July 17, 2025 • 20 mins
We dive deep into the psychology of collective obedience during the COVID-19 pandemic, examining how fear, authority, and group dynamics influenced behavior on a massive scale. Michael Aponsis' paper "Six Feet of Separation from Reality" serves as our guide for understanding how societies fell in line with unprecedented uniformity.
• The COVID-19 response characterized as a "global obedience experiment" where policies spread alongside the virus
• Comparison to Stanley Milgram's obedience studies, with pandemic compliance driven by internal fear rather than direct commands
• How fear served as the primary engine for compliance, creating visceral rather than rational responses
• The transformation of science into "sacred science" where questioning became taboo
• Matthias Desmet's concept of "mass formation" explaining how isolated, anxious populations gravitate toward unifying narratives
• The shift from seeing obedience as following orders to "emotional obedience" where moral pressure drives compliance
• The costs beyond restrictions: loss of intellectual humility, curiosity, and interpersonal trust
• People reduced to potential threats rather than fellow humans, fundamentally changing social dynamics
• The dangerous elevation of obedience as the highest virtue and questioning as harmful
• Aponte's call to action: normalizing dissent, embracing nuance, and rebuilding tolerance for uncertainty
Please check out Michael Aponte's "Obedient Nation" series on the Thinking to Think podcast for more insights on this vital topic.
🎧 Don't forget to like, share, and subscribe to join our growing community of thoughtful individuals!
🔗 Follow us:
📖 Check out my book: The Logical Mind: Learn Critical Thinking to Make Better Decisions:
- https://theintellectuallibrary.com/
- https://a.co/d/jdOm9pI
- https://shop.ingramspark.com/b/084?uZBbvqij7WRGoezaZG6c6L5tcjbl9VZB2vE9UAB9j2b
📲 Let’s connect on social media!
- https://x.com/Thinking_2Think
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Lyra Morgan (00:08):
You didn't choose to hear this.
The algorithm did, or maybe itdidn't.
Today we're diving deep, reallydeep, into territory that well.
It might feel a bit unsettling,maybe even a little too close
to home for some of you.
We're going to try and unpackthe psychology behind collective
obedience.
You know how whole societiessometimes just fall in line, and
we're looking at itspecifically through the lens of
(00:30):
a very recent, very globalevent.
It's a conversation that, let'sbe honest, was difficult to have
for a while.
Sometimes it felt like it wasactively discouraged.
Even Our main source, our guidefor this exploration, is a
really insightful paper byMichael Aponsis.
It's called Six Feet ofSeparation from Reality Fear,
obedience and the Psychology ofthe Pandemic.
It's actually a key part of hisWider Obedient Nation series,
(00:53):
which you can find over on theThinking to Think podcast.
So our mission today is prettyclear we want to dissect not to
judge, but just with realcuriosity how things like fear,
authority, group dynamics, howall that influenced behavior on
a massive, almost unbelievablescale.
We're basically asking thequestions that perhaps felt a
bit forbidden at the time.
Dr. Elias Quinn (01:12):
Yeah.
And what's really strikingright from the start is how
Aponthe sets this up.
He's very, very clear that he'snot trying to deny any tragedy.
He's not trying to politicizeGreece.
It's crucial that distinction.
His goal is really to prompt us, all of us, towards some
critical self-reflection.
And he comes to this not justas an academic but, you know, as
a father, an educator, athinker.
It's personal for him and thatperspective feeds into his core
(01:34):
belief, which is that obediencedriven purely by fear well, he
sees that as the most dangerouskind, much more dangerous than
obedience that comes from, say,love or respect or even just
reasoned agreement.
So this isn't just like anacademic exercise we're doing
here.
It's about trying to understandwhat we collectively might have
given up for this idea ofsafety and maybe, more
(01:56):
importantly, how we find thepath back to reclaiming our own
individual thinking.
Lyra Morgan (02:01):
Okay, right, let's unpack that core premise then,
because it is a bold one.
Aponte doesn't just call theCOVID-19 pandemic a health
crisis.
He actually calls it a globalobedience experiment.
Right, just let that sink infor a second.
A global obedience experimentas this new virus spread, he
argues, another way of spreadwith it policies, mandates and
(02:21):
what he calls moral messaging.
And it wasn't just aboutgetting people to do certain
things, right, he argues, it wasabout demanding this deep,
almost unconscious, emotionalalignment.
Think about how it felt.
Apon suggests that if youdisagreed even slightly, you
weren't just wrong, you werelabeled dangerous.
If you question things theeffectiveness, the costs, the
(02:43):
long-term impact you could beseen as a threat, a source of
misinformation, someone whomight hurt others by not
complying or even by justthinking differently.
Dr. Elias Quinn (02:51):
Right.
That framing of potentiallykilling others through dissent
was incredibly powerful.
Lyra Morgan (02:56):
Exactly and wrapped in this moral language, whole
populations across totallydifferent cultures, different
countries.
They just seem to comply withthis amazing uniformity.
And what Aponte reallyhighlights is the speed of it
and how synchronized it all was,like a global switch flipped.
It wasn't just about rules, itwas about getting everyone
emotionally on the same page.
Dr. Elias Quinn (03:14):
And his analysis of the let's call it,
the psychological infrastructure.
This is really compelling.
He drills down into these coreelements he believes were key
Fear, obviously, but alsoauthority, group dynamics and,
crucially, shame.
And this is where he brings inthat comparison to Stanley
Milgram's famous obediencestudies from back in the 60s
(03:41):
Aponte's view is that for awhile there, critical thinking
itself was basically put underwell quarantine.
Lyra Morgan (03:44):
Ok, maybe remind us quickly about Milgram, just the
core idea.
Dr. Elias Quinn (03:45):
Sure.
