People and Ideas Worthy of Praise
In the wild world that is semantics and public opinion, common knowledge is
always shifting. Terms and concepts that used to mean one thing to an older
generation often undergoes revision and comes out in the modern era as something
entirely new; divorced from prior meaning. In this article, I will be exploring the term
idol, the function of idols in society and the associations connected to idols. Though
people will argue the definition of idol, what functions as an idol and who or what
qualifies as an appropriate idol, my intention is to make clear the definition, associated
qualities and purposes of idols. Using the examples of Bill Moyers and His Holiness the
Dalai Lama XIV, I will focus on the many facets of how we select idols for ourselves and
who or what qualifies. Afterward, I will plunge into the people that I idolize, what
qualities they possess and how these qualities contribute to the world, making them
worthy selections.
Idol
An idol is a person, object or idea unto which we show reverence and/or render
worship; ideally (but not limited to) representing qualities one wishes to emulate.
What is appropriate for an idol?
Since an idol is something we worship or revere, it is important to investigate
what we believe our idols to represent. For example, if we choose a person like Ricard
Wagner as an idol, we are probably selecting him based on musical merit and
innovation, and not so much based on the person he might have been outside of his
professional exploits. On the other hand, we may choose a person solely based on the
qualities of their personality or outlook, regardless of how society views them. As an
example, Jesus was a man who was not a worldly success, but his spiritual
contributions to society made lasting impressions.
Since we choose idols to serve our likings, it is most appropriate to categorically
define what type of idol they are (area of knowledge/application), what they represent
in our minds regarding qualities they embody and why we have chosen them.
So, idolizing is a process of identifying what purpose the idol serves, what qualities it
represents and why we wish to emulate it. It is easy to choose an idol that is not a
person, but rather an object or an ideal. This is very common now, just as it was in the
past. I will work backward through the sequence of genre, represented qualities and
personal factors regarding choice to provide a more detailed and logical approach to
how we choose our idols.
The argument of what an idol is and how it is defined is easily debatable, both
objectively and subjectively. The connection a person makes with the qualities
symbolized by idols is usually direct and personal. Although peer-pressure, upbringing
and a healthy amount of ignorance plays a part in our selection, idols are just as
interchangeable as our daily wardrobes. We live in a buffet-like world of public figures
and competing ideologies, so it is not surprising that in a free-thinking society we can
switch from one figure to another in relatively short spans of time. Some of us will
select idols without any real understanding of the implied qualities of the symbol, and
this is a curious phenomenon. Why a person would decide to not investigate their
interests or attempt to better identify with the meaning of words and qualities they wish
to mimic is another symptom of a society characterized by shallow understandings and
shortening attention spans. Perhaps an example would better illustrate my point?
Among Christians, the most common idol of the last two millennia is probably the
image of the crucifix, or cross. Assuming that Christ was an actual human being that
lived and walked the earth, that the accounts and words attributed to the New
Testament are at least moderately accurate; a profile of purity and compassion is
presented. In the ministry of Jesus, there were three whole years of sermons,
instructions and living examples of the loving, enlightened qualities he wished to impart
to all who would listen. In the body of his message, Jesus commanded people to love
God--which is to say we should love all that is apprehended by the senses, all of
creation. The only other commandment Christ gave to his followers was that they love
their neighbors as they love themselves.
With questionable public behaviors and the often harsh personal opinions
expressed behind closed doors of a great number of so-called Christians, one might be
led to believe that Christianity is but a tool used to unjustly judge people who are not
members. Instead of focusing on the instructions and example of Jesus, the emphasis
of Jesus' significance has been placed on the symbolic representation of his death. In a
way, ignorant Christians have placed the death of Jesus before the life and teachings of
Jesus, and this has led to many-a-broken commandment, misguided view and bad
example. Instead of believers abiding in a way of life that embraces God and God's
creation while maintaining love for their neighbors that is exactly as they love
themselves; they prefer judgment, division, intolerance and hatred. This is not in
keeping with the message of the being that many claim as their own personal savior--as
the living embodiment of God Himself. A separate set of qualities are being substituted
in, which are edicts levied for political control through base religious institutionalism. It
is nothing other than the lack of knowledge, insight and correct practice that
ignorant "followers" display when they claim to be "believers" who fail to emulate the
qualities of Jesus. There is no doubt that there are people who falsely proclaim that
their object of worship is Jesus, when they base their personal paradigms and conduct
on models not taught nor endorsed by Jesus. It would seem vitally important that
Christians attempt to be Christ-like. This a description of the often strange,
disconnected realm of personal factors of idolizing, but not aspiring to emulate the
qualities of our chosen idols.
