The Agentic Shift in Glass Onion: How Groupthink and Power Dress Up in Linen

It’s not every day you get a murder mystery that doubles as a case study in social compliance, but Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery manages to do just that—offering a Negroni alongside a front-row seat to an absurd billionaire’s private island. Beneath the glamorous satire and head-spinning puzzle, the film quietly asks a disconcerting question: Why do intelligent people sometimes follow obviously bad orders?

A Quick Dive into the Movie

Glass Onion (2022), directed by Rian Johnson, brings back the charming Detective Benoit Blanc, who unravels a murder on the Greek island of tech mogul Miles Bron. While its surface appeal lies in the twisty whodunit, the movie also spotlights the social dynamics of power and complicity. Most strikingly, it highlights what psychologist Stanley Milgram termed the “agentic shift”—the psychological state in which we stop following our own moral compass and begin to act as instruments of an authority figure. Think of it as loyalty morphing into self-absolution: “I was just doing what I was told.”

The Agentic Shift in Action

From Milgram’s controversial obedience experiments of the 1960s, we know that when an authority seems “legitimate” and the stakes are high, people tend to relinquish moral responsibility. They no longer feel like the author of their actions but rather the “agent” carrying out someone else’s will.

In Glass Onion, Miles’s circle—dubbed the “Disruptors”—serve as a perfect example. Claire, Duke, Lionel, and Birdie each benefit from Miles’s wealth and influence. Even when it becomes clear he’s not as brilliant as he seems, they continue to endorse his agenda, conceal his mistakes, and rationalize outright deception. Their self-talk likely goes, “Well, he’s the visionary. I’m just here to help.”

As a psychiatrist, I often see how this phenomenon can be a coping mechanism in oppressive environments. Under dictatorships or extreme power imbalances, individuals may “go along” simply to survive—a forced agentic shift that doesn’t necessarily reflect their true ethics but helps them avoid punishment. However, the moral landscape becomes much more complex when people do have a choice and willingly abandon their personal responsibility for the sake of status, security, or financial gain.

The Social and Neurological Glue

What the movie underscores—through comedic jabs and elaborate con artistry—is how easily hierarchical settings and personal gain can override moral judgment. Neuroscientifically, social belonging lights up our reward pathways (boosting dopamine), while challenging the group or authority figure triggers discomfort in brain regions associated with pain or threat.

• In harmless everyday life, this dynamic might look like nodding along with a boss you disagree with—just to keep the peace.
  

• In a political dictatorship, the stakes are exponentially higher, so “following orders” becomes a survival tactic.
  

Glass Onion amplifies these everyday tensions: the Disruptors aren’t just misguided; they’re complicit. They’re part of a co-dependent ecosystem wherein Miles’s favor offers them career leverage and social prestige—and, in turn, they avoid confronting or exposing his fraudulence.

Visit HealoVerse to explore the AI-powered VR Psychotherapy in combination with at-home ketamine

When the Mask Slips

A pivotal turning point arrives when Helen (disguised as her twin sister Andi) shows up with no stake in the game other than seeking justice. She’s the fresh perspective who refuses to be sucked into Miles’s orbit of flattery, money, and power. Her presence shakes the group out of their agentic haze—reminding them (and us) that each person ultimately holds the key to their own moral agency.

On a societal scale, this parallels how dictatorial regimes sometimes collapse when enough individuals—often led by a courageous outsider—choose to reassert personal responsibility, despite real dangers. That shift from agentic follower back to a moral agent can spark collective awakening.

Ethical Reflections: Choice vs. Coercion

1. Dictatorships and Coercive Environments
   When people have no real choice—facing extreme violence, surveillance, or persecution—the agentic shift can be a form of psychological self-preservation. Survival instincts may overpower moral considerations in these life-or-death contexts.
   

2. Situations with Genuine Freedom
   In more open societies or corporate settings, continuing to follow a “Miles Bron” typically reflects a willingness to outsource morality for personal gain (fame, money, or comfort). Ethically, this is harder to justify because individuals do have the agency to dissent, resign, or blow the whistle.
   

The Danger of Moral Erosion
As we see in Glass Onion—and in real-world authoritarian regimes or even corporate scandals—the slippery slope from small ethical compromises to large-scale wrongdoing is steep. The agentic shift, if left unchecked, can erode entire social structures, from families to governments.

Conclusion

Glass Onion functions as more than a sleek murder mystery; it’s a parable about how easily we let the promise of safety, success, or sheer convenience lull us into moral slumber. The film’s theatrical flair underscores a sober truth: the human mind is startlingly quick to delegate ethical decisions to “higher authorities,” be they charismatic billionaires or actual dictators. Recognizing this inclination is the first step toward safeguarding our autonomy. Whether we’re deciding to stand up to a misguided boss or a tyrannical head of state, the greatest antidote to the agentic shift is the reaffirmation of our personal responsibility—and the courage to use it.