Where does anger lead and where does forgiveness lead

10 Sep

One can consider the first idea of ​​Western political wrath, from the 8th century BC, Homer’s Iliad the one that raises the first voice about wrath, already in the first sentence: “sing, O muse (Muse) the wrath (mènin) of Achilles”.

It seems that this is the current voice of the West from Zizek to Sloterdijk everyone seems to agree with this, except Edgar Morin and of course some pacifists, but who are embarrassed in the face of such contempt by conservative leaders.

But there are very few chronicles that speak of the success of these leaders, and it seems that the pandemic has helped them, fearing the idea of ​​a strong government that takes care of the weak is stronger than the voice of insurrection and liquidity.

The idea of ​​forgiveness is ironic and revenge and anger seem to be the potential for change, but the feeling of compassion and forgiveness is inherent in human ethics, however confused it may be with the ethics of the state, which often dispense with morals, it is the only hope that the cholera situation can be reversed, of course with regret from the oppressors, but the current discourse is that this is impossible and that people would never change, and with the pandemic!

It is clear that forgiveness without repentance and without reparation is not acceptable, and it is not true that it is enough to confess and show repentance that you are “saved”, there are social effects and punishments that can lead the oppressor to his reparation, even though this may be very less than the damage done, but there is no way to change the route, the course, without forgiveness.

What we need to understand is that offenses when they spring up around a polarization they can rarely favor those who dont have a defense, social, political or ideological, and this favors the strong, fear punishes the weak and never the cruel, accustomed to doing with him a game of risk and sadistic pleasure.

Edgar Morin clarifies that: “Understanding neither excuses nor accuses, asks that we avoid the peremptory condemnation, irremediable as if we ourselves had never known the weakness or made mistakes. If we know how to understand before condemning, we will be on the path of humanizing human relations ”, and it is the other way around at the moment, which favors authoritarian leaders and those who want hate to grow.

To be in solidarity with the Other, who is not our mirror, we have to “become aware of the uncertainty of the future and of its common destiny”, the pandemic can also make us aware that we must take care of the Other.

Forgiveness does not change events, but it can change the feeling towards them, it does not change the course of history, but the destiny of personal and / or collective stories when the problem is faced head on, overcoming anger and resentment.

If we are honest in the mirror, if we are capable of self-criticism, as we posted earlier, as stated by Popper: “Self-criticism is the best criticism”, it is from her that a criticism with positive consequences can be born.




Comentários estão fechados.