Coercion: One way we direct other people toward a specific spiritual pathway is with coercion. There is a long and often tragic history of many religious institutions making use of this strategy. We force the other person to do what we want them to do. Alternatively, we provide compelling rewards (or punishments) which help to determine their course of action. In other words, we are providing the cheese at the end of the maze or are providing the shock that encourages our colleague to leap to the other side of their cage.

This first form of influence is closely aligned with traditional models of behavioral psychology—and is fully secular in nature and perspective. It is also purely an “outside job.” The person we are trying to influence acts solely on the basis of forces from the external environment. Many neuroscientists would suggest that the person being influenced is steered internally from their limbic system (and even more specifically their amygdala) which operates on a very primitive, emotional level with regard to the external environment. As biological actors we ask: am I being exposed to something in the environment that is good or bad (about my personal welfare)? Is it something that is active or is it passive? Is it strong or weak? These are the questions we have all had to ask whether trying to survive on the African savanna or on the streets of New York.

Identification: The second way in which we are influenced also involves the external environment. Like coercion, it is secular—and psychological—in nature and perspective. This mode of influence involves much subtler dynamics and is often associated with imitation and behavioral modeling—derived from the later behavioral theory and research of Albert Bandura and his “social learning” colleagues (Bandura, 1976).  In essence, we observe someone else engaging in some behavior and watch what happens to them.  Is their behavior effective in getting results? Are they rewarded or punished for their behavior? What makes their behavior appropriate or inappropriate given the environment in which this observed person is being observed?

If the person or cluster of people being observed is in some manner admired (as leaders, celebrities, sports heroes…) or if we somehow can relate to them because they resemble us in some more or less important ways, then we are more likely to emulate their behavior. We are likely to do, or at least try to do, what the person or group being observed has been doing. The classic example of this identification process is the very controversial argument that children watching violence on TV are likely to act in a more violent manner themselves.

The process of identification can also influence decision-making processes –especially regarding the purchase of items that are endorsed or used by the admired person. At a spiritual level, we find likewise that the actions we take that are aligned with our vision and values will be observed by other people. These observers will often try to emulate our actions. While they might not be acting out of their own spiritually based vision and values, they are following our direction. Eventually, the actions might become spiritually internalized—the third source of influence to which we now turn.