We are not referring to the freedom of expression, granted by our laws, but the freedom to think with one's innermost self. The ability to reflect and act at all times with independence from prejudices, from external ideas, from "what will people say," and, moreover, to keep from thinking or saying what one should not.
In this context, who is supposed to be amply free?
On several occasions, we noted that almost everyone believes they act according to their will and that they are the master of their own mind, not aware that factors unrelated to their purpose interfere. Some factors are of more dubious origin, such as the many times thoughts take charge of the mind and act to circumvent man's control.
Readers please observe those whose lives are a reflection of the psychological turmoil that reigns in their minds. They constantly change direction, route, and purpose, never feeling secure of anything. Here and there they try to acquire, borrow, a conviction or certainty that they can never get for and by themselves. Today they ask for a book, tomorrow for a lecturer, then for an ideology, a religion, or a political party, etc.
Do these people have freedom of thought? Do they think and act according to their own will? The answer is easy: their will is dominated by confabulations of foreign thoughts, that at some point in life, become as necessary to them as the drug to the drug addict. "I can not give my opinion on this subject, I have not read the newspapers ..." This subtlety of Bernard Shaw encapsulates, unfortunately, a very common truth.
Also observe the case of those who are so absorbed by a thought that it becomes almost an obsession. In such circumstances, the individual often ends by acquiring the characteristics and even the name of the thought he hosts. People may say that "guy is a drunkard," "is a maniac," "is embittered."
In the first example the thoughts occur without order and harmony in the mind. The talk of freedom to satisfy one's desires is nonsense. In these cases people do not do what they "want," but what they "are able to": in between shuttles and tumbles resulting from the heterogeneous mix of thoughts that drives the mind. In the second example, it is clear that it is not the will of a person who acts, but the thought that causes obsession. The governance of the individual is exercised - dictatorially - by one or more thoughts that form a desire which instigates the instinct forcing them to meet their requirements.
As long as human beings are completely oblivious to what occurs in his mental sphere and fails to know the key through which they can get strict control over it, they will never claim to be the master of themselves and, therefore, will not be able to think freely.
Do you think freely?
________________________________
*Original article published in Spanish. Free Translation
Comments
Post a Comment