Just last night, I engaged in an interesting conversation with a friend who expressed a desire to drive four to five hours to Miami to watch Messi play. This isn’t a casual commitment—it involves a decent commute, possibly spending a night due to the potential exhaustion of a day trip, and procuring tickets for a local game that Messi is playing with a Miami soccer club. And it’s no easy feat given the high prices in the open market, especially since the regular tickets are already sold out.

This led me to ponder why people are willing to spend so much money to watch Messi play. This phenomenon is not exclusive to Messi or soccer; it pervades across various sports and even beyond. We shell out tons of money to watch our favorite actors perform in movies, or to hear our beloved singers live. We often obsess over celebrities, willing to pay whatever they demand or the market dictates.

From the perspective of teams and the entertainment industry, they naturally seek profit. Their best strategy to monetize their product is to personify it—to put a human face on the game. We as human beings connect more readily with personalities and celebrities because they’re human too, but they possess extraordinary talents that we adore. We often go to great lengths not only to watch these celebrities but also to mimic their actions and even immerse ourselves in the minute details of their lives.

What I propose, however, is a shift of focus. Instead of obsessing over the personalities in a game, why not appreciate the game itself? If you’re a fan of soccer, wouldn’t it be wonderful to genuinely enjoy a match regardless of who is playing? Instead of being fixated on Messi, we should develop a fascination with the sport itself.

This concept extends to other fields as well. In the film industry, instead of being blindly addicted to specific actors or actresses, we should fall in love with cinema itself. We should appreciate films for their narratives and genres, rather than worshipping the celebrities who portray the roles. Similarly, in music, we should appreciate the genre and the artistry, not just the performer.

The point is not to deny the merits of individuals who excel in their fields. Indeed, they have special talents that merit admiration. But they are not flawless; often, they lack skills or abilities in other areas of life. No longer do we see polymaths who excel in multiple domains of life—like a physician who is also an astronomer and a philosopher. Instead, we can draw inspiration from a range of individuals, each excelling in their own domain.

So, let’s start appreciating broader categories. When an intellectual presents a groundbreaking idea, let’s focus more on the idea itself rather than the individual. We don’t have to idolize Adam Smith; we can appreciate his ideas about capitalism and the invisible hand. The same goes for Einstein; it’s his theory of relativity that fascinates us, not necessarily Einstein himself. Yes, we can learn about him, appreciate his efforts, but it’s the concepts he propagated that will live on.

In short, while we should appreciate the individuals presenting these ideas, we should value the ideas themselves more. This way, we fall in love with the substance—the core of the idea—rather than the messenger.

Likewise, we should esteem sports or movies more than the performers, athletes, or actors who present them. If we shift our focus in this way, we transition from an individual-centric perspective to a broader one. This shift can influence our day-to-day life as well, where instead of focusing on individuals, we focus on concepts. We discuss solutions to problems rather than personalities. Our dialogues become about idea generation, implementation, and strategic thinking to improve life. The higher we ascend from the individual level, the more effective we become.

Politics provides another example. Aristotle claimed that the noblest profession one could pursue is politics while engaging in philosophy. We can greatly appreciate and admire politics without idolizing politicians as our role models. Politicians are merely tools, elected to propagate the agendas determined by consensus.

Instead of being fixated on billionaires, we can appreciate the mechanisms they used to amass their wealth, the systems they leveraged to attain their status. For instance, I appreciate Bill Gates for his philanthropy and his ideas, but I value the mechanisms that made him a billionaire more than his personal traits. I’m not interested in his personal life, but rather what he created, like Microsoft. Similarly, Steve Jobs created Apple. The companies themselves hold more value than the individuals; the CEOs may change, but what they created lives on.

This same concept applies to our educators. What we learn is more important than who we learn it from. The respect for teachers is undeniable, but the knowledge we gain from them is paramount. The value of education supersedes the prestige of the institution from where we attain it. Despite market dynamics favoring degrees from certain institutions, the essence of education remains more critical than the educator.

In conclusion, while we should acknowledge and respect individuals, we must shift our attention to the results, concepts, and ideas they generate. The message is more important than the messenger. The results matter more than the conveyor of those results. What we learn is more important than the medium through which that knowledge is dispensed. By broadening our horizons and extending our perspective, we make our lives more fruitful. We become less entangled in the constraints and limitations of individual personalities, focusing instead on the fruits of their creations while still respecting the originators.