This is a reading I resonated particularly well with from the first line, “The doctrine of nonviolence affirms that our humanity unites us more than our conflicts divide us” (Kimelman 1). Also, “If man returns evil for good, evil will not depart from his house” (Kimelman 2) This ties into the same way Gandhi uses another violent persons weapon against himself. By using good to combat evil, it deters the other person (who hopefully has a conscious) from using evil back against you. Also by using good against it evil, it stops evil from being the putrid disease it already is and doesn’t infect you as well by turning evil to repel another.
It is interesting the way good effects people. In the same way evil and violence spread, good spreads as well. It seems however that people are less receptive to the spreading of healthy causes. For example, most people if hit, yelled at, scorned, or made fun of in a mean way, the initial response in the majority is to counter with the same type of actions. Good doing also has this effect on people, but on a much smaller scale. Acts of kindness towards others who deserve are much less common than acts of violence are on people who are labeled to deserve it. Strangely so when many of the readings agree in the fact that humanity in general is nonviolent in nature. In this sense it seems that there much be a façade of evil that when scratched enough will bring out the kinder side of people. It seems society plays a huge role in this as well in terms of the media that people fill their thoughts with. Often times violence is the whole premise of movies, which is glorified, or simply ignored. Is there a possibility to turn this media in the other direction? Violence is also much more dramatic, so in turn it gets more attention from society. The mind is powerful and often makes thoughts a reality if possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment