Last spring, my friends and family pored over the lives of British royalty for months leading up to their ultimate event of 2018: the wedding. They followed the royals on TV and social media, endlessly chattering with an exuberance and enthusiasm on their faces that I had not seen in years. At that time, it came to me that the phenomenon that I termed as obsession was not obsession—rather it was idolatry, worship.

I did not actually believe that Harry and Meghan were being famed and explored as the people they are. No, the world was falling in love with the idea of this couple, instead, and it turns out that the ideas and lives that society chooses to examine are revealing.

Socrates was first attributed with the idea that the “unexamined life is not worth living.” He spoke the line in legal self-defense at his trial for impiety and corruption before he was found guilty and ultimately made to poison himself. Consequently, I am curious to discover a pattern in which lives are worth examining and which are not.

We parted ways with the United Kingdom centuries ago, yet American TV viewership of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry was in the tens of millions. On the surface level, it is easier to believe that the reason is that everyone likes weddings and that everyone likes to stay updated on current events. However, there is a catch, a nuance.

This specific wedding last year resulted in what psychologists call “parasocial behavior,” an occurrence rapidly growing in frequency in the 21st century. Parasocial behavior is commonly observed in spectators of a sporting event. There is that gut feeling that your chants or superstitions will affect the game, no matter how preposterous they are. Likewise, TVs create an illusion that the characters on the screen are real, not virtual, and that they are somewhat involving the viewer in a reciprocal relationship.

Of course, this idea sounds far-fetched, but the phenomenon happens in the subconscious most often. As the dissemination of information becomes more inevitable with the Internet, social media platforms, too, have become revolutionary methods of tapping into parasocial human behavior.

Take YouTube, for example. It differs from television, cinema, and live theatre, which are naturally passive mediums, meant for us to sit back and observe. In 2005, this website broke the fourth wall, generating a new form of entertainment.

Even if we are content to just observe without commenting or liking, we have the expectation that we are connecting with the person on screen. Content producers and early adapters spoke directly to the camera about their real-life issues. Even those with “shows” on YouTube Red today address the audience directly. Pranksters let viewers in on the joke; un-boxers involve viewers in the experience, and so on. The case is similar for other new Internet professions, such as Instagram influencers.

A second look at Socrates’ original Greek reveals that his quote can be read in a more modest way: “The unexamined life is not to be lived.” In other words, an unexamined life is a life where one misses out, has a gap that a satisfying life would fill. So my next question is: for what reasons to we examine others’ lives, and what is the gap that an examined life fills?

Socrates initially intended for his students to examine themselves before others, and rightfully so. Any judgment or interaction with the world at large is prone to an incomplete assessment.

The examined life, for me, consists of four principles, four principles that determine my role models and aspirations: honor, dignity, quality, and growth. Even though Instagram and the royal wedding appeals to underlying sentiments of fantastic upward mobility, time will prove these sentiments to be hollow at best. If Socrates’ intention with his quote was to promote a fuller life, then begin with self-examination. Then, once your principles are well-defined, your ideal role model will hopefully become clearer.

As a philosopher taught by the best rhetorician of his time, Marcus Aurelius’ ascent to becoming the Emperor of Rome in 161 C.E. was unexpected, but he took on the responsibility with dignity anyway. In his journal entries, I was surprised that he once wrote, “Stop monkeying around!” Later on, he continues to urge that complaining about what we do not have or how things have worked out is folly. He places the development of character over any material good and claims that, when it is, self-respect will ensue.

Viewership of the British wedding was higher in the United States than it was in the United Kingdom. James Truslow Adams, the writer of The Epic of America, described our country as a place land in which “life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement.” A principle-centered life is not a dream of castles merely, but a dream of social order wherein every person can attain the “fullest stature of which they are innately capable and are recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.”

Just because there is a feeling of intimacy between the viewer and the royal family, the illusion does not change. I believe that the media will continue to lure us into viewership through subconscious childhood desires, making us believe in the possibility of a life that we cannot have. You have been warned.