So Milgram, back at Yale in theearly 60s, set up this
experiment.
People thought they were partof a memory study.
They were the teacher told byan authority figure, a guy in a
lab coat, to give electricshocks to a learner who was
actually an actor.
Whenever the learner gotsomething wrong, the shocks
supposedly went up higher andhigher to dangerous levels.
(04:07):
The learner would pretend to bein pain, shout, protest,
eventually go silent.
Lyra Morgan (04:12):
Right, I remember this.
It's chilling.
Dr. Elias Quinn (04:14):
It is Because the shocking part was how many
ordinary people people like youand me kept giving the shocks
just because the authorityfigure told them to, even when
they thought they were causingreal harm, maybe even death.
Lyra Morgan (04:25):
Just because they were told.
Dr. Elias Quinn (04:27):
Just because they were told it showed this
powerful tendency.
We have to defer to authority,sometimes even over our own
conscience.
Lyra Morgan (04:34):
So how does Aponte connect that to the pandemic?
It wasn't exactly the same, wasit?
No one was in a lab coatordering us directly.
Dr. Elias Quinn (04:41):
No, exactly, and that's Aponte's point.
He uses Milgram as a benchmark,not a direct parallel.
He asks what happens when thepressure isn't an explicit
command like you must continue.
What if it's more diffuse?
What if it's driven bywidespread fear, or this intense
sense of moral duty, or justthe sheer terror of being kicked
out of the group, sociallyostracized?
Aponte argues the conditionsduring the pandemic created this
(05:03):
environment where thinking foryourself wasn't just frowned
upon, it was actively suppressedthrough these really powerful
social and emotional forces.
Lyra Morgan (05:10):
Questioning the main story felt well.
It felt almost wrong, like abetrayal.
Dr. Elias Quinn (05:15):
OK, yeah, that resonates and this brings us
squarely to fear, doesn't it?
Because you could argue thatwas the real engine here.
From the moment it all started,the media coverage globally
wasn't just reporting facts.
It felt like an immersive fearcampaign.
Almost you couldn't escape itImages of hospitals overflowing,
stories of mass graves, thosedeath counters ticking up
constantly everywhere you looked.
(05:36):
It wasn't just information.
It felt like a deliberate ormaybe unconscious psychological
strategy.
Lyra Morgan (05:43):
The constant stream of alarming information and
fear, as Aponts points out, isprobably the most primal tool
for getting people to comply.
Its effects were immediate,they were visceral and they were
everywhere.
Just think back to those firstfew weeks or months the panic
buying toilet paper, handsanitizer disappearing off
shelves.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:01):
Oh yeah, Total irrationality in some ways.
Lyra Morgan (06:04):
Right, and how quickly masks became common,
often way before any officialrules and the acceptance of
lockdowns, life changingcompletely, almost overnight,
for billions of people.
Aponte argues these weren't,you know, calm, rational
decisions made after weighingpros and cons.
He says they were raw, survivaldriven acts of obedience,
almost instinctual reactions tothis overwhelming sense of
(06:27):
threat.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:27):
Yeah, like a primal switch got flipped.
Lyra Morgan (06:29):
Exactly.
It's not just what we did, butwhy that distinction is key.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:33):
And this is where Aponte really
distinguishes the pandemicobedience from Milgram, drawing
out that psychologicaldifference.
It's quite nuanced In Mildrempeople obeyed even when they
were clearly distressed becausethe guy in the lab coat told
them to Explicitly.
Please continue, the experimentrequires you continue.
Lyra Morgan (06:51):
It was external Right Direct order.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:53):
But Apont argues, during the pandemic,
people mostly obeyed, notbecause of a direct command from
on high, but because they wereessentially terrified not to
Terrified, not to Okay, thatfeels different.
It's a huge shift, isn't it?
Yeah, the driver moves fromoutside the external command to
inside this deep, visceral,almost pre-rational fear.
(07:14):
It wasn't just oh, thegovernment says so, although
sure that played a part, it wasdeeper, it was if I don't do
this, I might get sick, myfamily might get sick, or maybe
even more powerful people willthink I'm bad, exactly.
I'll be seen as irresponsible,selfish, a danger to my
(07:34):
community.
Yeah, that internal fear-basedstory makes the obedience kind
of self-policing, doesn't it?
Yeah, less dependent onconstant orders, more on this
internal drive for safety, bothphysical and social and then, on
top of the fear, came this,this moral layer.
Lyra Morgan (07:44):
It wasn't subtle either.
Compliance shifted from beingabout safety to being about
virtue.
Dr. Elias Quinn (07:49):
Mm-hmm, the moral imperative.
Lyra Morgan (07:51):
Suddenly wearing a mask wasn't just a maybe useful
precaution.
It was a visible sign you werea good person, you cared.
Getting vaccinated wasn't justa health choice.
It was framed as a loyalty test, your duty to the collective
your civic responsibility rightand keeping six feet apart
wasn't just physics, it wasselflessness, protecting the
(08:13):
vulnerable.
Dr. Elias Quinn (08:14):
It all got loaded with this heavy moral
weight of course, you were freeto believe what you wanted, as
long as it was what everyoneelse believed or what was
presented as the only right wayto believe exactly, and this
framing it created intensesocial pressure.
Lyra Morgan (08:29):
If you questioned any of it, didn't matter how
carefully or what evidence youhad.
You were just selfish, ignorant, dangerous.
Dr. Elias Quinn (08:35):
It instantly created this us versus them
dynamic, didn't it?
The good, obedient people,versus the bad, dangerous
dissenters.
Lyra Morgan (08:42):
Yeah, and Aponta argues the result wasn't just
people changing their behavior,it was deeper, a kind of
psychological submission wherepeople started to truly believe
this was the only morally rightway.