Ignorance of what we idolize simply depicts the latent ignorance of people
themselves. Using Christ as a spiritual example of how to behave is step one of genre.
Step two is determining the qualities of an idol. What qualities does Jesus actually
represent? Just as personal factors play a part in why we choose the idols we do, the
depth of our knowledge and utilization of critical-thinking is just as important. If we
concentrate on culturally implemented approaches alone, we will easily remain
superficial in our investigation, leading to a great amount of topical assumptions. A
person who uses investigation watches carefully, listens closely and knows without
equivocation which qualities are present in their chosen idols. There is no need to go
into a rant on what qualities are, how they are represented in a symbol and what
purposes they serve.
Lastly, we arrive at the first in sequence of determining an idol: genre. As I
mentioned earlier with Ricard Wagner, we don't necessarily have to idolize someone or
something in its totality, but for its function. This is also personal, but it is equally
subject to group mentality, manipulation and other factors.
An example of a modern idol picked solely for genre is the idea of Capitalism.
Capitalist economic policy is supposed to represent access/opportunity and prosperity or
at least the promise thereof. While we hold dear the idea of free markets, of economic
mobility via hard work and innovation, the word and concept itself fails to adequately
represent the reality it was intended to create. It is not the adherence to a concept that
makes it work, but instead the application of the values defined by a concept that
determines success. It should be clear to anyone who studies economics that capitalist
societies are not free markets, but conglomerations of monopolies in every area of
commerce which push out competition with the legal shelter of government. Capitalism
as it is practiced today is no more than oligarchy or plutocracy, run by wealthy elites.
Unchecked capitalism is but an unworthy idol placed before free society, in the interests
of greed, influence and power.
The point here is that one must decide for oneself what a chosen idol represents, but
also how it is misrepresented and misused. Personal research and insight is required to
be adequately knowledgeable of your chosen idols, or we are worshipping something
entirely different than what we believe we are revering.
Idols worthy of worship are ones that serve beneficial purposes. Do you learn
something valuable from your idols? Do they represent and emulate qualities that you
deem worthy of pursuing and obtaining in your life? Even if a musician isn't an example
of a moral person or good example for society, worshipping the talents and works of a
musician is adequate. Just be careful to separate the person from the work, if it is the
work you adore. The point is to identify what qualities you idolize, who or
what represents them and why.
My Idols
I believe an idol should be something or someone worthy of your reverence,
your esteem and worship. Everyone worships fame and worldly success. Take any
moron off the street and you'll find someone who has in his power the ability to make
tons of money. There are millions of people who routinely screw over the masses for
the sake of self-interest. This is why I think much of our society is desperately out-oftouch with their own sensibilities, for it seems an overwhelming proportion of us bows
down to extraordinarily ordinary people. We kiss the feet of the selfish and think
of greed and excessive materialism as virtues. We might find ourselves in a much less
dilapidated world if we spent more time idolizing greater qualities and people who
contribute to the betterment of society in some way instead of worshipping rock stars,
actors, celebrities and businessmen.
I have carefully selected three individuals for their contributions to not only the
betterment of society, but their offerings to increase the capacity of individual human
beings to look deeply within themselves and think, Is there anything more I could be
doing with my life, with my potential? Is there something I can do to make this world a
better place? His Holiness the Dalai Lama XIV, Bill Moyers and Alex Jones touch every
aspect of the human condition worth emphasizing and improving for me. While their
places and functions within society are somewhat varied, the main mission of each of
these men is to inform, educate and awaken those who would listen. In a society that
shows that trends of individuality and critical analysis are going by the wayside, each of
these individuals challenge us to think outside our respective zones of comfort. Only
when we have the courage to stop mindlessly accepting what we are told by people, by
the media and through what we read in our standardized textbooks can we make the
efforts needed to start thinking for ourselves.
