Article Type : Short communication
Authors : Pimienta AO, Cobá WGP and Miramontes CRB
Keywords : Septenary, Mythomania
The days of the week usually have a
very particular effect on many people, for some, Mondays can be something like
the beginning of the week, sometimes it represents the possibility of starting
some relevant activity, no matter if it is about something personal like a
diet, or organizational like starting a new activity at work, etc.
Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays represent the
continuity of the septenary, and Friday usually means for a good part of the
people, the beginning of the weekend, maybe it starts with some extension of a
meeting or accompanied by some good friends, Saturday is usually dedicated to
carrying out activities that normally cannot be carried out during the week,
and finally, Sunday is completely dedicated to resting. The connotation of rest
implies stillness, repose, or pause in work or fatigue, and for this reason, it
is a cause of relief in fatigue and physical or moral difficulties. Hence, at
sunset on a traditional Sunday, this relief is achieved and then the mind
clears because one of the usual occupations is forgotten, the latter allows
daily events to be perceived more clearly, that is, it is not they use
emotional filters that could at a given moment hinder the capture of reality. Well,
it is precisely on a Sunday afternoon when the word mythomania bursts into my
brain, this one that refers to an uncontrolled desire for lies and
exaggeration. The trigger for this thought was not rumination, much less
tribulation the scene that led me to think about this was a simple soccer game.
A trivia! Some critics of this exciting game said, that's right, it was a
simple soccer action that led me to reflect on certain mythomaniac behaviours
that some players in this sport assume, as I expressed in previous lines, this
behaviour refers to the impulsive desires for exaggeration and lies, in this
case, what caught my attention was that a skilled player entered the area with
the ball dominated and with the possibility of increasing his approach and
culminating it with a goal, which is finally the partial goal of this game, and
I say partially because it is about scoring and also that the opponent does not
score. Returning to the play in question, it could be said from the perspective
of manifest probability that the striker had an eighty percent chance of doing
damage and a twenty percent chance of not doing it. Well, just when the striker
feels a small charge from the opponent, he lets himself fall exaggeratedly,
trying to show the referee on duty that he had been knocked down, finally
nothing is scored and on the contrary, he receives a warning, the player at the
same time, he shows himself to others as a victim of the arbitral assessment. It
is at that moment that I get into my thoughts and I begin to reflect on the
generality of this type of behaviour, that is to say, the human being from the
development of his own abilities or skills can achieve results that transcend
or make a difference, only requires maintaining the effort and direction until
the conclusion of the objective, knowing that during the process itself,
obstacles may appear, however it is the capacities or abilities that contribute
not only to the achievement of the goal, but also, the implementation. The
progress of these tools allows them to fine-tune, thus, to greater obstacles
that arise, better possibilities to increase their own resources and therefore
to obtain better personal and professional development, despite the fact that
there is the possibility of obtaining these benefits from a sustained effort,
instead of this, they try to find shortcuts that precisely what they cause in
the opposite, that is to say, greatly limit the development of personal
efficiency, because there is a general idea that things should be done with
minimal effort and without adherence to rules or regulations, and it is this
defiant attitude of the legal that it makes one an intelligent person. Hence,
in this same popular belief, it is assumed that those who make use of legality,
or their sustained effort using only their own abilities in order to achieve a
goal, are considered cowardly, cowardly, foolish or stupid. Who has not heard
popular sayings related to the above, "Who does not trance does not
advance. There is no door that will not be opened with a ticket everyone does
it, why not me" "Totally nobody is going to notice Etc. These
generalizations so generalized and intellectualized by the inhabitants of our
society have little by little become categorical imperatives, that is, people
give dogmatic value to these pronouncements to such an extent that they do not
question or reflect on the impact they have on consciousness. Social that these
sayings are an invitation to not respect the law or worse still, breaking the
law is synonymous with intelligence, on the other hand, the one who adheres to the
statutes is considered a fool and a coward. In a society like ours, foolishness
is not tolerated, much less cowardice. Due to a large extent to categorical
imperatives, which do not allow for possible mistakes, again the product of
self-imposed generalizations that establish a null possibility of mistake
Dostoyevsky could be quoted on this point, who said more or fewer words, which
what men fear most is making mistakes, when in fact what they should fear is
not trying. As we can see then, this sentence of Dostoyevsky opens the
possibility of action and instead of censoring the possible errors, it
stimulates the attempts, which by themselves increase personal growth and even
strengthen self-confidence, in this sense, there is another author called
Bandura, which says that self-confidence in the ability of human beings to
trust their resources to control the situations inherent to their actions. We
can see then that on the one hand, they tell us that the fearful are those who
do not try and on the other, they tell us that to try it you have to trust
yourself without thinking about the results. Hence, it is paradoxical to think