They internalized it completely.
Dr. Elias Quinn (08:54):
Which raises this really critical question
what happens when science itselfstops being a process of
questioning and becomes morelike a dogma, an unshakable
belief system?
Aponte brings in Robert JLifton's idea of sacred science,
and it seems to fit so wellhere.
Lyra Morgan (09:11):
Sacred science.
Tell me more about that.
Dr. Elias Quinn (09:14):
Lifton studied thought reform, totalitarianism.
He described how a particularbelief system, maybe even a
scientific theory, can become soholy, so untouchableable that
you just can't question it.
And Aponte argues that's whathappened with the pandemic
narrative the presented sciencebecame sacred.
Lyra Morgan (09:31):
So, even when the advice changed constantly, one
minute masks don't work, thenext minute they're essential.
Dr. Elias Quinn (09:36):
Exactly.
Even when guidelines shifteddramatically, sometimes
contradicting earlier advice,often without really clear
public explanations, peoplemostly just accepted it.
Aponte's point isn't thateveryone understood the complex
shifting science.
He suggests people accepted thechanges simply because they
came from the authorities, whowere seen as guardians of this
sacred science.
Lyra Morgan (09:55):
So it wasn't about understanding the why, just
accepting the what because ofwho said it.
Dr. Elias Quinn (10:00):
Precisely.
It's a really powerfulmechanism because it bypasses
your own critical thinking.
You just accept the narrative,even if it's changing or seems
inconsistent, because the sourceis seen as beyond question.
Lyra Morgan (10:12):
Wow, ok, so that ties into another concept that
Punt uses, right, this idea ofmass formation from Matthias
Desmet.
Dr. Elias Quinn (10:19):
Yes, he draws on Desmet's work quite
significantly.
Desmet described this kind ofcollective hypnosis, almost a
psychological state that canemerge under very specific
conditions.
Lyra Morgan (10:30):
And those conditions sound disturbingly
familiar when you think about2020.
Dr. Elias Quinn (10:34):
They really do.
Desmet identified key factorsindividuals feeling very
isolated, a lot of free-floatinganxiety not tied to anything
specific, just a general senseof unease and widespread
uncertainty about the world.
Lyra Morgan (10:47):
Which was basically the global mood, wasn't it?
Lockdowns causing isolation,fear causing anxiety and total
uncertainty about health, jobs,the future, Exactly, and in that
state upon accuse, peoplenaturally gravitate towards a
collective.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:00):
They find a new identity in the group.
They find comfort and clarityin a simple, unifying story that
seems to explain everything.
Lyra Morgan (11:07):
And, crucially, they find safety in obedience.
Following the narrative becomesthe safe path, the way to
manage the chaos.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:16):
And Appondit makes a really humane point here
, one that pushes back againstjust blaming people.
He says, quoting him looselythe obedience weren't stupid,
they were human and they foundpeace in the clarity that comes
with following orders in a timeof chaos.
Lyra Morgan (11:30):
That's important.
It's not about judging.
It's about understanding thathuman need for certainty for
belonging, especially underextreme stress.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:38):
Right when everything's confusing and scary
.
A simple, clear path presentedas the right path is incredibly
appealing psychologically.
It quiets the internal noise.
Lyra Morgan (11:49):
No, I know Desmet's term mass formation psychosis
was controversial.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:53):
It was yeah.
Yeah, there was a lot of debateabout the specific label.
Lyra Morgan (11:55):
But Aponte focuses more on the underlying idea
right that large groups can fallunder the spell of a single
narrative when they'revulnerable, isolated and guided
by what seems like a moralauthority.
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:12):
Exactly.
Regardless of the label, thecore insight is powerful, and
Aponte points out how thepsychological mechanisms
involved look remarkably similarto those seen in cults.
Lyra Morgan (12:17):
Like what specifically?
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:18):
Well, think about it Social isolation,
constant fear-mongering, endlessrepetition of the same messages
, creating this sense of usversus them and framing the
group's beliefs as morallysuperior, righteous even.
Lyra Morgan (12:32):
All those elements were arguably present during the
pandemic.
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:35):
Undeniably Fear uncertainty, a clear enemy.
First the virus, then maybe theunvaccinated or the questioners
.
Aponte suggests you don't evenneed some mastermind pulling the
strings.
The conditions themselves canbe enough to trigger this kind
of collective psychologicalshift.
Lyra Morgan (12:49):
Which brings us to what you called Aponte's unique
contribution, this idea ofemotional obedience.
How is that different, again,from Milgram?
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:57):
It's a subtle but crucial difference.
Milgram was about obeying adirect external command from an
authority figure.
Do this?
Aponte argues the pandemic.
Obedience was driven more byinternal emotional pressures,
specifically moral pressure, theneed to be seen as good and the
fear of exclusion, the fear ofbeing cast out.
Lyra Morgan (13:18):
So people complied, not just because they feared
the virus, but because theyfeared being seen as well as bad
people, selfish people.
Dr. Elias Quinn (13:25):
Precisely, they feared the social consequences
being judged, condemned,ostracized by their community,
their friends, maybe even theirfamily.
That emotional weight wantingto belong, wanting to be seen as
virtuous, avoiding that socialstigma became this incredibly
powerful, almost invisiblemotivator.
Lyra Morgan (13:42):
It's less about the rule itself and more about the
social meaning attached tofollowing the rule.
Dr. Elias Quinn (13:47):
Exactly it becomes an internalized,
self-policing obedience drivenby emotion, not just external
orders.
Lyra Morgan (13:53):
And the consequences of that taking hold
.
What did Aponte see happening?
Dr. Elias Quinn (13:57):
Well, the consequences were pretty severe.
According to his analysis,questioning the narrative wasn't
just ignored, it was oftenactively punished.
