Opinion (José Lúcio / Judge): Blame and excuses.
Suffering makes the best men? Or is the pain that is bad? Life led me to disbelieve any of theses.
José Lúcio
(Judge President of Beja County)
Neither the naive belief that the very suffering only lead by themselves to holiness, or the notorious fallacy that evil is only as a result of past suffering.
The experience of the courts leads us often these reflections – people and where we tripping over the years drag us insensibly to other land. Pass the impudence, e siga ele – nor that descend pretentious in chronic. A man can not be a theologian, not Filosofem, not antropologi, not sociólogo, but also think.
And let us return to the beginning. Often we find those who have suffered horrors and manifest the most refined malice. If it were possible to show these copies to many preachers I believe that stood on end – the unattended suffering of any higher guidance does not lead to any improvement. Most likely insensitive raw form.
On the other hand, if we reject the illusions of theologians also can not accept the beliefs of sociologists. Sociology was born with the original sin of all want to explain the social – to the individual, which is an animal much more complex. Hence, noting that one thing succeeds another not resist the tendency to conclude that the second resulted from the first. Comes across very wicked people who has a history of suffering then concludes that it was the company that made them so. They were not bad, They made us ill.
We have here a manifestation of what in logic is called sophistry as "post hoc ergo propter hoc". It was thereafter, just because of this.
Indeed, can and does happen often that precede or follow a personal history of undeniable evil we found a long and deep history of suffering. The personal itinerary seems to be so easy explanation for the deformation that haunts us, indifference and insensitivity towards the suffering of others.
Arises in these moments naturally the tendency to explain one thing for another - now the evil of the suffering of yesterday.
This temptation capsizes almost inevitably sociology, given its inherent constitutional addiction - the individual would be no more than a product of society.
The truth is that it can not accomodate explanation as naive. The same observation that exposes the wickedness of each in combination with an own suffering path sometimes shocking allows us to immediately find other examples where much suffering can not be related to a deformed personality, and before there is the stress of radiant goodness lives.
A primitive people used to do the rain dance when drought tightens naturally believes that there is a cause and effect relationship between the ceremony and rainfall, when it happens that the latter is the case at first. And if nothing happens probably the belief is not affected, because there will be no other explanation for the inoperability of dance than its own irrelevance.
We can not embark on the fallacies of magical thinking. We have to reject this explanatory temptation, so primitive that I wonder how large sociological not aware of the fallacy.
The theory is attractive, because desresponsabilizante. No accused of any crime especially wicked that do not want to go there. But it must be firmly rejected. Abound those who suffered less, and yet they were not so.
synthesising: a bad experience, the very suffering, can make men better? It is known that for some thought, namely theological, suffering is a path to spiritual improvement. What I say is that the experience and observations lead me to disbelieve this hypothesis.
Today I am more inclined to think that suffering only serves to accentuate something that is already in power in the personality of each (and do not ask me how it was that there was installed or was born). For every one in that the wickedness practiced seems to be able to relate to the evil suffered can counteract another example where no less painful just seem to have refined a natural goodness.
so disbelieving of theological current that could point suffering as a path to moral perfection, however it is not possible to adhere to the opposite current that tends to see society as the source of all evil and any deformation of the personality as a mere accident with external causes to the subject.
That way, would inevitably reject any notion of individual responsibility, or guilt (and passing any possible statement of criminal law).
(Text written under the previous rule to spell AO1990, by the author's option)