In my mind, there are two battles every person must become aware of in the
course of their lives...the outward battle of worldly pursuits and the inner battle of
spirituality. Both wars can only be waged intelligently by those who have developed
awareness of themselves and their surroundings, and those who have made the
necessary efforts to gain knowledge and insight into the world and their own human
condition. There are many people who have said that the better you know yourself, the
better you know others. This is only a half-truth, because if we are only focused on
what we think and feel, there is a whole world of ideas and realities occurring
without our awareness. It is important that we figure out for ourselves what is worth
recognizing and pursuing. There are thousands, even millions of spheres of interest that
daily grab out attention. With modern media, advertising, entertainment and popular
culture, we are exposed less and less to information that is useful or vital to our
knowledge-pool. If there is someone out there who swims against the stream of
conditioned perception and manufactured opinion, they tend to secure my interests,
whether I agree with them or not.
What does this have to do with idols? If you're going to prostrate before anyone
or anything, it should be something or someone that has your best interest at heart.
Otherwise, you can idolize Donald Trump, Kobe Bryant and Eminem, but in the end,
they don't seem to care that much about average people. These types of social
icons have one thing to teach you...greed and determination can lead to worldly
success. That’s it. If Eminem could have made it as an actor before he became a popmusic phenomenon, he probably would have. Yes, these men are quite deserving of
idol status in their respective genres of success. I'm sure they and people like them
have worked hard in their lives to rise to the top of their fields. However, the people I
idolize have nothing at all to gain for their hard work except your increased measure of
knowledge, insight and preparedness for the obstacles of life. In fact, they probably
stand to lose more than they might gain, because of the vested efforts of powerful
special interest groups to discredit their causes or of the violent opposition they face
from freedom-loathing hate mongers. To me, this is all the difference between idolizing
someone or something that is of use to only a small cross-section of our population and
one that props up the better part of humanity.
I don't mean to say that the Dalai Lama, Alex Jones and Bill Moyers pursued
their livelihoods without some degree of self-interest or drive. There is certainly going
to be some point in the day when they think of themselves. I'm not saying they are
perfect people nor short of public controversy. I'm sure their own respective curiosities,
desires and experiences drove them to become the men they are today. The reason I
idolize these men is also because of their commitments to the public good and to the
cause of peace in this world. They forego politics, influence and personal gain to bring
people closer to facts, truth and to unite them with fellow human beings. Most people
use influence, power and access to get a leg up on everyone else. In terms of how
these men are viewed and due to their vocational aspirations, I have chosen each for a
different reason. His Holiness the Dalai Lama XIV is as close to a holy man as I am
aware of, who as a monk, has no need for anything more than basic material needs. He
is completely devoted to spreading the cause of peace and compassion in the world. Bill
Moyers is more evenly-balanced between worldly affairs and spirituality, and in many
ways is a bridge between the two main concerns humans face in life. Alex Jones is a
much more outwardly-focused person, who speaks little of his personal beliefs outside
of the spectrum of political views. No one aspect is more important than the other, for
we cannot live in this world without being part of it, but in another manner not
bound strictly by material things.
I think there is nothing more important to a person's development than their
education. Education reaches far and wide, however. Unless you were born into a
family of scholars, it is highly unlikely you will learn nearly as much in life as you do
when you're in school. If you want to be a better person deep down, you have to
appeal to other sources of knowledge. Moyers, Jones and the Dalai Lama are staunch
advocates for higher knowledge, but they have a great deal of understanding regarding
the reality of the world that goes beyond books. Notably, none of them are afraid to say
something in full view of the public that might not be palatable. Therefore, they
represent two highly esteemed qualities of knowledge and wisdom. As for Moyers and
His Holiness, these men are very knowledgeable, but not merely in the worldly fashion.