Lyra Morgan (14:04):
We saw that, didn't we?
Social media censorship.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:06):
Absolutely Widespread censorship, sometimes
algorithmic, often targetingviews that question the dominant
line, even if they were basedon reasonable scientific debate
or personal experience.
Lyra Morgan (14:17):
And families breaking apart over it.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:19):
Yes, heartbreaking stories of
families fractured overdiffering beliefs, people losing
jobs, professional licenses Notfor actually harming anyone but
, as Appante puts it, forfailing to align emotionally
with the dominant message.
Lyra Morgan (14:33):
Failing to align emotionally.
That's chilling.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:36):
It is.
It suggests conformity wasn'tjust behavioral, it was
emotional, and Appante posesthis really haunting question
what if the real censorshipisn't silencing others, but
silencing yourself before youeven speak?
Lyra Morgan (14:50):
Ah, the self-censorship, the fear of
speaking up becomes so strongyou just don't.
You bite your tongue before thethought even fully forms.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:56):
Exactly, it's an internal chilling effect.
Yeah, the individual becomestheir own censor, constantly
checking their thoughts againstthe perceived public mood,
purely out of fear of the socialconsequences.
It's a very subtle butincredibly effective form of
control.
Lyra Morgan (15:10):
So, thinking about all this, what did we actually
lose Beyond freedom of movement?
What were the deeper costsAponte identifies?
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:19):
He points to losses that go right to the
heart of a healthy society,things that might take a long
time to recover, if we everfully do.
Lyra Morgan (15:27):
Like what.
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:27):
He highlights three big ones intellectual
humility, curiosity and, maybemost damagingly, trust in one
another.
Lyra Morgan (15:34):
Intellectual humility, the ability to say I
don't know or I might be wrong.
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:38):
Exactly that seemed to just evaporate in the
face of this single, certainnarrative and curiosity, the
drive to ask questions, exploredifferent angles, look for
nuance.
That got shut down too.
It was often labeled asdangerous, irresponsible.
Lyra Morgan (15:53):
Yeah, you could feel that frame, couldn't you?
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:55):
Definitely.
Trust in neighbors, trust infellow citizens, trust in
institutions, the social fabric,the connections between us took
a real hit.
Suspicions seem to replacetrust in many areas.
Lyra Morgan (16:06):
What Aponte observes about how we started
seeing each other isparticularly disturbing.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:10):
It really is.
He argues that, through thelens of this fear-based
narrative, other people stoppedbeing just people.
They became potential threats.
Lyra Morgan (16:19):
Grandparents became risks, not sources of comfort.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:22):
Right.
Neighbors became potential rulebreakers, people to be reported
, children.
Children were reduced to beingseen primarily as vectors of
disease, not just kids needingconnection and play.
Lyra Morgan (16:33):
That redefinition is profound.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:35):
It is.
And Aponte insists it wasn'tthe virus itself that did this,
but the narrative around thevirus insists it wasn't the
virus itself that did this, butthe narrative around the virus.
That narrative encouragedsuspicion.
It encouraged seeing othersprimarily through the lens of
risk.
It created this deeppsychological distancing that
went way beyond six feet.
Lyra Morgan (16:52):
A fear of each other, basically.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:54):
A deep-seated fear of each other became
normalized, undermining the verybasis of community.
Lyra Morgan (16:58):
And maybe the biggest loss, the one with the
longest shadow.
Aponte suggests it's this ideathat took hold, that obedience
was the highest virtue.
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:07):
Yeah, just pause on that for a second.
Obedience is the highest virtue.
Lyra Morgan (17:10):
It means just following orders, not
questioning, not thinkingcritically.
That was presented as caring,as empathy, as being responsible
.
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:18):
And the flip side, questioning, doubting,
even just wanting moreinformation that was framed as
harmful, as reckless, asselfishly putting others at risk
.
Lyra Morgan (17:29):
What does that do to a society when thinking
critically is seen as bad andjust going along is seen as good
?
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:35):
It's fundamentally dangerous, isn't
it?
It's almost an Orwellianreversal of values.
It encourages intellectualpassivity, discourages the very
skills a society needs to solvecomplex problems.
It changes the wholerelationship between individuals
and authority.
Dissent becomes almost immoral.
Lyra Morgan (17:52):
So, as things reopen, as we move forward,
what's the big question Aponteleaves us with?
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:58):
It's really this.
Did we actually learn anythingfundamental about how easily
obedience can be manufacturedwhen people are scared and under
pressure?
Lyra Morgan (18:05):
Or did we just hit pause?
Are we just waiting for thenext crisis for the same
dynamics to kick in all overagain?
Dr. Elias Quinn (18:10):
That's the unsettling question, isn't it?
What happens next time?
Lyra Morgan (18:13):
So what's his call to action?
How do we avoid just repeatingthe pattern?
Dr. Elias Quinn (18:17):
His message is pretty clear To reclaim our
minds, to protect our autonomy,we have to start actively
normalizing dissent, not justputting up with it, but seeing
it as essential for a healthysociety.
Lyra Morgan (18:29):
We need to embrace nuance right, Understand that
complex problems rarely havesimple answers.
Dr. Elias Quinn (18:35):
Exactly, and we need to rebuild our tolerance
for uncertainty.
Tolerance for uncertainty.
Life is uncertain.
Trying to eliminate all risk atany cost can lead us down these
very dangerous paths ofconformity that destroy the
freedoms we value.
Safety matters, of course, butbut freedom of thought, Aponte
argues, is absolutely essential.
It's not optional.
His Obedient Nation seriesisn't about blaming anyone for
(18:56):
obeying during a scary time.
It's about reminding us we canchoose differently.
Lyra Morgan (19:00):
Empowering us maybe .
