Who can say somebody is good or bad? In what sense? What "good" really means?
There are more than one answer to these questions. The definition of this word constantly changes according to the environment where the situation is set.
In the example of Savater, the Nazi officer that killed the Jewish in Awshuitz was a very good officer from his superior´s point of view but not so much from the point of view of the families of those Jews that were killed.
Many people may say that this officer was just following orders and that it was not his fault (otherwise he may have been killed as well) but I think that this kind of thinking is an easy way out.
It is easier to blame somebody else, "wash your hands" and put the responsibility on others but we are no children. As adults, we have the ability to choose, despite what anyone can order us to do.
That is why, my motto is: "think twice, no regrets later". In the above example, the 1st thinking process may have involved only but to follow the superior´s instructions. But, if there were any 2nd thinking process, it would have probably involved the officer´s reflection on what he is really doing; that is to say, killing innocent people. If those 2nd thoughts existed, the outcome would be probably different.
Before we perform an action is important to think twice. The 1st thoughts are always made out of impulse but the 2nd ones involve reflecting and analysing which is the best way to perform a specific action. After finishing those two thinking processes, the choosing part is easier: you know that you are deciding consciously and carefully, taken into account what your mind and your heart tell you to do, so, in that way, there cannot be any regrets later on.
Chapter 3, Etica para Amador - Savater
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
2 comentarios:
I really like your motto, Romina! That is, provided you don't mean our choices will always make us happy: sometimes, we need to choose "the lesser evil". The Nazi officer might have been saving his children's lives, who knows... I'd say we can never assume the rightness (or wrong... ness???) of an action carried out by somebody else... Actually, our own actions are usually partly right and partly wrong!
Now, how do you make a choice when reason and feelings suggest divergent paths... Which one do you prioritise?
Love,
Gladys
Gladys, what a difficult question!
Well, I think that if reason and feelings suggest divergent paths, we should choose the path that entails "the lesser evil", as you said. You know that I´m pro-reasoning (haha) but sometimes fellings get so involved in our decision making that it becomes taugher what path to take.
I think that choosing wisely covers taking into account reason and fellings and then create a new path, that joins both things.
Publicar un comentario