His Holiness The Dalai Lama is the leader of a world-wide group of spiritual
practitioners (Buddhists), whose sole mission is to fully develop within themselves a
greater sense of compassion for all beings, a willingness to become more aware of their
inner-workings (mental and emotional), and to offer themselves in service to any and
all who might be in need. The Dalai Lama says, "The factor that distinguishes humans
from other living species is the ability to utilize intelligence while retaining the human
qualities of love, kindness and honesty towards fellow beings." (Path To Bliss, 13).
When discussing what qualities are worthy of recognition, praise and emulation, it is
difficult to argue with intelligence, love, kindness and honesty. The most well-known
qualities that Buddhism propounds are: awareness; compassion; generosity; discipline;
patience; diligent effort; concentration, and; wisdom. I can think of few alternatives
that have the benefit of beings as the aim and result. Although the Dalai Lama is a
spiritual practitioner of the highest order of monastic discipline and study, he has made
it his personal mission to close the gap between spirituality and secular pursuits. He is a
scholar of many disciplines of advanced sciences, of philosophy as well as a proponent
of uniting religious and secular peoples of the world under the banner of respect for
one another.
I think that the most endearing quality of Moyers and The Dalai Lama is their
determination to be accessible, humble and loving. Although Bill Moyers has made quite
a name for himself as a journalist, he probably doesn't care so much about the
numerous Emmys he has received as he does touching the minds and hearts of his
audience. Though the Dalai Lama has received a Nobel Peace Prize, he has made it
tacitly clear that his mission is not public recognition nor high reputation, but what he
can do to help others. In his acceptance speech he said, "I believe the prize is
recognition of the true values of altruism, love, compassion and nonviolence which I try
to practice..." (NobelPrize.org).
The combined number of books, publications, broadcasts and discourses that
have been given between His Holiness and Bill Moyers is more than I can account for
here, but suffice it to say that it would easily fill a room of bookshelves. In a society
that places more importance on being right, on finding the person, organization or
idealogy to blame for the awful state of affairs we find ourselves in, these two men
generously offer their knowledge, their insight and their respect to anyone they
encounter. Instead of outlooks that embrace ideologies of separation, they insist that
working together despite our differences is the only way to bring about positive change
in society. I admire that and have the deepest respect for these two men for their
unceasing efforts to instruct me and help me become a better man than I was
yesterday.
Before Bill Moyers became a world-renowned, award-winning journalist (30
Emmy Awards to date), he spent time in seminary and became a Baptist
minister. Before his long career in investigative journalism, Bill Moyers was appointed
White House press secretary under the infamous president, Lyndon Baines Johnson.
Following his short tenure in politics/public service, Moyers shifted his focus to exposing
the secretive dealings of politicians, businessmen and social elites on behalf of the
public. I think his attitude is sufficiently captured when he said,
I learned the hard way an old lesson that the greatest moments in the history of
the press came not when journalists made common cause with the state but
when they stood fearlessly independent of it," he said. "Now we have those
mega media companies that won't speak truth to power and an ideological media
that willingly lies for power. Scary! (Moyers Leaves, New York Post).
I admire Bill Moyers and Alex Jones for their continuous efforts to bring facts and
truth to the public while the airwaves are being dominated by big-money "news"
agencies. Moyers believes deeply in freedom of the people as well as the press,
"Freedom begins the moment you realize that someone else has been writing your
story, and its time you took the pen from his hand and started writing it yourself."
(Moyers on Democracy). As a rule, journalism is meant to be the buffer between
citizens and those who wield power over the population. I came to know Bill Moyers
through his show on PBS, Bill Moyers Journal. For years, I watched in horror and
in amazement, the information being presented by artists, scholars, insiders and public
figures. Through use of precise journalistic techniques and masterful craftsmanship, Bill
Moyers Journal made me aware of the many unseen elements of society, of business,
of governmental activities and many other areas of knowledge and information. Had
this show not run on public access, my education and insight into America would be
woefully incomplete. The fact that Moyers commented frequently on all facets of
life, incorporating his own beliefs from time to time also encouraged me.
Alex Jones is much more difficult to identify as being a humanitarian with his
crass delivery of information and opinion. Jones had his early beginnings as a radio talkshow host, being labeled a conspiracy theorist, rabble-rouser and political dissident. As
the homes for his early productions endured intense public and commercial scrutiny, he
was forced into self-financing to protect the content of his programming. In this age of
fact-manipulation and deceptive mass-media tactics, the unadulterated message of
Jones is one of personal responsibility, scholarly research and individual thinking.