Dr. Elias Quinn (19:06):
Yes, empowering us to pause, take a breath and
actually think for ourselves,especially when fear starts
shouting.
His final thought is simple butpowerful that the next time
fear knocks, we pause, webreathe and we think.
Lyra Morgan (19:15):
We pause, we breathe and we think, which
leaves us with that finallingering question if the
algorithm controls what we see,who controls what we believe?
We really want to extend oursincere thanks to Mr Michael
Aponte for letting us speakabout his work on thinking To
(19:39):
think and for allowing us toco-host this incredibly
important obedient nation series.
It's been profound.
If you found this deep dive asthought-provoking as we did,
please do like, share, commentand subscribe to thinking to
think wherever you get your deepdive and definitely stay tuned.
There are more episodes comingin this vital series and you
won't want to miss them.
You didn't choose to hear this.
The algorithm did, or maybe itdidn't.
Today we're diving deep, reallydeep, into territory that well.
It might feel a bit unsettling,maybe even a little too close
to home for some of you.
We're going to try and unpackthe psychology behind collective
obedience.
You know how whole societiessometimes just fall in line, and
we're looking at itspecifically through the lens of
(00:30):
a very recent, very globalevent.
It's a conversation that, let'sbe honest, was difficult to have
for a while.
Sometimes it felt like it wasactively discouraged.
Even Our main source, our guidefor this exploration, is a
really insightful paper byMichael Aponsis.
It's called Six Feet ofSeparation from Reality Fear,
obedience and the Psychology ofthe Pandemic.
It's actually a key part of hisWider Obedient Nation series,
(00:53):
which you can find over on theThinking to Think podcast.
So our mission today is prettyclear we want to dissect not to
judge, but just with realcuriosity how things like fear,
authority, group dynamics, howall that influenced behavior on
a massive, almost unbelievablescale.
We're basically asking thequestions that perhaps felt a
bit forbidden at the time.
Dr. Elias Quinn (01:12):
Yeah.
And what's really strikingright from the start is how
Aponthe sets this up.
He's very, very clear that he'snot trying to deny any tragedy.
He's not trying to politicizeGreece.
It's crucial that distinction.
His goal is really to prompt us, all of us, towards some
critical self-reflection.
And he comes to this not justas an academic but, you know, as
a father, an educator, athinker.
It's personal for him and thatperspective feeds into his core
(01:34):
belief, which is that obediencedriven purely by fear well, he
sees that as the most dangerouskind, much more dangerous than
obedience that comes from, say,love or respect or even just
reasoned agreement.
So this isn't just like anacademic exercise we're doing
here.
It's about trying to understandwhat we collectively might have
given up for this idea ofsafety and maybe, more
(01:56):
importantly, how we find thepath back to reclaiming our own
individual thinking.
Lyra Morgan (02:01):
Okay, right, let's unpack that core premise then,
because it is a bold one.
Aponte doesn't just call theCOVID-19 pandemic a health
crisis.
He actually calls it a globalobedience experiment.
Right, just let that sink infor a second.
A global obedience experimentas this new virus spread, he
argues, another way of spreadwith it policies, mandates and
(02:21):
what he calls moral messaging.
And it wasn't just aboutgetting people to do certain
things, right, he argues, it wasabout demanding this deep,
almost unconscious, emotionalalignment.
Think about how it felt.
Apon suggests that if youdisagreed even slightly, you
weren't just wrong, you werelabeled dangerous.
If you question things theeffectiveness, the costs, the
(02:43):
long-term impact you could beseen as a threat, a source of
misinformation, someone whomight hurt others by not
complying or even by justthinking differently.
Dr. Elias Quinn (02:51):
Right.
That framing of potentiallykilling others through dissent
was incredibly powerful.
Lyra Morgan (02:56):
Exactly and wrapped in this moral language, whole
populations across totallydifferent cultures, different
countries.
They just seem to comply withthis amazing uniformity.
And what Aponte reallyhighlights is the speed of it
and how synchronized it all was,like a global switch flipped.
It wasn't just about rules, itwas about getting everyone
emotionally on the same page.
Dr. Elias Quinn (03:14):
And his analysis of the let's call it,
the psychological infrastructure.
This is really compelling.
He drills down into these coreelements he believes were key
Fear, obviously, but alsoauthority, group dynamics and,
crucially, shame.
And this is where he brings inthat comparison to Stanley
Milgram's famous obediencestudies from back in the 60s
(03:41):
Aponte's view is that for awhile there, critical thinking
itself was basically put underwell quarantine.
Lyra Morgan (03:44):
Ok, maybe remind us quickly about Milgram, just the
core idea.
Dr. Elias Quinn (03:45):
Sure.
So Milgram, back at Yale in theearly 60s, set up this
experiment.
People thought they were partof a memory study.
They were the teacher told byan authority figure, a guy in a
lab coat, to give electricshocks to a learner who was
actually an actor.
Whenever the learner gotsomething wrong, the shocks
supposedly went up higher andhigher to dangerous levels.
(04:07):
The learner would pretend to bein pain, shout, protest,
eventually go silent.
Lyra Morgan (04:12):
Right, I remember this.
It's chilling.
Dr. Elias Quinn (04:14):
It is Because the shocking part was how many
ordinary people people like youand me kept giving the shocks
just because the authorityfigure told them to, even when
they thought they were causingreal harm, maybe even death.
Lyra Morgan (04:25):
Just because they were told.
Dr. Elias Quinn (04:27):
Just because they were told it showed this
powerful tendency.
We have to defer to authority,sometimes even over our own
conscience.
Lyra Morgan (04:34):
So how does Aponte connect that to the pandemic?
It wasn't exactly the same, wasit?
No one was in a lab coatordering us directly.
