep evil out of our back yard and protect those in need. Their every word is worshiped and every action unquestioned.
Because of this, we elevate these ordinary people above ourselves to a perceived level that is unattainable by us flawed individuals. And thanks to our boost, these men feel empowered to act as we treat them -- one step above the drama, the evil, and ultimately the consequences.
The horrible monstrosities committed by Jerry Sandusky -- and subsequent cover-up at the hands of Penn State University leadership -- has lifted the veil on the fickle nature of human beings. Those at the center of the cover-up scandal have been exposed.
But instead of judging them we should be taking a step back from the emotion and realizing that like them, we too are just normal people. None of us worthy of the exponential power we grant to presidents, coaches, and other high-ranking authority.
Ordinary humans are to blame, not heroes or villains. The same type of people we interact with at school, work, during our social lives and in our homes on a daily basis. Ordinary men are the ones our children will become and must learn to interact with and work alongside. The type of people they should be taught to think of as equals, not superiors.
Respect is what authority figures deserve, not reverence. Because, after all, they're just like you and me.
It was ordinary men who took part in the horrible actions carried out by the Nazis in Germany. "Artisans, salesmen, and clerks..." all fell victim to the power of authority. And as more and more men around them took part, the power of social proof took hold and helped to justify their actions. As others around them took life after life, the draw of the mob mentality enveloped the minds of many of those normal men and turned them into monsters.
Many of us may also remember the famous hyperbole that asks, "If your friends jumped off a bridge; would you?" The sad thing is that the answer to the question is most likely, "Yes, if the others land safely." But the sad part isn't that the answer is "yes," it's that we think we're so different from our peers and invulnerable to the powers that impact our every action.
That homeless man you just walked past on the sidewalk; was he just a sleeping bum or someone in need? Once again, human beings judge uncertain and uncomfortable situations on the actions of others. If everyone else is walking past, then the man must just be a homeless guy. But how do you really know? You don't unless you check. And what if someone you respected -- or revered -- walked right past? You most likely would trust their judgement and assume they know better than you as you walk past step-for-step.
And when ordinary people, whether in positions of power or not, are presented with threatening situations that disturb their peaceful way of life; they, you, and me find ways to rationalize it away.
It's partly why Mike McQueary struggled to describe in detail what he saw in that Penn State shower when he talked to Joe Paterno. He didn't want to believe it and if he explained in detail what he saw, he would have to accept it as truth. And, in part, due to McQueary's vagueness, JoePa wrongfully rationalized away the seriousness of the situation by mixing in his own desire for it to be just a misunderstanding.
Not because Joe was a malicious man -- but because he just didn't want it to be true.
As the situation spread throughout the four-headed Penn State leadership monster at the heart of the cover-up; so did the ability of those four men to pretend away what was really going on. Each consulting with each other on an idea to hope it all away. A response which would have weighed heavily on each of them individually, but when accepted by each part of the group; made the weight seem shared and less heavy.
You see, this isn't about defending or reprimanding the actions of the four involved in the cover-up or others who could have stopped Sandusky at any time. This is about defending their status as human beings -- as ordinary men. It's about defending ourselves and those around us. It's the only way we learn from this. The only victory that can be won here.
Realize, that like them, we too are ordinary men; suspect to external powers like authority and social influence. Understand that our brains will fight us to pretend away hurtful information, so we must fight back. These are lessons we need personally and something we must pass along to our friends, families, and our children.
The Penn State controversy certainly is full of losers, none ruined more than Sandusky's victims. But a small victory can be taken from this.
From the losses we are reminded that there really is no such thing as a hero. And we reflect for our own good and that of our loved ones, so we always remember that no one is above who we are at our inner-most core.
Nothing more, nothing less. We are ordinary men.
Justin Mikels is a staff writer for Operation Sports. Share your thoughts with him on Twitter by following @long_snapper.
# 2
jmik58 @ Jul 13
@Aggies67 Thanks for reading and I appreciate the feedback.
I feel like there may be a disconnect in the semantics of my main point and how you interpret the article. First of all, your point on Christ is also valid, but he also was no "ordinary man" as I refer to humans. This is about the flawed beings that we are.
You are correct in saying that many people throughout history and on a daily basis act selflessly in a heroic fashion. However, that doesn't make them a hero; only a normal human being who acted heroically at the prescribed moment. If Jerry Sandusky would have never committed his horrible acts, his charity at Second Mile would have painted him as a hero of sorts.
