In Terry Pratchett's book series DiscWorld, perhaps my favorite character is Esmarelda "Granny" Weatherwax, the oldest witch in Lancre, and the toughest and most powerful, and in some ways the wisest. She reminds me of myself: a heart that can seem like a rock, but really it is an unpolished diamond. :)
In the book Carpe Jugulum, one of the best, she says that evil is defined as "treating people like things".
... Which I think is very wise.
But perhaps it does not say everything about the matter. The "evilest" people certainly seem to treat people not only like things, but like things they hate!
But I do think that a central point in life, and re good and evil, is the innate desire to let everybody rule their own life, totally. Or the opposite, the wish to control people.
How widespread this is, despite most people being good, is shown in the fact that even in these enlightened times, children are still treated like slaves. (Or things.) They are not citizens under the law, and they don't have control over their own lives.
I guess the way people treat their children basically reflect the way they perceive themselves, and their lives. Unfortunately there are a lot of unhappy people around, quite a few of them with children.
ReplyDeleteAs for giving children control over their own lives, how would you envisage implementing this while taking into account the fact that children do need some guidance? Or do you disagree with me there?
With regards to them not being citicens, how do you mean that? Because they cannot go to elections? Or because they cannot go to jail nor enter into a house loan contract?
Ronald,
ReplyDeleteI suggest you look back at my last comments on freedom. Children are persons, and ever since I was one myself, I understood it is a grave mistake to underestimate a child's ability to either understand or feel. But they aren't yet truly free as persons, because they have yet much to learn. Knowledge is the condition for freedom. I always seek more freedom...
It sounds odd to say perhaps, but I really mean it : I respect children. Fully. Even newborns. In fact, I have lots of respect to give around. I'll respect you if you have different opinions, I'll even respect an unbearable fool/fanatic. I just won't LIKE those. :-)
I also respect animals. They are different, perhaps even truly "inferior" in terms of awareness, but they feel. Anything that feels is NOT a thing and deserves consideration. I'll swat a mosquito around me anytime, but only because HE (or rather she, only the females bite) will show no consideration for my desire not to itch later. Strictly in self-defense and hygiene. If they would just go away it'd be fine by me.
Like probably most boys, when I was a kid I took flies' wings off. For fun. Today, not only I wouldn't, but I feel retrospective shame. The child I was didn't realize he was causing gratuitous pain. Flies aren't our friends, and they'll cause us deseases. That justifies protecting ourselves, our own species. But not treating them like things.
Perhaps I'm an unaware oriental religion believer. I don't know about Karma, and whether I'll come back as a fly if I torment flies. I just think : "Doesn't this make me feel ashamed of myself?" A very good behavioral guideline, I found out. I wish this notion was more felt by my brother (and sister) humans.
Hope that wasn't too boring. :-)
Man, I REALLY should get to reading Pratchett. The only thing I know from him is the videogame Discworld on Playstation. And such ignorance makes me feel ashamed! ;-)
Pascal,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you are saying, besides the "feeling ashamed" part. It's ok to stop, reflect, say to yourself "that wasn't right, I'll not do that again" (and apologise to any people who might have been affected), adjust your course and go your way.
Feeling ashamed, at least for any extended time, doesn't help anyone.
With regards to the children, of course we should respect them. Their minds are young and unexperienced but their senses probably work better than ours and they are fully-flagged spiritual beings, just like us (only, again, probably with a better connection still to their spiritual side).
Also I'm not condoning people treating their children badly, I was just stating my observations.
Usually when people treat children badly they have got low self-esteem.
It probably also plays a role that children tend to reflect the behaviour they experience, so they show their parents the mirror. Which those often take very badly because they don't want to be shown that side of themselves.
So yes, of course children should be respected and treated well, but that doesn't contradict what I said earlier.
I do think children need guidance (note I didn't say education or patronising) and in countries where children are taken to task for running their own lives you find 12-year-old joyless adults who look after their siblings, work on the field or carry a gun.
That's not what it's meant to be, either, in my opinion.
Childhood is meant to be a care-free time and that means that someone else has to take responsibility for them then. Which should of course be done in a respecting way. Which many parents just don't seem capable of. Which I believe is because of the way they themselves grew up and because they haven't had the opportunity to progress since then.
And I don't understand how children are not citizens.
Ronald,
ReplyDeleteSorry for the long delay. Lebanon's daily hassles, power shortage, etc. You know, all the little annoyances... ;-)
When I said to look back at my comments on Freedom, it wasn't meant as a critic or contradiction at all. Just as a means to avoid repeating the same generously-sized notions. (Hey, maybe Eolake has to pay for this fine web space!)
"Feeling ashamed, at least for any extended time, doesn't help anyone."
I see it essentially as a tool for self-improvement. Gleeful masochistic self-despising isn't my (bitter) cup of tea... I really don't think God is twisted enough to enjoy us doing so.
"Children [...] Their minds are young and unexperienced but their senses probably work better than ours"
No argument there! My 2 y.o. nephew is a constantly amazing data sponge, noticing and absorbing everything with his fresh eyes on the world. (^_^)
Besides, he *worships* me, which definitely proves he's very smart, too. And has got taste. ;-)
"... and they are fully-flagged spiritual beings, just like us (only, again, probably with a better connection still to their spiritual side). "
Alas, a seemingly mandatory part of growing up seems to be blunting one's perception. I try my best to resist this foolish notion.
"It probably also plays a role that children tend to reflect the behaviour they experience, so they show their parents the mirror. Which those often take very badly because they don't want to be shown that side of themselves. "
Alas... Truth isn't the ONLY thing that hurts, but it can be very unpleasant to some.
(To cut short on a potential new debate, rejection when in love is but one example of truth-independent hurting. A mean insult is another one, simply because it's mean!)
"in countries where children are taken to task for running their own lives you find 12-year-old joyless adults who look after their siblings, work on the field or carry a gun. "
You wouldn't happen to know my aunts, by chance? Except for the gun-carrying part, I mean. :-\
"Childhood is meant to be a care-free time and that means that someone else has to take responsibility for them then."
A truth which our Gorilla cousins seem to have very much understood. They're far better parents than some humans I know. Even wild lions are a better example sometimes. :-(
"And I don't understand how children are not citizens."
Some things you can't understand, because you're not capable of being stupid enough. Idiocy is a science, my friend, and maybe you and I aren't skilled enough for it. :-)
Children ARE citizens, of course. Except for some specific rights that come from being completely aware and responsible, they become full-part citizens at birth according to the law, and at least since they have functioning neural pathways in the womb in my opinion.
Of course, functioning neural pathways appear way after the legal period for abortion, but let's leave this debate for another time. (Preferably peace time, it's much more convenient for me...)
Why "at birth" for the law? Well, because until rather recently, birth was a very hazardous moment, with no guarantees of surviving it. So, the laws that were made back then declared that a child born alive becomes a citizen, with Nature's (or God's) approval. Also, sometimes you have therapeutic abortion, where the doctor is forced to sacrify a virtually viable foetus because of clear danger to the mother's life. Calling such an act "child murder" would really complicate things. I've had Ethics classes in Med School...
Pascal,
ReplyDeleteGreat post, thanks. :-)
Patience, Ron ol'buddy. I have another one coming for ya on "Bob Carlos Clarke".
ReplyDeleteBut that one's a BIG piece of work. ;-)
[Dips fingers in a steaming bowl of water+ice]