Dr. Elias Quinn (04:41):
No, exactly, and that's Aponte's point.
He uses Milgram as a benchmark,not a direct parallel.
He asks what happens when thepressure isn't an explicit
command like you must continue.
What if it's more diffuse?
What if it's driven bywidespread fear, or this intense
sense of moral duty, or justthe sheer terror of being kicked
out of the group, sociallyostracized?
Aponte argues the conditionsduring the pandemic created this
(05:03):
environment where thinking foryourself wasn't just frowned
upon, it was actively suppressedthrough these really powerful
social and emotional forces.
Lyra Morgan (05:10):
Questioning the main story felt well.
It felt almost wrong, like abetrayal.
Dr. Elias Quinn (05:15):
OK, yeah, that resonates and this brings us
squarely to fear, doesn't it?
Because you could argue thatwas the real engine here.
From the moment it all started,the media coverage globally
wasn't just reporting facts.
It felt like an immersive fearcampaign.
Almost you couldn't escape itImages of hospitals overflowing,
stories of mass graves, thosedeath counters ticking up
constantly everywhere you looked.
(05:36):
It wasn't just information.
It felt like a deliberate ormaybe unconscious psychological
strategy.
Lyra Morgan (05:43):
The constant stream of alarming information and
fear, as Aponts points out, isprobably the most primal tool
for getting people to comply.
Its effects were immediate,they were visceral and they were
everywhere.
Just think back to those firstfew weeks or months the panic
buying toilet paper, handsanitizer disappearing off
shelves.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:01):
Oh yeah, Total irrationality in some ways.
Lyra Morgan (06:04):
Right, and how quickly masks became common,
often way before any officialrules and the acceptance of
lockdowns, life changingcompletely, almost overnight,
for billions of people.
Aponte argues these weren't,you know, calm, rational
decisions made after weighingpros and cons.
He says they were raw, survivaldriven acts of obedience,
almost instinctual reactions tothis overwhelming sense of
(06:27):
threat.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:27):
Yeah, like a primal switch got flipped.
Lyra Morgan (06:29):
Exactly.
It's not just what we did, butwhy that distinction is key.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:33):
And this is where Aponte really
distinguishes the pandemicobedience from Milgram, drawing
out that psychologicaldifference.
It's quite nuanced In Mildrempeople obeyed even when they
were clearly distressed becausethe guy in the lab coat told
them to Explicitly.
Please continue, the experimentrequires you continue.
Lyra Morgan (06:51):
It was external Right Direct order.
Dr. Elias Quinn (06:53):
But Apont argues, during the pandemic,
people mostly obeyed, notbecause of a direct command from
on high, but because they wereessentially terrified not to
Terrified, not to Okay, thatfeels different.
It's a huge shift, isn't it?
Yeah, the driver moves fromoutside the external command to
inside this deep, visceral,almost pre-rational fear.
(07:14):
It wasn't just oh, thegovernment says so, although
sure that played a part, it wasdeeper, it was if I don't do
this, I might get sick, myfamily might get sick, or maybe
even more powerful people willthink I'm bad, exactly.
I'll be seen as irresponsible,selfish, a danger to my
(07:34):
community.
Yeah, that internal fear-basedstory makes the obedience kind
of self-policing, doesn't it?
Yeah, less dependent onconstant orders, more on this
internal drive for safety, bothphysical and social and then, on
top of the fear, came this,this moral layer.
Lyra Morgan (07:44):
It wasn't subtle either.
Compliance shifted from beingabout safety to being about
virtue.
Dr. Elias Quinn (07:49):
Mm-hmm, the moral imperative.
Lyra Morgan (07:51):
Suddenly wearing a mask wasn't just a maybe useful
precaution.
It was a visible sign you werea good person, you cared.
Getting vaccinated wasn't justa health choice.
It was framed as a loyalty test, your duty to the collective
your civic responsibility rightand keeping six feet apart
wasn't just physics, it wasselflessness, protecting the
(08:13):
vulnerable.
Dr. Elias Quinn (08:14):
It all got loaded with this heavy moral
weight of course, you were freeto believe what you wanted, as
long as it was what everyoneelse believed or what was
presented as the only right wayto believe exactly, and this
framing it created intensesocial pressure.
Lyra Morgan (08:29):
If you questioned any of it, didn't matter how
carefully or what evidence youhad.
You were just selfish, ignorant, dangerous.
Dr. Elias Quinn (08:35):
It instantly created this us versus them
dynamic, didn't it?
The good, obedient people,versus the bad, dangerous
dissenters.
Lyra Morgan (08:42):
Yeah, and Aponta argues the result wasn't just
people changing their behavior,it was deeper, a kind of
psychological submission wherepeople started to truly believe
this was the only morally rightway.
They internalized it completely.
Dr. Elias Quinn (08:54):
Which raises this really critical question
what happens when science itselfstops being a process of
questioning and becomes morelike a dogma, an unshakable
belief system?
Aponte brings in Robert JLifton's idea of sacred science,
and it seems to fit so wellhere.
Lyra Morgan (09:11):
Sacred science.
Tell me more about that.
Dr. Elias Quinn (09:14):
Lifton studied thought reform, totalitarianism.
He described how a particularbelief system, maybe even a
scientific theory, can become soholy, so untouchableable that
you just can't question it.
And Aponte argues that's whathappened with the pandemic
narrative the presented sciencebecame sacred.
Lyra Morgan (09:31):
So, even when the advice changed constantly, one
minute masks don't work, thenext minute they're essential.
Dr. Elias Quinn (09:36):
Exactly.
Even when guidelines shifteddramatically, sometimes
contradicting earlier advice,often without really clear
public explanations, peoplemostly just accepted it.
