Challenging established controls always has a danger, because the moment you challenge control, you challenge the security of other. If you move out of the realm of another’s perceptual acceptance, and if you live outside the realm of another’s perceptual acceptance, you immediately by your existence, force others to question what they perceive. When you do this, it leaves those in control totally defenseless and they will react in order to defend the security that they know.
The last thing you want to do when you are being chased across the field with the lion behind you, is to sit down philosophically and say “Gee, am I going the right way?” Because you don’t want the lion to get you. So the group is threatened by someone that says “Hey! Stop, let’s think about this. There a lot of us and only one of him, and let’s all put our horns down and chase him away.” By challenging what’s always been done, this individual has taken the instinctual survival mechanism of the group and called it into question, and that makes the group totally naked and defenseless. And in any secure social operation, the controlling group will always strike down that which endangers it.
Which is the greater danger to a society, the lion or the individual that has questioned and changed? Which is the greater danger to the group? If you are the individual that has questioned, what is the danger to your individual acceptance and to your being a part of that society? The person who sees the world through different eyes and socially behaves from that alternative world, will ultimately pay the Socratean price: being socially ridiculed and removed to the most extreme examples of being killed. In a journey of God, when one questions established social norms, the controlling group will rule that this individual does not believe in the Gods and does not honor them, and therefore he must be removed from the operation of the group. Otherwise, the group believes they are vulnerable to unseen dangers that can destroy them.