that the shortcuts in the use of legality are for the intelligent, on the
contrary, the fact of carrying out actions attached to legality will lead us to
be brave and self-confident. These two conditions are the ones that should be
stimulated in our new society, that is, an ethic and morally oriented towards
continuous effort based on one's resources should be stimulated to develop
individuals who are aware of their potential and that this is the same. , the
one that provides them with resources to solve their existential dilemma. Unfortunately,
the current panorama of our society is completely ominous, that is to say, the
models of action that prevail in our national context are of transgression
instead of compliance, the reason for this greyish horizon is due, in my
opinion, to the fact that the models of social performance are distorted of
origin and these are executed in almost all the contexts where the human being
roams, we see for example that many times the parents who are considered the
first teachers of the children, are the ones who constantly subtly model and
worse still without realizing account, transgressive behaviours, we have the
mother who tells her son or daughter, do not tell your father that he bought
you, or that we were somewhere, the father tells the son or daughter to tell
the creditor that he is not, or that he does not know where he went. One of the
two may even ask the child to tell the boss that he will not go to work because
he is sick, which may be true, but the illness is not due to viruses or
bacteria, but to an excess of alcohol and tobacco consumed the night before. Let
us also see the teacher who, by not preparing properly for his session in front
of the group, because of some issue, decides to impose works that do not
contribute to knowledge but that does take time and with this, they solve their
obligation or teachers who take advantage of their trade union situation to avoid
working instead of teaching. Now let us examine the worker, it does not matter
if it is a public or private initiative, the common of both, is that they have
a day to fulfil, and they take advantage of the work time, to carry out personal
matters or for food, leaving aside their chores, which causes them to fall
behind in their obligation over time, and when they are demanded in the
fulfilment of their work, they assume themselves as labour victims and turn
their bosses into dictatorial tyrants.
Or what do you think if we now look at politicians, if
those who call themselves social managers and who in the eyes of others pretend
to be very sensitive to the needs of others, in reality, they are not
sensitive, but only to their own needs. These people are capable of developing
seductive talents, they are something like actors in a great theatre, where
reality is lived as fiction and fiction is presented to us as reality, hence
they cannot be considered myth maniacs, since they live in their world and
solve only what goes through their heads, therefore, these unique characters
reach degrees of schizophrenic-type behaviour, first because they have no
contact with reality, and second because their fictions are similar to
hallucinations, that is, they can see, hear and feel what their conscience
dictates. Hence, many of their apparent solutions are not attached to social
reality, but on the contrary, they solve their distorted reality. There is not
much difference between the model of action that politicians present to us and
the model that we see in our rulers, I dare to say that they are subspecies,
the substantial difference would be that the first seek power and the second
already has it and also assumes that this one belongs to him, and since he
already has it, he tries to perpetuate himself in it, arguing for this, that he
has a vast experience, in fact, this very one, makes him think that experience
is equal capacity and suddenly he assumes himself competent to know of
everything and solving everything, that is, over time another symptom is added
to their behaviour and this is called megalomania and omnipotence. Let's leave
people and go now to advertising if that which was created to inform about the
characteristics and qualities of the products, which originally tried to show
the benefits of what was bought and established the differences between similar
products, well with Over time that spirit has changed and now it can be seen in
the different schedules and channels, products capable of making someone loved
and remembered because the bathroom towels have the aroma of the forest, or
walking shoes with enough power to make the obese slender, or what about scenes
where to meet with friends to drink beer and where the main premise focuses on
making creative lies so that the wife does not realize that the objective is to
get drunk. As can be seen, the myth maniac scenarios are closer than we can
imagine, in every corner it is shown that completely distorted models of action
prevail in the social world, so in this scenario, as I said a few lines ago,
quite gray. How can we expect our children to learn to be honest if in the
contexts where they develop, the
anti-values stand out before the values, it is reinforced that the anti-values
are for intelligent people and the values are for cowards and fools, hence Not
wanting to be stupid, you opt for lying. However, this phenomenon of our time
cannot be seen from a single perspective, it would be worthwhile to analyse
this same phenomenon from an ethical, moral and social point of view, let's see
then that from an ethical point of view. Morality is theory and ethics in
action, practice, life. Morality points to the social sphere and ethics respond
to the personal sphere. Morality is part of the social sphere, it will always
be conditioned by the beliefs, feelings, attitudes, and behaviours of culture
and time. Hence, one can speak of Christian morality, Catholic morality, or
Mayan, Cora or Huichol morality, etc. Presumably, morals or customs can change
according to culture and time, and may even disappear. Morals are those
principles or customs that are socially and culturally accepted as good or bad.