My point being, you can't judge a few acts of a man and then elevate him or her to hero status. We all are flawed, some with more evil than others. The brave acts of soldiers and firefighters (among others) is amazing. However, they are still human and still make errors. Just because someone is a solidier or public servant doesn't mean they aren't corrupt, can't be criminals, or don't abuse or mistreat other humans. The vast majority of them are great people, but the danger of labeling someone only hurts them and risks our lives and that of our loved ones.
I think you may be missing my main point by defending the concept of a hero. Once again, ordinary people may act heroically, but we should not elevate them to the status of a "hero" and should be wary of those we look upon as authority figures. There is a danger to ourselves and to the person we label as such. The let-down by the authority figures amid the Penn State scandal are a prime example. The authority corrupted their decision making and we should be guarded ourselves to prevent it from happening. Likewise, we should protect ourselvs to never revere a human as more than a fallable being capable of both great and horrible things.
And yes, most all of us are susceptible to influence that could lead to questionable decisions. I studied extensively in social science (especially in psychology and social psychology) throughout my undergraduate work. I never made the statement that we all are capable of evil; only that it is human nature to be influenced.
The Penn State scandal provides a great example that people should learn from. That is my goal with thise piece. Know how your actions can be influenced by various outside sources and guard yourselves. Educate your loved ones. The concept of the "hero" is a fallacy that no one can live up to. It's dangerous and can make us blind.
I feel like there may be a disconnect in the semantics of my main point and how you interpret the article. First of all, your point on Christ is also valid, but he also was no "ordinary man" as I refer to humans. This is about the flawed beings that we are.
You are correct in saying that many people throughout history and on a daily basis act selflessly in a heroic fashion. However, that doesn't make them a hero; only a normal human being who acted heroically at the prescribed moment. If Jerry Sandusky would have never committed his horrible acts, his charity at Second Mile would have painted him as a hero of sorts.
My point being, you can't judge a few acts of a man and then elevate him or her to hero status. We all are flawed, some with more evil than others. The brave acts of soldiers and firefighters (among others) is amazing. However, they are still human and still make errors. Just because someone is a solidier or public servant doesn't mean they aren't corrupt, can't be criminals, or don't abuse or mistreat other humans. The vast majority of them are great people, but the danger of labeling someone only hurts them and risks our lives and that of our loved ones.
I think you may be missing my main point by defending the concept of a hero. Once again, ordinary people may act heroically, but we should not elevate them to the status of a "hero" and should be wary of those we look upon as authority figures. There is a danger to ourselves and to the person we label as such. The let-down by the authority figures amid the Penn State scandal are a prime example. The authority corrupted their decision making and we should be guarded ourselves to prevent it from happening. Likewise, we should protect ourselvs to never revere a human as more than a fallable being capable of both great and horrible things.
And yes, most all of us are susceptible to influence that could lead to questionable decisions. I studied extensively in social science (especially in psychology and social psychology) throughout my undergraduate work. I never made the statement that we all are capable of evil; only that it is human nature to be influenced.
The Penn State scandal provides a great example that people should learn from. That is my goal with thise piece. Know how your actions can be influenced by various outside sources and guard yourselves. Educate your loved ones. The concept of the "hero" is a fallacy that no one can live up to. It's dangerous and can make us blind.
# 3
jmik58 @ Jul 13
@Profit89 Thank you, and very beautifully stated; "Every human being contains within him or her the whole of humanity." What a prize, yet what a burden.
@brettford I appreciate the nice words. Those are great questions you pose, and difficult to digest.
@brettford I appreciate the nice words. Those are great questions you pose, and difficult to digest.
# 4
jersez @ Jul 13
I just can't agree with this post, we are all individuals and we all have a mind of our own. Yes some are elevated to a higher level socially than others, but that doesn't mean we can't rationalize superman drowning babies as not a problem. It's not right, we know right from wrong bottom line. I know you wrote that you aren't trying to divert the blame from everyone involved, but when you bring Nazi's in as an example kinda of cancels, out that you are trying to blame "ordinary people" It's not being ordinary, it's fear and being a coward. That's what happened, fear is the best mind control known to man. Nazis were monsters because Hitler put fear into their minds.
Hero are real they just don't wear capes and tights, If your home was burning down, why call 9-11? You need someone to rescue you and everyone there, and that firefighter puts his own life at risk to save you. The point being anyone can be a hero, Mcqueary should have thought of the children's safety because Paterno certainly was going to get off his a$$. The problem we have is that we elevate football or any sport over the things that matter, and what mattered was the children's safety. To try a defend Paterno's actions is ridicules it's not an "ordinary people" thing and it's not complicated; he didn't care. There are hundreds of defensive coordinators. It wouldn't be worth it even if they won 25 national championships.Paterno could have been a HERO for so many of those victims or soon to be victims, and could have added to his overrated career but instead his Legacy is tarnished. At the end of the day MCqueary's a coward, Paterno's a coward and the officials that knew are cowards.
