It's the struggle we all have. The voice inside our head that tells us what's wrong or right before we can even think about the issue at hand.
Group-think isn't just a fancy word developed by an author writing about the sheepish like dedication to conformity. It's the mill of society.
Conventional thinking is the edge of the big pool of the world everyone hangs onto and with that dark deep end "over there" - it's scary.
One becomes a part of the majority, civilization, country, team by learning all about what that institution says is institution. And when one happens upon something never taught by said institution, something never graded, expected, created, investigated, instigated, integrated... one gets confused.
Although that confusion isn't merely due to never having experienced something before. It is sometimes that the unexpected sight, thought, or feeling is surprisingly natural to a person. It is when that person includes the gesture in their wider, taught, view of the world that things get complicated.
They start to ask questions not simply about the idea in front of them but, more importantly to them, about how others would view it with a conventional, unwitnessed, mind set.
Thinking with and for a majority holds peoples' sense of exploration back. They tend to censor their world experience according a pre-determined set of values. This is one's base which they use in order to compare new things to what they already use. It's a completely necessary mental yardstick in order to process the world around us. The more we learn and experience the more we are confident that the world works in a certain way.
Many people would rather sit comfortably on their opinions, whatever they may be, than to feel the judgement or contest of others. That is the basic definition of comformity. Keep to yourself and 'they' will not disturb you.
However, the issue I take with this is that certain people use this technique or pre-disposition much too strongly. It blinds them because they always stunt their experience by submitting their thought to popular belief before deciding for themselves what their experience means to them.
Rather, the pioneers and discoverers are always those who go against the general consensus. Edwin Hubble was the first astronomer in the 20th century to realize that there was more to the universe than our local galaxy. Before this evocotive idea came to Mr. Hubble he knew that the entire observable universe was tightly absorbed within one grand grouping of stars and nebulas called the Milky Way Galaxy. Even though astronomers could see other galaxies, such as the nearest one 'Andromeda', in their scopes for centuries they simply referred to them as gaseous clouds within the Milky Way. There was no concept of external Milky Ways beyond our gaze. Hubble decided he would break the paradigm and go forward in revealing his new case to his scientist peers; "those blurry smudges in the skies are other galaxies!"
He received much ridicule but he pushed on until other astronomers could confirm his speculation and publish as fact for a new world.
Going against the grain is progress. Keep your state of mind devoid of pre-conceived notions. Although I will agree that a healthy sense of skepticism is also necessary as a base in order to compare that which you hypothesize against that which you already know. So goes the saying, " keep your mind open, but not so open that your brain falls out."
Thus, it is important to keep a balance of mind, not simply one state. Try to see that being too afraid to challenge the majority can only hold one back in the grand scheme of things.
However, there is much to be sought in having a majority of people agree and understand one's work. Though we may have our own ideas and eccentricities. It's also just as important to realize that everyone in the world has their own as well - and the right to have them. So how does one person not only make progress, but report it to as many people as possible in order to spread it? There's a word journalists pride themselves on, there's even a catchphrase to go with it. "Unbiased" reporting; fair and balanced - you decide.
Now I encourage the reader to decide.
The point is that in order for us to digest as much as possible we need to make all of our ideas and concepts more accesible to the free world around us. It's the same reason why televisions these days always read instructions in multiple languages.
But even if, there is always more to consider.
If I told you - the reader - something in the beginning of this essay that resoundingly offended you in some way would you have gotten this far?
It may be that one's adherence to the beliefs of the majority impedes the writer more than the reader.