Obeying them is morally good and disobeying them is morally bad. When a person
acts against what is morally established, he is usually called
"immoral" and when another person acts and ignores said moral
principles, he is called "amoral", that is, he has no custom or
principle to obey or follow. Employer, because he does not know them, they have
not been taught them or he simply ignores them or does not recognize them as
his own. In daily life, morality as a theory is useful, however, some actions
or customs may seem morally bad and ethically correct, and there may be
ethically incorrect actions that morally may seem good, let us remember the
saying: "do not do good things that look bad, or bad things look good. How
to solve this? Is this the conflict between the moral and the ethical? Is this
the abyss between theory and practice? Is this the conflict between the
external and the internal, that is, between what I see and what I ignore inside
the other? Let's look at this; Prostitution is seen as a morally bad habit,
however, suppose that the person who prostitutes herself does so because she
needs to feed her five children and the need is so urgent that she does not
wait and desperation leads her to prostitute herself. She seeks the good of her
children at the expense of her reputation. On the other hand, the other person
who prostitutes her does it only for pleasure and because she has economic
power and enjoys it. Who acts morally or ethically right or wrong? Says another
famous saying against Machiavelli, the end does not justify the means. What a
rant! It is not necessary to fall into casuistry, what is meant is; Ethics
demands and imposes the responsibility and it is something that we will not be
able to evade, to act responsibly towards oneself and towards others, it
requires each one to act with the right intention. One day, they took Master
Jesus, a woman who was discovered in flagrant adultery and according to the
morality or custom of the town, she should be stoned to death. Jesus kept
silent and said: he who is without guilt, let him cast the first stone. They
all left starting with the oldest. Jesus said to the woman: Who accuses you,
who condemns you? Nobody, she said. Neither do I, go away and don't do it
again. What a moving narration, what a human gesture, what a great consolation,
what teaching, what a life lesson, what a sensitivity! From the ethical point
of view, each one must assume their responsibility and not become anyone's
judge. Each one must respond in the best way to himself and to others. Every
lie is a deception to ourselves, we cannot deceive anyone, although sometimes
it seems so. The deception is to oneself. Maradona justified his lie, saying
that the goal was by the hand of God who helped him. The human being is not
only complex but also contradictory and in contradiction, he experiences the
tragic feeling of life. Unamuno says, "What makes one happy, gives another
reason to take his own life." How to integrate the comedy and the tragedy
that we are and live? How to integrate Don Quixote and Sancho Panza that we
carry inside? The human being is only known from within and what difficulty he
represents to us.
