We rarely admit the error and when we do, it usually hurts. The act of recognizing one’s faults is closely connected with a mirror that reflects an image we rarely want to see. It is naturally understandable that the human being, in the majority of the times, will be overestimated, even when this appears camouflaged in the form of self pity – it is, yes, one of several ways to be exempt of certain responsibilities and to avoid actions that move the individual of your comfort zone and drive it to change.
Therefore, the fault is rarely in us. A small example about this, and that usually happens with almost everyone: in the face of delay to a compromise, the magical and universal justification takes the form of “the traffic was terrible”, among many other endless excuses that will be given in order to subject to exemption from further liability. After all, if we have whom or what to blame, why recognize?
When we stratify recognition, we can say that the current configuration of society exempts us from any and all responsibility (DALRYMPLE, 2014). Taking advantage of certain political ideologies that place the individual in a minimum category of human being. Here we start from the Aristotelian assumption that positions the individual as constituting three essential characteristics of life, being the vegetative life – nourishment, growth and reproduction – the sensible life – basically contained in the emotions, “the automatic stimulus-response circuit” – and by end, the intellectual life – solely belonging to man (STORK, ECHEVARRÍA, 2005). From this perspective, man is able to choose intellectually his own ends, with reactions not based merely on sentimentality, being able to discern rationally the best for himself.
A more accurate perception of the social and political context in which we are inserted makes it possible to conclude that man has been treated as if his full capacity resides only on the sensitive level, for example public policies are the fruit of a shallow conception of the human being . Society has also embraced this descending mode of seeing and perceiving the other. No fault belongs to anyone: the other things are guilty. Unfortunately, the persistent moral chaos is the result of the outsourcing of ethical responsibility. Excluding duty, everything is allowed, there are no more parameters for right and wrong, now it’s all a matter of “point of view.”
In a society where ethical principles have been renounced, it is possible to note the weakening of values and moral precepts of the individual, thus making it a simple tool of ideologies that will never aim to make it transcendent, capable of rationally deciding the circumstances of the very existence.
Recognition is one of the most important steps in the execution of ethical actions. In it, it takes the painful and constructive process of looking inward from a realistic perspective, leaving aside fanciful propositions about oneself. It is the recognition that can provoke the transformation of attitudes and in this process the force develops to become an active being, ethically responsible and minimally conformed to the common ideals.
STORK, Ricardo Yepes; ECHEVARRÍA, Javier A. Fundamentos de antropologia: Um ideal de excelência humana. São Paulo: Instituto Brasileiro de Filosofia e Ciência “Raimundo Lúlio” (Ramon Llull), 2005.
DALRYMPLE, Theodore. A vida na sarjeta – O círculo vicioso da miséria moral. 1. Ed. – São Paulo: É Realizações Ed., 2014.