Hero are real they just don't wear capes and tights, If your home was burning down, why call 9-11? You need someone to rescue you and everyone there, and that firefighter puts his own life at risk to save you. The point being anyone can be a hero, Mcqueary should have thought of the children's safety because Paterno certainly was going to get off his a$$. The problem we have is that we elevate football or any sport over the things that matter, and what mattered was the children's safety. To try a defend Paterno's actions is ridicules it's not an "ordinary people" thing and it's not complicated; he didn't care. There are hundreds of defensive coordinators. It wouldn't be worth it even if they won 25 national championships.Paterno could have been a HERO for so many of those victims or soon to be victims, and could have added to his overrated career but instead his Legacy is tarnished. At the end of the day MCqueary's a coward, Paterno's a coward and the officials that knew are cowards.
# 5
jmik58 @ Jul 13
@jersez In no way am I defending Paterno, I'm trying to educate and empower human beings. I am very passionate about sharing the lessons I learned through years of studying human behavior. Emotional reaction will only get us so far. Understanding and education will project much better into the future.
Fear is definitely a tactic that the Nazi's used, and using them as an example does not cancel anything out -- it supports my points. In fact, the example I gave is based on psychological research and documentation. Read the book "Ordinary Men" and you'll understand. It's about the impact that the mob mentality (or Social Proof) plays on the actions of others, as well as that of authority and others.
Your assumption that we all "have a mind of our own" is the same assumption that we all have "free will." This is something that could be debated for all eternity but I don't believe it's true.
By labeling those involved as cowards or monsters or con-artists does nothing to help us. When you drop names or labels you're distancing yourself from them. It's a mental short-cut that humans use to make sense of situations such as this. However, when you label someone as a coward or horrible person, you are creating a stereotype in your mind that you use to judge all future cowards or horrible people. Essentially, you become blind to the flaws of others who could make the same bad mistakes because they don't seem to be capable -- they appear to have free will.
People tell their kids to stay away from strangers, but the real dangers for neglect, abuse, and kidnapping lie with someone the child is familiar with. We don't want to believe it, but it's true. And by not telling our children the truth we are putting them in harms way. While it's not a perfect analogy, there is relevance conceptualy to the Penn State cover-up scandal.
If you want to argue these things, that's fine. But realize you're arguing against factual psychological concepts, not just a single man's beliefs. I'm not fighting to justify the actions of anyone, only to bring understanding to help empower anyone who may be reading.
Fear is definitely a tactic that the Nazi's used, and using them as an example does not cancel anything out -- it supports my points. In fact, the example I gave is based on psychological research and documentation. Read the book "Ordinary Men" and you'll understand. It's about the impact that the mob mentality (or Social Proof) plays on the actions of others, as well as that of authority and others.
Your assumption that we all "have a mind of our own" is the same assumption that we all have "free will." This is something that could be debated for all eternity but I don't believe it's true.
By labeling those involved as cowards or monsters or con-artists does nothing to help us. When you drop names or labels you're distancing yourself from them. It's a mental short-cut that humans use to make sense of situations such as this. However, when you label someone as a coward or horrible person, you are creating a stereotype in your mind that you use to judge all future cowards or horrible people. Essentially, you become blind to the flaws of others who could make the same bad mistakes because they don't seem to be capable -- they appear to have free will.
People tell their kids to stay away from strangers, but the real dangers for neglect, abuse, and kidnapping lie with someone the child is familiar with. We don't want to believe it, but it's true. And by not telling our children the truth we are putting them in harms way. While it's not a perfect analogy, there is relevance conceptualy to the Penn State cover-up scandal.
If you want to argue these things, that's fine. But realize you're arguing against factual psychological concepts, not just a single man's beliefs. I'm not fighting to justify the actions of anyone, only to bring understanding to help empower anyone who may be reading.
# 6
PackerBacker123 @ Jul 13
Aggies67, I do agree with you, Paterno failed to report and he deserved to be fired. And with such evils in the world we do need heroes...
