It is no surprise that the world is fragmented into disparate perceptions and conceptions that, while not erroneous per se, lack a certain degree of authenticity. We all divulge aspects of ourselves to different people we encounter, and those fragments shape their perception of us. Sometimes the apparent facet is agreeable, and other times it is not, thereby shaping opinions and judgments across the wide array of individuals we come across.

Now the question arises: do we manipulate this plethora of opinionated perceptions, or do we allow the nature of social intercourse to take its course? The answer is far from simple, as it hinges on our perception of this phenomenon. Some may contend that the organic evolution of human perception is natural and should remain unimpeded, while others argue that our presentation to our peers is the primary architect of these perceptions. Consequently, opinions are not merely controllable but are often induced or incepted.

However, what transpires when there is a significant asymmetry between the actual facts and a person’s perceived attributes? When an individual is erroneously ascribed a negative quality that they scarcely embody, yet opinionated observers brand them as the epitome of that quality, it creates a dissonance in our social fabric. For fear of being labeled with undesirable attributes, people may endeavor to project a facade. This phenomenon has precipitated a scenario where individuals feign qualities that are socially and culturally palatable, regardless of their true beliefs, thus abdicating originality. Instead of acknowledging that humans possess attributes not always within the moral or acceptable precincts of human nature, we strive to espouse only those traits that garner approval. Such positive feedback mechanisms have engendered pernicious behaviors like sycophancy, duplicity, and superficial flattery in our quotidian social interactions to the extent that these behaviors have become normalized.