He can only be fully or fully human when he is
faithful to what he chooses and what he renounces. I know it is fully or fully
human when things are done with discipline and consistency. I only know that he
is fully human or fully human when he does what has to be done and does it
right the first time. Hence, when it is recognized, it is accepted and the
effort is made to integrate that which is contradictory in one. Deciding,
choosing, and being faithful to what you choose and what you decide to give up,
is not an easy thing, it demands responsibility since you decide on a whole
project of life and society. It is the existence that is at stake, because
before all possibility, one chooses to make his existence an authentic or false
existence. A fictitious existence is one that does what everyone does, says
what everyone says, and buys what everyone buys without question. It is the one
who decides to be part of the mass, to be one more, among many others. A
feigned existence is one that renounces its freedom and does not assume its
responsibility. Authentic existence is one that flies responsibly over the
vertigo of his possibilities and enjoys every moment of his life to the
fullest. Authentic existence is one that looks at and enjoys abundance and does
not regret being shipwrecked in the sea of scarcity. Authentic existence is one
that does not play within the limits but plays with the limits. It is one that
does not consume time but generates it. Authentic existence is one that assumes
its responsibility and lives beyond good and evil and with great freedom and
responsibility. I don't know a morality that says and commands, that lying is
good, that stealing is acceptable, or that killing is allowed. No, there is no
morality that affirms that, however, there are robberies, lies, and violent
deaths. There is no mythomaniac culture, but there are mythomaniac people; it
would be cruel and this would justify the title of this article, that the
mythomaniacs are the majority and implement as law, custom, or duty that they have
to teach their way of life. As long as this does not happen, the responsibility
to act ethically will fall and will remain with each and every one of the people
who make up this society. Finally, I will say that there is no crisis of
values, as others affirm, the values remain intact, although ignored, however,
the possible absence of criteria and value judgments, make it possible for
people to enter a crisis and not discover the seriousness of their actions, nor
take responsibility for them. Ethics is a quixotic adventure where it is not
easy to distinguish when madness presents itself as sanity and when sanity
presents itself as madness. If there is no moral progress, in our society,
culture will be impoverished and disorder will be experienced, the urgent will
be chosen and the important will be abandoned, the means will become ends and
the ends in the middle, etc. Our customs, our way of living, of valuing, will
change. However, despite the regrets, let us not forget that Don Quixote lived
mad and died sanely and the sane Sancho embraced madness to continue rewriting
history. Ethics will demand freedom, responsibility, and authenticity from each
and every one of us citizens. Who condemns you? No one answered the woman and
Jesus said: Neither do I, go away and don't do it again. It can be the people
or maybe the culture, the fact is that this trend is so dominant that now what
was illegal before is legal. That's right, we now live and accept a culture of
illegality. Same that manifests itself in small sometimes imperceptible
circumstances, such as when traveling in the vehicle. Day after day I travel
through the same avenues that take me from home to work and from work to home,
day after day I observe and suffer the terrible car traffic that keeps me
sitting in my car for many... many minutes, which allows you to have time to
observe and reflect. The actions that call my attention, either because they
are the ones that are repeated the most, or because they are the ones that affect
me the most, are the following:
Inevitably on my journey, I am prey to hope, something
like expecting a fallacy of cultural change, well, I always have the illusion
that when I reach an avenue where there are two or more lanes in the same
direction, the traffic it will be more fluid, however, also inevitably day by
day I suffer the same disappointment, if they are there, they are two lanes
only one is being improperly used as temporary parking by drivers of other
vehicles, therefore only one lane works as an avenue. There are many
explanations... neighbours who have left their car there, parents who leave
their children at school, people who decide to buy something and only park for
a "little moment", meanwhile the drivers who pass by, continue in our
attempt for riding in our car. In the sections of the route where the line of
vehicles is long, I observe with curiosity that consequently there are people
who; Leaving the line, advance passing as many vehicles as possible on the
right or left side, to later re-join the line in a position closer to their
destination. This action particularly calls my attention to three aspects,
first; does the passing individual believe that his haste is more important
than mine and everyone else's waiting in line for traffic to move? Second; He
simply lacks a social conscience and doesn't realize that he hurts the rights
of those of us who arrived first? And third; have those of us who stand in line
become accustomed to this classic way of “acting” to such a degree that not even
a horn is heard when this happens? These reflections give rise to continuing
with the other events that I live in my beloved Tepic. I realize, for example,
that modifications were made to the road in a project called; Tepic 4X4 where
some avenues with four lanes in the same direction were enabled with the
intention of improving the flow of vehicles. A palliative measure that has
achieved few results, since during peak hours only one or two lanes can be used
since the others are occupied by parked cars on many occasions, in a double
row, mainly due to the lack of sanctions by the corresponding authority. Before
these facts. Thus, in the same way, the mother who threatens her son with
extreme punishment for his bad behaviour, and does not carry out her threat in
the face of the son's disruptive behaviour, causes the son to lose fear and
even respect, because of observing, that breaking a norm does not cause
sanction, and without even noticing it, it is the same mother who reinforces
the behaviour not of adherence to norms or rules, because it is to this extent
that the authorities by not punishing those who break the laws reinforce the
attitudes of breaking the statutes. This is how members of a society that we
have learned to transgress already resign and even adapt more and more to this
kingdom of impunity in which we live because it is useless to threaten
offenders and criminals with increasingly severe penalties if you are only in
exceptional occasions are applied. But are we just getting used to impunity? I
think there is more… According to González Llaca in his book; corruption,
collective pathology, there are two forms of corruption, black and white, black
corruption includes actions that transgress the law and are unanimously
recognized as illegal. White corruption is the practices and uses that, far
from being frowned upon, are justified by the authority and even presumed by
the offenders, however, the type of corruption that worries me is that which,
due to uses and customs, we see as every day, which is normal since it occurs
normally, but which we see with less and less displeasure.