Out of each of my idols, Jones is perhaps the most controversial. The fact that his daily
radio broadcasts are aimed at the disinformation that infects mass-media, the
manipulation of free markets by powerful monopolies and trends of corrupted elected
officials denying citizens their constitutionally guaranteed rights shows his lack of fear of
power. Such racy comments as, "We have to wake up and face the fact that we have a
criminal government" leave little room for doubt on behalf of uninformed readers of
Jones' perspectives (Angry in America). Much of the reason that I idolize Alex Jones as
a journalist and public figure is because of his discipline in delivering a well-sourced
message. I often wonder if Jones has any time to sleep, given his research for many
years was only conducted by himself and his wife.
One major difference between Jones and my other two idols is that he is much
less sensitive to the emotional sensitivities of human beings. You will not hear a liberal
attitude which embraces love or empathy for corporate elites or people who do not
share his perspectives on corruption. While I do feel that this negatively impacts the
amount of listeners his radio show garners on a daily basis, Jones does concentrate on
individual freedoms and the necessity for people to take action to affect any change. A
self-proclaimed Libertarian, Alex Jones describes himself as a "constitutional
fundamentalist" (Alex Jones Radio). All the same, I believe that the content of Jones'
daily message is concise and worthy of attention. You will rarely hear him make any
statement regarding what some radical "conspiracy theories" without a multitude of
governmental reports, public records and scholarly citations at his disposal. The number
of expert opinions he wields in the span of a four-hour discourse would impress even
the most seasoned researcher. As crass and direct as Alex Jones is, he has earned my
respect for the quality of information he presents, but not because he forces you to
believe it. In almost every broadcast, documentary and article authored or produced by
Jones, he encourages the reader to check his facts, do their own research and most
importantly, think for themselves.
My idols make daily contributions to the increased awareness of the public to the
tendencies of man and how to proceed in our lives in meaningful ways. You may not be
a spiritual person, you may not be a worldly person, but there is no denying the
presence of these components as being integral to our individual lives. When studying
the body of work of each of my idols, you could spend the better part of your life
reading, watching and listening and still would not be able to consume the massive
amounts of information being presented. With all of the information denied media
attention, the constant efforts of political parties and special interests to shape public
opinion, I appreciate the careful treatment of ideas by Jones, Moyers and the Dalai
Lama. As human beings, they do not pretend to be anything other than genuine and
driven, wise and forthright.
Works Cited
"Bill Moyers: Biography from Answers.com." Answers.com: Wiki Q&A Combined with Free Online
Dictionary, Thesaurus, and Encyclopedias. Web. 15 Sept. 2010.
<http://www.answers.com/topic/bill-moyers>.
"The Dalai Lama, A Brief Biography." The Dalai Lama. Web. <http://www.dalailama.com/biography/abrief-biography>.
Gyatso, Tenzin, Jinpa Thupten, and Christine Cox. Path to Bliss: a Practical Guide to Stages of
Meditation. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1991. Print.
Gyatso, Tenzin. "The 14th Dalai Lama - Acceptance Speech." Nobelprize.org. Web. 15 Sept. 2010.
<http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1989/lama-acceptance.html>.
Harris, By Dan. "Alex Jones: Day in the Life of Libertarian Radio Host - ABC News." ABCNews.com Breaking News, Politics, Online News, World News, Feature Stories, Celebrity Interviews and
More - ABC News. Web. 15 Sept. 2010. <http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/alex-jones-day-lifelibertarian-radio-host/story?id=10891854>.
Jones, Alex. Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a War on for Your Mind! Web. 15 Sept. 2010.
<http://www.infowars.com/listen.html>.
Moyers, Bill D. "24. Life on the Plantation, National Conference on Media Reform." Moyers on
Democracy. New York: Doubleday, 2008. Print.
"The New York Times Log In." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia.
Web. 15 Sept. 2010.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/17/arts/television/17moye.html?pagewanted=all>.