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.