To cite an example, I have given myself the task of
interviewing my acquaintances who have decided to support the political
campaigns of one or another candidate for a popular election position and as I
feared, very few have expressed their convictions to me political, I have to
say that the vast majority are lending their support in pursuit of subsequent
retribution, the most common; a well-paid job, for which, needless to say, the
least important thing is to be qualified. The relevant thing about the
situation is that there is no desire to mask this objective, it is declared in
a flat and shameless way, after all, they tell me, that's the way things are,
"it's the custom". However, the above is just one example of the many
that exist and that we witness daily, this means that more and more, our
ability to wonder at corruption is lost. How many of us do not know of a union
in which the promotion processes are a farce? How many of us do not know
someone who bribes some authority to achieve an end? How many of us do not know
someone who is engaged in illicit activities? How many of us do not know the
way in
Which our rulers squander public resources? In short,
I think that very few of us are oblivious to the fact that in our context it is
necessary to negotiate to advance in any company, it is necessary to use the
"levers" otherwise we run the risk of drowning in the legal course of
any action. Derived from my previous comments, I would like to talk about a
psychological phenomenon that occurs in social thought and that from my
perspective is wreaking havoc in our current society; learned hopelessness,
which is nothing more than a behaviour pattern developed by individuals subjected
to situations in which there is no consistent relationship between their
behaviour and its positive or negative results. To put it in other words, if a
student finishes his higher studies with excellent performance based on his
effort and yet cannot enter the labour market, he warns that jobs are given
through influence peddling, nepotism, cronyism and not based on abilities,
performance or resume, he will learn little by little that control over the
situation does not lie in the effort he made, but in external elements such as
the will of his friends and acquaintances to enter him into a certain company
or institution. To speak of learned hopelessness is to refer to the moment in
which the individual believes that the control of various aspects of his life
is of external origin, he infers that despite the fact that he performs any
action, the situation in which he lives will not reflect any change, he
experiences the notion of despair, he resigns himself to the fact that
everything happens as a result of the external, of what he has no control over,
this he learned through repeated experience. However, we cannot speak of
learned hopelessness without touching on his older sister; "the
alienation". According to Ignacio Martin Baro, a Spanish psychologist who
pioneered the psychology of liberation, alienation is the state that represents
the extreme limit that the ego can reach in the realization of a desire to
abolish all situations of conflict, uncertainty, and suffering. This author
points out that, under certain conditions, most people can oscillate towards
that state. The state of alienation is induced by a social and power system,
which prevents people from "thinking the system and performing with the
power that derives from that system. In other words, the state of alienation is
one in which the individual is no longer capable of thinking about his own
life, he simply survives it by letting himself be carried away by the current
of vicissitudes that are presented to him, that is why when I see a television
commercial in which they mention "the good ones are more I wonder; yes
but… where are we? Because apparently only the bad guy's act. I could not
conclude this writing without proposing what I believe may be the beginning of
the construction of a social environment aimed at people acquiring control over
their own existence and being able to direct their lives towards those objectives
that are proposed as valuable, without unconscious mechanisms or conscious
experiences preventing them from achieving their existential goals and their
personal happiness. An environment where being brave is not so expensive and
being a coward is not worth it, remembering Joaquín Sabina. How could we begin
the construction of that environment? There can be many options, as many as
interests and perspectives, I propose to begin by really talking about reality,
recognizing the one who steals like a thief, the one who kills as a murderer,
the one who bribes or allows himself to be bribed as corrupt, the one who does
not agree but he does nothing like a coward… using the truth as a form of
violence against those who are nourished by a functional and utilitarian vision
of reality and who contribute to the construction of kleptomania as a form of
social organization. In short, the best way to guide the social functioning in
which we are all immersed in any way is by assuming full and complete
responsibility for our thoughts and actions and understanding that only with a
great ethical and moral sense of our own actions can it be possible. That what
is now a reality that resembles a nightmare, in the future the community
personalism that seeks to exalt the human being in all His fullness, so that he
is able to share with others the ethical and moral sense of his own presence.