marți, 16 decembrie 2014

Powerful massacres and weak mourners


The emotional and moral sanctions cannot be duly replies to massacres. Our anger and moral condemnation against an evil or bad thing are always conditioned by the existence of some individuals who could be affected by our reaction.

Though there are authors of massacres, they lose their human individuality by committing a mass murder. The mass of the victims with unknown identity makes the murderer to rise above the common level of personal relations with other people. He does not become more powerful as an individual after the massacre, but he gets the power of those great forces which are deemed to modify the life of human communities: God, nature, fate, or the state.

Surely, this huge power has made quite attractive the massacres in the human history, in spite of the large emotional and moral sanctions against them. Nonetheless, this kind of reactions has encouraged the proliferation of using the massacres as sources of individual or political power, because all of them are weak replies. The individual life with all its emotions and moral feelings cannot stand against the great forces which decide the life of the human communities and among which the mass murderer places himself.

A great power cannot be defeated otherwise than by using a similar great power with the cost of using similar insensitive and immoral means.

luni, 15 decembrie 2014

Terrorism in prosperous and democratic societies

The prosperous and democratic countries owe their existence to a high participation of their citizens to the goals of prosperity and democracy.

The propaganda of politicians for the two values is not the main reason for their popularity. The citizens themselves speak to each other about them. They do not do it in serious discussions about the advantage of following prosperity and democracy, but by discussing about their results. The goods which symbolize the prosperity are the main topics of discussion together with the successful people who possess them.

 The results of democracy become the categories of people which seem worthy being heard by authorities: different sexual, ethnic, or religious minorities. They are also the main topics of public debates.

However, the individual choices which strengthen the personality of a human being are about paths to follow, not about some already achieved results. The beginning is closer to an individual person than the end which finally makes all the people to be the same thing as dead human beings.

The spontaneous advocates of prosperous and democratic societies fail to see the individual persons in that way. They are considered only starters in the fight for getting the results provided by the society.

Differently, some religions see the man as a permanent beginner in this world, if they preach about a future one where the humanity will achieve its goals. Though the religions talk through different preachers, they claim to transmit the words of a god who does not bother the individual persons like the many voices advocates of the prosperous society. If it is a religion like Islam which praises the martyrdom of a man who chose to leave the world altogether, not only the benefits of a civilized society, the believer sees the value of living by himself, and not in a certain category. The martyr is not even a member of the category of martyrs, since all of them are together only after their death.

Nonetheless, the religious option for building an individual personality is an easy way to grow the power of your person, because the recipe is already given by those religions and not your own work.

In spite of this limited form of proving the individuality, the prosperous and democratic societies do not know to give solutions for other free ways of manifesting the personal identity of its citizens. They are happy to hide the problem of individuality by condemning the religious phenomena which expose it in the most salient way and often in the most brutal forms.

duminică, 7 decembrie 2014

Racist morality against racism

The racist sees the evil embodied into a mass of people who bear the evil deeply in their flesh, since the race is exhibited by their bodily aspect.

It is an overwhelming view of evil: the racist did not see evil individuals, but crowds and the evil is not attributed to words and facts, but to the more hard reality of the flesh. Differently, in the daily experience, we manage to deal with evil or bad realities because they are embodied by the particular individuals and such realities consist in words and facts. The evil cannot overwhelm us, since we can oppose to it many other individuals, words, and facts contrary to it.

To be sure, the racist who imagines the evil in such an overwhelming way will naturally try to annihilate it. He could not just ignore the evil as we all naturally do with the daily evils (for instance, the news about some atrocities occurred in a corner of the world rarely persist in our minds).

Thus, the racist commits the error of judging the morality in extreme terms which he cannot meet otherwise in his daily experience of life.

The fight with the racism often assumes the distorted moral view held by the racist. It takes again the high and abnormal scale of morality. The goodness cannot be the privilege of the people who condemn the racism like the evil was thought to be the mark of a race. Also, the goodness cannot be attributed to the spirit of peace or brotherhood, which resembles the racist belief in an evil present in flesh. The goodness is present only in individuals, facts, and words.

It seems more correct to fight with racism by renouncing to judge the public affairs in extremist moral terms. As regards the masses of people, there is no moral, it is only law.

vineri, 5 decembrie 2014


The dependency caused by a drug or other material habit (eating, drinking coffee, living in a room or a house, listening music, and so on) does not only drag a large part of an individual to it. It also gives to his life a kind of an unquestionable coherence.

In the case of a spiritual cause of the coherence of someone’s life, he is responsible to give answers for his decisions to be most of the time in a way or another: ‘I chose to be a scholar, a rich man, a poor man, a sportsman, a politician, because of…’ And the statements we use after ‘because of’ are both explanations of our decisions and reasons for living further in the same manner. Finally, we do not know if we lived in a particular way because of our decisions or because of the manner we were explaining them after we made them.

Meanwhile, the dependency on a drug or a material habit, though it may provide a despicable coherence of life, it has the privilege of not lying the dependent persons. They are not forced to explain their constant dependency and thus to force explanations according to which they will live further. The drugs and material habits are solely responsible for the dependency, the persons only for the original choice for them. The relative easy renouncement to personal ambitions for such dependencies is a consequence of the attractiveness of living without any obligation to answer to the questions about our way of life.

marți, 18 noiembrie 2014

Serious people playing

In the childhood, we have many questions and only a few answers. Though, the child itself is not the subject matter of any questions. It is a child and everybody accepts its poor knowledge in spite of its inability to give answers.

The grown up persons who seem to be fulfilled in the social order are recognized through a similar lack of questions about them. They are clearly workers, teachers, politicians, and so on. We may ask them about what they do, but not about who they are.

The idea that they have answers to the essential questions about their life is false. Their fulfillment is not due to a perfect knowledge of life. They simply cannot put under question their social status they have assumed, but that status is a way to stand apart from the tumultuous and changeable course of life which gives birth to questions and doubts.

Therefore, an immature kind of life can also be attributed to those serious people who believe that they reached the maturity of their life in the social order. The playful habits, of serious people (the modern technology highly increased their number) are not strange. They release that immaturity and keep the people from the awareness of the doubtful nature of life.