Aponte's point isn't thateveryone understood the complex
shifting science.
He suggests people accepted thechanges simply because they
came from the authorities, whowere seen as guardians of this
sacred science.
Lyra Morgan (09:55):
So it wasn't about understanding the why, just
accepting the what because ofwho said it.
Dr. Elias Quinn (10:00):
Precisely.
It's a really powerfulmechanism because it bypasses
your own critical thinking.
You just accept the narrative,even if it's changing or seems
inconsistent, because the sourceis seen as beyond question.
Lyra Morgan (10:12):
Wow, ok, so that ties into another concept that
Punt uses, right, this idea ofmass formation from Matthias
Desmet.
Dr. Elias Quinn (10:19):
Yes, he draws on Desmet's work quite
significantly.
Desmet described this kind ofcollective hypnosis, almost a
psychological state that canemerge under very specific
conditions.
Lyra Morgan (10:30):
And those conditions sound disturbingly
familiar when you think about2020.
Dr. Elias Quinn (10:34):
They really do.
Desmet identified key factorsindividuals feeling very
isolated, a lot of free-floatinganxiety not tied to anything
specific, just a general senseof unease and widespread
uncertainty about the world.
Lyra Morgan (10:47):
Which was basically the global mood, wasn't it?
Lockdowns causing isolation,fear causing anxiety and total
uncertainty about health, jobs,the future, Exactly, and in that
state upon accuse, peoplenaturally gravitate towards a
collective.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:00):
They find a new identity in the group.
They find comfort and clarityin a simple, unifying story that
seems to explain everything.
Lyra Morgan (11:07):
And, crucially, they find safety in obedience.
Following the narrative becomesthe safe path, the way to
manage the chaos.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:16):
And Appondit makes a really humane point here
, one that pushes back againstjust blaming people.
He says, quoting him looselythe obedience weren't stupid,
they were human and they foundpeace in the clarity that comes
with following orders in a timeof chaos.
Lyra Morgan (11:30):
That's important.
It's not about judging.
It's about understanding thathuman need for certainty for
belonging, especially underextreme stress.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:38):
Right when everything's confusing and scary
.
A simple, clear path presentedas the right path is incredibly
appealing psychologically.
It quiets the internal noise.
Lyra Morgan (11:49):
No, I know Desmet's term mass formation psychosis
was controversial.
Dr. Elias Quinn (11:53):
It was yeah.
Yeah, there was a lot of debateabout the specific label.
Lyra Morgan (11:55):
But Aponte focuses more on the underlying idea
right that large groups can fallunder the spell of a single
narrative when they'revulnerable, isolated and guided
by what seems like a moralauthority.
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:12):
Exactly.
Regardless of the label, thecore insight is powerful, and
Aponte points out how thepsychological mechanisms
involved look remarkably similarto those seen in cults.
Lyra Morgan (12:17):
Like what specifically?
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:18):
Well, think about it Social isolation,
constant fear-mongering, endlessrepetition of the same messages
, creating this sense of usversus them and framing the
group's beliefs as morallysuperior, righteous even.
Lyra Morgan (12:32):
All those elements were arguably present during the
pandemic.
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:35):
Undeniably Fear uncertainty, a clear enemy.
First the virus, then maybe theunvaccinated or the questioners
.
Aponte suggests you don't evenneed some mastermind pulling the
strings.
The conditions themselves canbe enough to trigger this kind
of collective psychologicalshift.
Lyra Morgan (12:49):
Which brings us to what you called Aponte's unique
contribution, this idea ofemotional obedience.
How is that different, again,from Milgram?
Dr. Elias Quinn (12:57):
It's a subtle but crucial difference.
Milgram was about obeying adirect external command from an
authority figure.
Do this?
Aponte argues the pandemic.
Obedience was driven more byinternal emotional pressures,
specifically moral pressure, theneed to be seen as good and the
fear of exclusion, the fear ofbeing cast out.
Lyra Morgan (13:18):
So people complied, not just because they feared
the virus, but because theyfeared being seen as well as bad
people, selfish people.
Dr. Elias Quinn (13:25):
Precisely, they feared the social consequences
being judged, condemned,ostracized by their community,
their friends, maybe even theirfamily.
That emotional weight wantingto belong, wanting to be seen as
virtuous, avoiding that socialstigma became this incredibly
powerful, almost invisiblemotivator.
Lyra Morgan (13:42):
It's less about the rule itself and more about the
social meaning attached tofollowing the rule.
Dr. Elias Quinn (13:47):
Exactly it becomes an internalized,
self-policing obedience drivenby emotion, not just external
orders.
Lyra Morgan (13:53):
And the consequences of that taking hold
.
What did Aponte see happening?
Dr. Elias Quinn (13:57):
Well, the consequences were pretty severe.
According to his analysis,questioning the narrative wasn't
just ignored, it was oftenactively punished.
Lyra Morgan (14:04):
We saw that, didn't we?
Social media censorship.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:06):
Absolutely Widespread censorship, sometimes
algorithmic, often targetingviews that question the dominant
line, even if they were basedon reasonable scientific debate
or personal experience.
Lyra Morgan (14:17):
And families breaking apart over it.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:19):
Yes, heartbreaking stories of
families fractured overdiffering beliefs, people losing
jobs, professional licenses Notfor actually harming anyone but
, as Appante puts it, forfailing to align emotionally
with the dominant message.
Lyra Morgan (14:33):
Failing to align emotionally.
That's chilling.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:36):
It is.
It suggests conformity wasn'tjust behavioral, it was
emotional, and Appante posesthis really haunting question
what if the real censorshipisn't silencing others, but
silencing yourself before youeven speak?
Lyra Morgan (14:50):
Ah, the self-censorship, the fear of
speaking up becomes so strongyou just don't.
You bite your tongue before thethought even fully forms.
Dr. Elias Quinn (14:56):
Exactly, it's an internal chilling effect.
Yeah, the individual becomestheir own censor, constantly
checking their thoughts againstthe perceived public mood,
purely out of fear of the socialconsequences.
It's a very subtle butincredibly effective form of
control.
Lyra Morgan (15:10):
So, thinking about all this, what did we actually
lose Beyond freedom of movement?
What were the deeper costsAponte identifies?
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:19):
He points to losses that go right to the
heart of a healthy society,things that might take a long
time to recover, if we everfully do.
Lyra Morgan (15:27):
Like what.
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:27):
He highlights three big ones intellectual
humility, curiosity and, maybemost damagingly, trust in one
another.
Lyra Morgan (15:34):
Intellectual humility, the ability to say I
don't know or I might be wrong.
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:38):
Exactly that seemed to just evaporate in the
face of this single, certainnarrative and curiosity, the
drive to ask questions, exploredifferent angles, look for
nuance.
That got shut down too.
It was often labeled asdangerous, irresponsible.
Lyra Morgan (15:53):
Yeah, you could feel that frame, couldn't you?
Dr. Elias Quinn (15:55):
Definitely.
Trust in neighbors, trust infellow citizens, trust in
institutions, the social fabric,the connections between us took
a real hit.
Suspicions seem to replacetrust in many areas.
Lyra Morgan (16:06):
What Aponte observes about how we started
seeing each other isparticularly disturbing.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:10):
It really is.
He argues that, through thelens of this fear-based
narrative, other people stoppedbeing just people.
They became potential threats.
Lyra Morgan (16:19):
Grandparents became risks, not sources of comfort.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:22):
Right.
Neighbors became potential rulebreakers, people to be reported
, children.
Children were reduced to beingseen primarily as vectors of
disease, not just kids needingconnection and play.
Lyra Morgan (16:33):
That redefinition is profound.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:35):
It is.
And Aponte insists it wasn'tthe virus itself that did this,
but the narrative around thevirus insists it wasn't the
virus itself that did this, butthe narrative around the virus.
That narrative encouragedsuspicion.
It encouraged seeing othersprimarily through the lens of
risk.
It created this deeppsychological distancing that
went way beyond six feet.
Lyra Morgan (16:52):
A fear of each other, basically.
Dr. Elias Quinn (16:54):
A deep-seated fear of each other became
normalized, undermining the verybasis of community.
Lyra Morgan (16:58):
And maybe the biggest loss, the one with the
longest shadow.
Aponte suggests it's this ideathat took hold, that obedience
was the highest virtue.
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:07):
Yeah, just pause on that for a second.
Obedience is the highest virtue.
Lyra Morgan (17:10):
It means just following orders, not
questioning, not thinkingcritically.
That was presented as caring,as empathy, as being responsible
.
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:18):
And the flip side, questioning, doubting,
even just wanting moreinformation that was framed as
harmful, as reckless, asselfishly putting others at risk
.
Lyra Morgan (17:29):
What does that do to a society when thinking
critically is seen as bad andjust going along is seen as good
?
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:35):
It's fundamentally dangerous, isn't
it?
It's almost an Orwellianreversal of values.
It encourages intellectualpassivity, discourages the very
skills a society needs to solvecomplex problems.
It changes the wholerelationship between individuals
and authority.
Dissent becomes almost immoral.
Lyra Morgan (17:52):
So, as things reopen, as we move forward,
what's the big question Aponteleaves us with?
Dr. Elias Quinn (17:58):
It's really this.
Did we actually learn anythingfundamental about how easily
obedience can be manufacturedwhen people are scared and under
pressure?
Lyra Morgan (18:05):
Or did we just hit pause?
Are we just waiting for thenext crisis for the same
dynamics to kick in all overagain?
Dr. Elias Quinn (18:10):
That's the unsettling question, isn't it?
What happens next time?
Lyra Morgan (18:13):
So what's his call to action?
How do we avoid just repeatingthe pattern?
Dr. Elias Quinn (18:17):
His message is pretty clear To reclaim our
minds, to protect our autonomy,we have to start actively
normalizing dissent, not justputting up with it, but seeing
it as essential for a healthysociety.
Lyra Morgan (18:29):
We need to embrace nuance right, Understand that
complex problems rarely havesimple answers.
Dr. Elias Quinn (18:35):
Exactly, and we need to rebuild our tolerance
for uncertainty.
Tolerance for uncertainty.
Life is uncertain.
Trying to eliminate all risk atany cost can lead us down these
very dangerous paths ofconformity that destroy the
freedoms we value.
Safety matters, of course, butbut freedom of thought, Aponte
argues, is absolutely essential.
It's not optional.
His Obedient Nation seriesisn't about blaming anyone for
(18:56):
obeying during a scary time.
It's about reminding us we canchoose differently.
Lyra Morgan (19:00):
Empowering us maybe .
Dr. Elias Quinn (19:06):
Yes, empowering us to pause, take a breath and
actually think for ourselves,especially when fear starts
shouting.
His final thought is simple butpowerful that the next time
fear knocks, we pause, webreathe and we think.
Lyra Morgan (19:15):
We pause, we breathe and we think, which
leaves us with that finallingering question if the
algorithm controls what we see,who controls what we believe?
We really want to extend oursincere thanks to Mr Michael
Aponte for letting us speakabout his work on thinking To
(19:39):
think and for allowing us toco-host this incredibly
important obedient nation series.
It's been profound.
If you found this deep dive asthought-provoking as we did,
please do like, share, commentand subscribe to thinking to
think wherever you get your deepdive and definitely stay tuned.
There are more episodes comingin this vital series and you
won't want to miss them.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.