the evolving mind

Most of us, in ways that we are not entirely aware of, automatically associate leadership ability with imposing physical stature.
- Malcolm Gladwell (1)

What is a god but a leader of people: a judge, a master, a lord, a father. We put leaders on pedestals, probably because this reflects both how we feel about them and how we want others to feel about them. Leaders may put themselves on pedestals, real or symbolic, as a way to increase their “size” and hence position/status.

Numerous studies have shown that, all other things equal (as possible) tall people get more respect and jobs and better access to resources than their shorter counterparts. Malcolm Gladwell, in his book, Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, reported “In the U.S. population, about 14.5 percent of all men are six feet or taller. Among CEOs of Fortunate 500 companies, that number is 58 percent. Even more striking, in the general American population, 3.9 percent of adult men are six foot two or taller. Among my CEO sample, almost a third were six foot two or taller.” (2)

Platform shoes, anyone? And why does the phrase go, “big man on campus” rather than “handsome man on campus” or any number of other human attributes?

The taller person tends to land a job or win an election over the shorter. Why? Though it may not make sense to our contemporary minds, you’ve got to understand the human being’s “older inclinations,” if you will.

Let’s take a look at size. A father is typically the largest member of a family. Children generally look up to their fathers. Again, both literally and figuratively. Perhaps the origin of the equation between size and domination began here. Children of all species learn they cannot easily move their more physically imposing parent. They are lesser, and in many cases, dependent upon, their larger parents.

In the primate world, male chimpanzees frequently and vigorously battle over status. “Most of the time the males engage in so-called bluff or intimidation displays, in which they look larger than life through body inflation and pilo-erection, while charging closely past their rivals, hurling objects in all directions….When relations are stable, dominance differences among males are communicated by means of bowing movements and a particular grunt vocalization by the subordinate, while the dominant draws himself to a greater height, thus accentuating the giant/dwarf relation (whereas in reality, the two males may be the same size).” (3)

Throughout the animal kingdom, individuals attempting to dominate others will do their best to appear larger: they stand taller, they bristle their hair, they may even have specialized body parts, such as lizards and their folds of skin used to make them look bigger. In chimpanzees, intense threats, efforts at domination, are “almost always accompanied by hair erection.” (4) That’s right, hair erection. Dogs do this, too. Do human beings care about hair height?

My mind quickly recalls the traditional custom of taking off one’s hat when meeting someone new. As with the handshake, the implied message is, “I approach you humbly, with no intention of attempting to dominate.” Likewise, many churches implicitly or even explicitly prohibit the wearing of hats. Hats make you taller. Could this be perceived as disrespectful to the alpha god? How dare you put on airs of greater size/power/status? The Jewish use of the yarmulkes is very relevant to this line of thought. Consider this explanation of its use:

The Hebrew term for it is Kippah. Jews cover their heads during prayer, eating and studying as a sign of respect toward God, who is above you. http://www.joi.org/qa/yarmulkas.shtml

Don’t disrespect your god, and his position as the unquestioned biggest, by having tall hair. Instead, submit to the alpha, and the way to show your submission is . . . what? Movement in the opposite direction of the threat display: down. Get down!

“Submissive behavior is in the first place behavior that placates more dominant individuals. It should therefore have characteristics opposite to those of aggressive, dominant, or angry behavior, and it does. Expressions of submission in animals are clear demonstrations of lesser power, smaller size, and less readiness for action….In humans, submissiveness is manifest in glance aversion, general unobtrusive behavior, and conventional bowing.” (4)

Does the deity of the Bible have size? Consider these verses:

In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind. (Job 12:10)

Just as the song goes, “he’s got the whole world in his hand.”

Both high and low among men find refuge in the shadow of your wings. (Psalms 36:7)

Parent birds frequently tuck their children under their wings for protection.

[O]ur God is greater than all other gods. But who is able to build a temple for him, since the heavens, even the highest heavens, cannot contain him? (2 Chronicles 2:5-6)

The Bible god is humongous. Bigger than all things we know. So, yes, the deity at the pinnacle of the Abrahamic tree of supernatural agents has impressive size. But once again, size is relative. To be greatest he merely needs to be greater than all the competition, both human and mythological, as these verses illustrate:

[B]lessed be God Most High (Genesis 14:20)

I will be glad and rejoice in you;I will sing praise to your name, O Most High. (Psalms 9:2)

We must remember that the underlying issue is that of dominance, of status. And these, too, are relative perceptions.

The alien who lives among you will rise above you higher and higher, but you will sink lower and lower. [A punishment orchestrated by their god] (Deuteronomy 29:43)

When they had brought these kings to Joshua, he summoned all the men of Israel and said to the army commanders who had come with him, “Come here and put your feet on the necks of these kings.” So they came forward and placed their feet on their necks. (Joshua 10:22-26)

All kings will bow down to him. (Psalms 72:11)

The desert tribes will bow before him and his enemies will lick the dust. (Psalms 72:9)

The above/below dynamic is a cultural universal. Furthermore, primates of all types understand the meaning of greater and lesser size/body positioning. It’s all about group positioning, hierarchy, status.

Through the centuries, the concept of “God” has become more vague. While the fact that no one can see him may be construed as a drawback, his invisibility actually expands his potential size. The guy is so immense, he’s everywhere.

Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty?  (Job 11:7)

In human life, particularly for the ancients, there were mysteries around every corner. Knowledge and mystery tend to be inversely related. The greater the amount of knowledge, the lesser the mystery, and correspondingly, the smaller the boundary of a deity’s size and power. In technologically advanced cultures, god has had his reach shortened in many directions: healthcare, weather, crop yield, etc.

This size theme is found in other religions as well. In the Bhagavad Gita, for example, you will find verses such as this:

O unbounded power, You are the master of limitless might! You are all-pervading, and thus You are everything! (6)

Why would a person want to worship a puny, little god with pathetically small biceps of supernatural power? Your average person wouldn’t. Neither would your average primate if he/she had the ability to envision the work of an invisible troop leader.

—

(1) Gladwell, M. Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, Little, Brown, & Co., New York, 2005, p.88
(2) Gladwell, M., 2005, p. 87
(3) de Waal, F., “The Relation between Power and Sex in the Simians: Soci-Sexual Appeasement Gestures,” in Gender Rhetoric: Postures of Dominance and Submission in History, Trexler, R. C. (ed.), Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies, Binghamton, NY, 1994, p. 19
(4) Goodall, J. The Chimpanzees of the Gombe: Patterns of Behavior, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1986, p. 315
(5) Frijda, N., The Emotions, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1986, p27
(6) Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta, Bhagavad Gita As It Is, Collier Books, NY, 1972, 11:40

Technorati Links: dominance, evolution

Trackback URI | Comments RSS