# 7
jersez @ Jul 13
Well doesn't the human mind use judgement? To keep us safe and away from danger correct? If you looked at black water would you drink it? I think you could judge whether the water was "bad" or "good" which is labeling the water. Or smelling some milk to see if it's rotten or not. You can't stop the brain from judging. It's a natural survival tactic. By your logic Sandusky was suppose to rape those kids and we shouldn't judge him because he lacks free will. But you also said your not defending them, so you must have labelled what they did as wrong? Just like the rest of us, just because you choose to not label them with words, doesn't mean your mind doesn't label them for you. Understand what I'm saying? Again we all judge we have to judge because we need to know what's right and what's wrong. I know you said your not defending them but it really sounds like your contradicting yourself. "you become blind to the flaws of others who could make the same bad mistakes because they don't seem to be capable -- they appear to have free will". Should I feel sorry that Sandusky was "meant" to rape those boys? I just don't understand your logic. And I'm not trying to say that in a a-hole type of way.
# 8
jersez @ Jul 13
@Profit89 I agree that ego and pride can be dangerous but no way is it excusable for Paterno to no report sandusky. Did Paterno have a ego problem probably, but did Mcquaery have a ego problem? I don't think so. But again there are hundreds of defensive coordinators, Joe and everyone else made terrible decisions.
# 9
jmik58 @ Jul 13
@jersez Nowhere does my logic justify Sandusky's disgusting actions. You're taking points that I made and transferring them beyond their intended purpose. Understanding human behavior and justifying it's nature are too different things. By saying that complete, 100% free-will is a fallacy doesn't mean I give Sandusky or anyone a free ride to do as they please without consequence.
The point of this article isn't even about Sandusky, but a non-emotional psychological evaluation would likely tell you that he too was influenced in various ways to become who he is -- things that were out of his immediate control. However, that does NOT excuse his horrible actions. Again, this is about understanding, not justifying.
Understand why ordinary men took part as Nazis. Understand why people will walk past the man on the sidewalk. Understand why, then you can guard yourself against similar influences and protect others as well.
Understand why labeling people as infallable heroes is dangerous. Because it gives them a feeling of power where they are untouchable. And because we let them run, unquestioned, never knowing what dark secrets they may be hiding.
Understand so that you and others you care about will be able to fight back. Imagine being able to catch yourself before you make a decision you wouldn't have otherwise done. A decision that you were going to make because you trusted a hero. A decision you were going to make because the ten people standing around you did it also.
Do this so you won't be tricked, so you will stop to see if the man on the sidewalk is ok. Do this so that your children and their children can make exceptional decisions.
But if for no other reason, do this because you are human, an ordinary person. And you need to know what drives you; what makes you tick. And every other person, they are ordinary too.
Why do you do what you do? It should be every human's responsibility to understand.
The point of this article isn't even about Sandusky, but a non-emotional psychological evaluation would likely tell you that he too was influenced in various ways to become who he is -- things that were out of his immediate control. However, that does NOT excuse his horrible actions. Again, this is about understanding, not justifying.
Understand why ordinary men took part as Nazis. Understand why people will walk past the man on the sidewalk. Understand why, then you can guard yourself against similar influences and protect others as well.
Understand why labeling people as infallable heroes is dangerous. Because it gives them a feeling of power where they are untouchable. And because we let them run, unquestioned, never knowing what dark secrets they may be hiding.
Understand so that you and others you care about will be able to fight back. Imagine being able to catch yourself before you make a decision you wouldn't have otherwise done. A decision that you were going to make because you trusted a hero. A decision you were going to make because the ten people standing around you did it also.
Do this so you won't be tricked, so you will stop to see if the man on the sidewalk is ok. Do this so that your children and their children can make exceptional decisions.
But if for no other reason, do this because you are human, an ordinary person. And you need to know what drives you; what makes you tick. And every other person, they are ordinary too.
Why do you do what you do? It should be every human's responsibility to understand.
# 10
jmik58 @ Jul 14
Great discussion and comments so far everyone.
@Profit89 I'm really enjoying your unique way of expressing some of the same concepts. Very interesting.
@Aggies67 I can agree that we're all responsible for our actions. As I mentioned before, understanding what causes humans to make poor choices doesn't mean we're justifying those same actions. All humans are susceptible to outside influence. Many people can fight through that influence, but none of us are immune all the time and some of us are weaker in general.
My goal is to encourage people to learn about the things that can influence our decisions and behavior. These same things are known by people in marketing, they know how to influence us, and so you can even educate yourself to make yourself a smarter consumer and fiscally responsible person.
It's also important to note that I'm not talking about the influence of the environment that people grow up in. I'm talking about various influential aspects that are documented by social psychology. Check out the following link on Robert Cialdini and read over his six principles of persuasion. These are the things that are in play in everyone's life, and some of them were very much in play during the cover-up scandal.
The bottom line though isn't how we define a hero or that we even use that word. The point is that we are all flawed and all vulnerable to influence. That means our "heroes" aren't as perfect as many think they are. You may understand they are flawed, but many people don't think that way. And conversely, Joe Paterno and the rest of the administration involved are not bad people. They are most likely very good people who made an absolutely horrible series of decisions.
We all must be careful to dismiss these men as a definition of their worst decision. This distances them from us and makes them less than ordinary, and thus we don't learn from them as we assume we or others we know could never be influenced to make bad decisions.
The same is true for the person we revere. We put them in a place that makes them seem better than us, and thus they seem infallible -- hurting us by trusting too much, and hurting them by giving them power they likely can't handle.
Ultimately though, yes, we are all responsible for our actions. But knowing that, why not take control of our actions a little more by filtering what can impact our choices? This whole cover-up scandal gives us a great opportunity to understand how good people can allow themselves to do dumb things. Instead of dismissing them, learn from them because they aren't that different from the rest of us.
They are ordinary men just like you and me. Learn from them, not because we want to justify their actions, but so anyone we know might be able to make better choices because of it.
@Profit89 I'm really enjoying your unique way of expressing some of the same concepts. Very interesting.
@Aggies67 I can agree that we're all responsible for our actions. As I mentioned before, understanding what causes humans to make poor choices doesn't mean we're justifying those same actions. All humans are susceptible to outside influence. Many people can fight through that influence, but none of us are immune all the time and some of us are weaker in general.
My goal is to encourage people to learn about the things that can influence our decisions and behavior. These same things are known by people in marketing, they know how to influence us, and so you can even educate yourself to make yourself a smarter consumer and fiscally responsible person.
It's also important to note that I'm not talking about the influence of the environment that people grow up in. I'm talking about various influential aspects that are documented by social psychology. Check out the following link on Robert Cialdini and read over his six principles of persuasion. These are the things that are in play in everyone's life, and some of them were very much in play during the cover-up scandal.
The bottom line though isn't how we define a hero or that we even use that word. The point is that we are all flawed and all vulnerable to influence. That means our "heroes" aren't as perfect as many think they are. You may understand they are flawed, but many people don't think that way. And conversely, Joe Paterno and the rest of the administration involved are not bad people. They are most likely very good people who made an absolutely horrible series of decisions.
We all must be careful to dismiss these men as a definition of their worst decision. This distances them from us and makes them less than ordinary, and thus we don't learn from them as we assume we or others we know could never be influenced to make bad decisions.
The same is true for the person we revere. We put them in a place that makes them seem better than us, and thus they seem infallible -- hurting us by trusting too much, and hurting them by giving them power they likely can't handle.
Ultimately though, yes, we are all responsible for our actions. But knowing that, why not take control of our actions a little more by filtering what can impact our choices? This whole cover-up scandal gives us a great opportunity to understand how good people can allow themselves to do dumb things. Instead of dismissing them, learn from them because they aren't that different from the rest of us.
They are ordinary men just like you and me. Learn from them, not because we want to justify their actions, but so anyone we know might be able to make better choices because of it.
jmik58
42
2,404 Forum Posts
406 Blog Entries
1 News/Blog Comments
4 Reader Score Votes
80 Friends
3 Chalkboard Messages
0 Screenshots
4 Videos
1,433,402 Arena Visits
jmik58's Blog Categories
jmik58's PSN Gamercard
' +
jmik58's Screenshots (0)
jmik58 does not have any albums to display.
More
jmik58's Friends
Recent Visitors
The last 10 visitor(s) to this Arena were:
jmik58's Arena has had 1,433,402 visits
- bgordon0102
- Biglott
- Ghost Of The Year
- Lewisf33
- Magist
- mastershake88
- maxodds
- NewNapkin
- squashed377
- tical2399
jmik58's Arena has had 1,433,402 visits
Working...
Does anybody think that if you asked 30 year old Paterno…
"Would you trade the ability to build a historic career that lasts decades, an amazing reputation, love and adoration, and lots of money in exchange for allowing children to be molested and to see your life accomplishments torn down and irreparably destroyed right before you die?"
…that he would have said yes?
What if you told him he would get away with it? Would his answer change?
Are there some people who would answer yes to that question? I suppose there are... But I'm guessing he wouldn't have. Same as if anyone asked you or me that question.
Yet here we are.
It's not about defending or blaming. It's just a commentary on how human behavior is sometimes very confusing.
We like to stand on the sidelines and fit other people and events we didn't take part in into simple narratives. I'm not sure if that is always an intellectually honest approach.