The Narcissist and Hypocrite Judges of the 21st Century
We are witnessing an intriguing phenomenon nowadays, especially powered by social media. People seem to have embraced a sense of purity and superiority inside their social bubbles, feeling authorized to judge and condemn anyone who does not share most part of their opinions or beliefs. If that was not troublesome enough, the “I am morally superior” argument is often used when comparing themselves and their reality with people that lived centuries ago.
We are probably wrong
As John Stuart Mill once said, when we hold our opinions to be the only possible truth in any given situation or time, we are, in reality, considering ourselves to be infallible beings.
Are you infallible? Have you lived your entire life without making a single mistake or changing your opinion on any matter? I bet that all of us can answer both of these questions with a clear “no”, accompanied by silent memories of things we wish we could have done a bit differently.
Considering that, on what subjects are we, as individuals or society, justified to intervene and impose opinions over other individuals? Not so many.
If you are the average human being, there is a very large chance that you are only holding part of the truth, if any truth at all. There is also an even more considerable chance that the generations after you are going to make more complex arguments, have more refined discussions, and probably come up with better conclusions than the ones you have so far, about any given subject.
Furthermore, in the long run, bad ideas tend to lose space in educated discussions and naturally fade away. That’s why promoting diversity of ideas is so important and can only intimidate those who argue with passion, instead of facts.
Life is not a comic book, forget the Good vs. Evil shit
Seriously, stop it. We need to put an end to this black and white approach to life and society.
You will certainly live long enough to see many people that you admire, for many reasons, do things that you disagree with. And that is perfectly normal.
Also, with even more frequency, you will look at history books and learn about men and women who did great things but, by today’s standards, fell short on other subjects. Does that mean that those individuals are less deserving of our passionless admiration for their achievements?
Before judging other people’s beliefs, it is important to consider that they may not have had the same education as you did, they may not have gone through the same challenges and experiences, and their environment growing up could have been — and probably was — unrecognizable to you. And never forget that, for the same reasons, it could be the case that they are right, not you.
One should not think for a second that, in the same circumstances of a robber — upbringing, financial conditions, mental health — they would for sure be a different person.
The world is full of ambiguities
Humans are complex beings. Our lives are like movies, a combination of events that, if well managed, will eventually result in a nice piece of history. Experiences, people we help, some that help us, loved ones we have to say goodbye to, and others that we welcome into our lives.
While in the making of this movie, there are — pardon the pun — frames in which we don’t perform as well as we wish we could have. Sometimes out of bad intentions, like cheating on a spouse. Sometimes out of misinformation, like electing someone in to office without really studying and dissecting their plans and ideas.
In both situations, some regret, while others don’t. Some probably made the best decision they could, considering the knowledge acquired until then. Some were fooled and others were going through a turmoil in their minds, eventually giving in to irrationality.
The point here is: people make bad decisions. But to think that all mistakes committed by others are result of pure evil is, at least, very immature.
Also, a movie is only as good as the equipment and technology available at its time. Can we judge Vertigo(1958) by its lack of special effects and modern transitions? Can we judge someone born in 50 AD for thinking that his or her society should persecute the Christians?
Dealing maturely with the mistakes of others demands humility: admitting that you could too be mislead, that you could too lie, that you could too eventually break someone’s trust.
Also, a mistake could be a mistake only in one’s perspective. While some may have never committed a crime or done anything to put other in harm's way, it could be that they just strongly disagree with each other. That is no reason for hate, judgement or even bad wishes. On the contrary, disagreeing is a sign that we are free to diverge, free to live our lives the way we desire.
One of the greatest gestures of humility I’ve ever seen was during the 2008 Presidential Election Campaign. In one of John McCain’s rallies, a clearly discontented woman took the microphone and started to say that she did not trust Barack Obama, at that time the opposing candidate representing the Democrats. Even before she could say anything worse about him, McCain, the Republican Party candidate, suddenly takes back the microphone and says:
No mam, no mam. He’s a decent family man and citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues. And that’s what this campaign is all about.
Pardon the words but ain’t that fuck*ng awesome?
Keep that in mind: the world is full of ambiguities. Most people you will disagree with love their kids, help a neighbor go through financial hardship or have a sick relative waiting for their care at home. To see evil in everyone else’s acts is a sign of your own evil. Be careful.
Judging does not bring us closer
Judging others is, naturally, an act of separation. It is determining that that person or that group of people does not belong in what the judge sees as the “good world”. It is labeling someone based on your perspective, condemning them based on your beliefs. Also, it usually backfires on the judges.
When we disagree, there are two possibilities: we are either right, and then we should try to convince the other person with our arguments and evidence, or we are wrong, and that we’ll only find out if we permit ourselves to hear different opinions, having an open minded and polite discussion.
However, what we see nowadays is a bunch of groups pointing fingers to each other, creating bad names to stamp other groups with, and oversimplifying important subjects with jargons and empty words. The result is the worst possible: there’s no exchange of ideas and the people involved tend to become more and more extreme, sometimes causing violent encounters.
The point here is: discussing and trying to peacefully convince people you disagree with is hard, demands patience, and good arguments, but it is the only effective way.
The Hypocrisy of Judgement
This is something interesting and very common. I often see on the internet people judging others using parameters that not even themselves can hold up to. How can that be?
Let’s take the COVID-19 as an example. In both Brazil and USA there are lots of people who think the pandemic is a lie, or that it is at least a far lesser threat than what has been reported. Most of these opinions are held because of one factor: negationism of science.
However, if you believe in spiritual surgeries and pseudosciences like astrology, ain’t it hypocrite of you to judge a 65 year old man for not trusting the news on a disease? Aren’t you holding his opinion against standards that you are not applying to your own?
Be honest and be humble. If you seek for the truth, there are no better qualities.
