Freedom
Freedom
"It is the mental agency that transforms awareness and knowledge into action; it is the bridge between desire and act." -ARISTOTLE (As cited in Yalom, 1980 p. 289)
American society places high value on freedom. Freedom is a considered an inherent right, not a privilege. Our constitution tells us that we are all created equal. People say that they would risk their lives for freedom. In fact, my home state of New Hampshire has the motto "Live Free or Die" on its license plates.
But what exactly is freedom? Is it really all it is cracked up to be? With the risk of equivocation I assert that freedom is not everything we think it is and in other aspects it is much more. Jean-Paul Sartre (1957) wrote:
Man is condemned to be free. Condemned because he didn’t create himself, yet in other aspects is free, because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does… (p. 23).
One of the largest ongoing arguments in psychology and philosophy concerns freedom. Do we, as humans have a choice in the things we do? Staunch behaviorists would say no. They would say that our actions are nothing more than learned responses to stimuli and patterns of reinforcement schedules. This leaves barely, if any room for choice. However, in response to Skinner's assertion that we are determined by the environment, Yalom (1980) states, "If we manipulate the environment, then we are no longer environmentally determined, on the contrary, the environment is determined" (p.270).
Erich Fromm (1956) said, "There is no good and evil unless there is freedom to disobey" (p.8).
Sigmund Freud asserted that we are determined by our past. Our experiences during particular stages of our childhood determine who we will be and what we will do. He also described a tri-partite system of Id, Superego, and Ego to explain our behavior. The Id being the instinctual insatiable satyr that drives us through desires for sex, aggression and the like. The Superego is the highly moralistic internalization of our parents and their value systems that also drives us to repress our immoral desires. Finally there is the Ego that functions as a "middle man", attempting to balance the other two. According to Freud, we feel anxiety when there is conflict between the parts of our personality structures and since we do not like to feel anxiety, we unconsciously erect defense mechanisms to deal with the uncomfortable feelings. This system is extremely deterministic and thus, again we have no real choice in who and what we become. "If we are determined by the past, whence comes the ability to change?" (Yalom, 1980, p. 348).
It is ironic that our society, the one that places so much emphasis on freedom, is the same society where these two schools of thought flourish the most.
Jean-Paul Sartre once said that we are our choices and we are condemned to be free. The existential view of freedom describes something entirely different from the catchy mottoes and political rhetoric of America, and ultimately more horrifying as well.
To those who recognize the "existential" in psychology, freedom is an "ultimate concern". "The individual is entirely responsible for, that is, is the author of his world, life design, choices, and actions" (Yalom, 1980, p. 221). Freedom is the confrontation with groundlessness. As human beings, we desire structure and things that are familiar. The realization that one is responsible for oneself and one's life is difficult to accept. Groundlessness can be more frightening than death, more lonely than isolation and to face it requires strength and courage. To not face it and accept it is to forfeit one's will, and ultimately one's opportunity to create an authentic life. It is with freedom and choice that people begin to grow and heal. It is when one takes his or her life in his or her own hands that wondrous things occur.
There are two main concerns when dealing with freedom. The first is "responsibility" and the second is "existential guilt". They are closely related and interconnected. Viktor Frankl, founder of Logotherapy, distinguishes between `responsibility' and `responsibleness'.
Responsibility can also be called `authorship' and clinically speaking, without it no real therapy is possible. "At the deepest level, responsibility accounts for existence" (Yalom, 1980, p. 222). This means that we are solely responsible for ourselves, for our existence. We are responsible for all of our choices, including the choices we have not chosen, including the all that we have failed to acknowledge.
What does this mean for those who would help to heal? It means that those who are suffering must take the first step alone. This step is fundamentally simple yet at the same time quite difficult to attempt. The person must take their life into their hands and acknowledge it as their own. Not unlike a baby who takes its first steps to walk must acknowledge they are both the vehicle and driver. Those who are suffering must take responsibility for themselves and begin to acknowledge their entire role in experience and life.
The following are, according to Yalom (1980), many types of "denials of responsibility" (pp. 227-229):
Compulsivity. A person who experiences an uncontrollable urge to do a particular behavior and seems to be out of control is in a sense avoiding their responsibility. "Compulsivity obliterates choice" (Yalom, 1980, p. 227).
There is Displacement of Responsibility which is very common in psychotherapy. It occurs when a person "shifts responsibility from themselves to another person."
It can occur in when one asks, what should I do? What do you think I should do? Yalom asserts that for many clients who have problems with doing `homework' it is not so much about time or convenience, even if that is what they purport but rather, "what is at stake is the facing of one's own personal responsibility for one's life and one's process of change. And always lurking beyond that awareness of responsibility is the dread of groundlessness." (Yalom 1980 pp. 229)
The Denial of Responsibility: the Innocent Victim is described when a person fails to
take responsibility for consequences that have occurred as a result of their own volition but they fail to recognize their role in it.
Denial of Responsibility: Losing Control: This occurs when a person "loses control, or goes "out of one's mind". There is a common payoff to this type of denial and that is "nurturance". "Some patients so deeply crave to be nursed, to be fed, to be cared for in the most intimate ways by their therapist that to gain those ends, they `lose control' even to the point of deep regression requiring hospitalization" (p.228).
Avoidance of Autonomous Behaviors: This occurs in clients "who know very well what they can do to help themselves feel better but inexplicably refuse to take that step" (Yalom, 1980, p. 227).
Disorders of Wishing and Deciding: "If one is terrified by groundlessness, then one may avoid willing by deadening oneself to wishing or feeling, by abdicating choice, or by transferring one's choice to other individuals, institutions, or external events" (Yalom, 1980, p. 230).
There is a paradigm that offers insight regarding those who have problems with avoiding responsibility by focusing on one's perception of personal responsibility based on "locus of control". There are those who have an "external locus of control" which may be described as "lack of responsibility acceptance." This is related to "greater feelings of inadequacy, more tendencies of mood disturbances, more tension, anxiety, hostility and confusion" (p.261).
"Those who believe that they are not responsible for what happens to them in the world may pay a heavy penalty. Though they avoid paying the price of existential anxiety associated with awareness of responsibility, they may develop fatalism and depression" (Yalom, 1980, p. 263).
As human beings we all must face the possibility of events that are out of our control. In the past few years we have seen many terrorists' actions here in the United States as well as abroad. People are killed everyday from `natural disasters'. It is when these inexplicable events occur that we feel groundlessness at the core of our being. It is in the face of evil, tragedy and the unexplainable that we experience the sobering and sometimes brutal reality of our freedom. However, even when these things occur, even when we are faced with the horrors of existence, we still have a choice of how we choose to face these horrors.
As our existence approaches the 21st century we are faced with the possibility of self-annihilation. Even with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end to the cold war and arms race we are still at risk for a nuclear devastation. Our environment is weakening and dying as a result of over-population and its subsequent `consumer mentality'. Most tend to ignore these truths and with that comes the ignorance of the possibility of obliteration.
Joseph Fabry, founder of the Institute of Logotherapy, distinguishes between two types of freedom. When a human being is freed from the repression of outside forces such as a totalitarian government, authoritarian parent or religion, or slavery, their freedom not only offers them freedom of motion or thought but also the responsibility of choice and creation. No longer underneath the blanket of control one is forced to respond to the world within his or her self. With freedom comes groundlessness. It is our response to this groundlessness that decides how healthy we are to be. One can either face the reality of freedom and accept his or her responsibility or ignore it. To ignore it is to open up the self to emptiness within. This ignorance is apparent in our actions to ourselves, others, and the earth. It is apparent in the lack of respect for life and the lack of awareness of the realities of our existence. We have become our own potential worst enemy it seems. "Human freedom allows Mankind to say no to even his own existence" (Fabry, 1967, p.124).
In our society there seems to be an aura of complacency that surrounds the "average" person. Recently, I was able to witness it while sitting in the snack bar one rainy afternoon in November. The alarm sounded and instructed everyone in the building to go to the nearest exit. Everyone around me sort of meandered while they put their cigarettes out and packed up belongings, myself included. Everyone was talking and it seemed as though we left the building in a fog. When I got outside I was struck by the reality of the situation. As it was raining, everyone huddled close to the building in order to remain dry. I stepped back from the crowd about thirty feet and watched in horror at the lack of concern of this mystery emergency. I asked the person next to me if he thought we would be so calm if we lived on the West Bank or even Oklahoma City. I looked at everyone, including myself, and said that we think that we are untouchable.
As a species, we are terribly unprepared and part of the reason is that we try to remain so far away from the existential givens of existence. There is an unspoken surrender within most of us. We cannot face these givens and this results in false sense of security. It is ironic that our fear of the "danger" of reality only serves to keep us in harm's way. This is just one of the parents of existential guilt.
Viktor Frankl has said that during his imprisonment in concentration camps during Hitler's rampage of cruelty and murder, he realized that he had both freedom and choice. He could not choose not to be in the death camps but he could choose how he handled it. He said that even in the face of unavoidable suffering, and even death, we can find meaning in how we choose to accept our death.
Epictetus said over 2,000 years ago that, I must die. I must be imprisoned. I must suffer exile. But must I die groaning? Must I whine as well?…My leg you will chain—yes, but not my will—no, not even God can conquer that" (As cited in Yalom, 1980, p. 272).
Another major part of Freedom is Existential guilt. The fact that one is responsible for one's own life assures the experience of existential guilt. One who has existential guilt has transgressed against one's own self - the victim is one's own potential self. Redemption is achieved by plunging oneself into the true vocation of the human being which (as Kierkegaard said) "is to will to be oneself"(1980, p. 27).
A 27 year old woman described how she could characterize existential guilt: "Imagine someone loved you and you loved them, and then imagine telling that person everyday that you hated them." Another 28 year old man characterized it as an aggression towards yourself as well as a shot of "existential adrenaline." Many people denied ever experiencing existential guilt and for some they were only able to mention it intellectually but unable to describe it from a gut level. Two people described existential guilt only to later deny the experience.
Rollo May (1953) defines existential guilt as "arising from one's transgressions against oneself; it emanates from regret from an awareness of the unlived life, of the untapped possibilities within one" (p. 19). Some people described the difficulty in being in the moment while one is experiencing existential guilt and thus self-perpetuating. Once one is caught in the throes of existential guilt, it is very difficult to get out.
As with the other existential concerns that the human being must experience, `existential guilt' is often found in literature although it is one of the tougher ones to spot. The French author, Jean Genet, wrote in The Thief's Journal, "I say to myself, this painful moment must concur with the beauty of my life. I refuse to let this moment and all the others be waste matter" (1964, p.171).
It is clear that there is an underlying current of existence guilt within these words. Our lives are filled with an endless chain of choices. Some that we have chosen and some that we have not. With every decision and act of freedom and will there is its antithesis that we have denied. In contemplating the act of choosing one cannot separate the chosen from the unchosen for they are infinitely part of each other. Just as in life there is the inherent truth of death, in the chosen there is the undeniability of the denied. Perhaps, we fear death not only because when we die we will `be no more’, but also for the fact that when we die before we have found our true selves we shall forever be what we are not.
Yalom defines existential guilt not as the result of some criminal act that the individual has committed, but quite the contrary. Existential guilt issues from omission. He is guilty for what he has not done with his life.
We all carry within us the pains of our past; the realities of our human tendency to squander our lives caught up in the trappings of everyday lives. No one can ever be all they would be if they could. Within the freedom we experience lie limitations that prevent us from being all there is. These limitations are exaggerated when one takes into account our oftentimes willful waste. There will always be the trailing reminder of all that has never been and all that never will be. We cannot escape it.
We are like a lot of wild
Spiders crying together,
But without tears
(Robert Trail Spence Lowell Fall 1961(1964)
We enshroud our transgressions against ourselves within a fog as thick as guilt itself. This fog is not near us but is us. Each failing strikes fiercely against our shield of the "myth of the average man". Freedom is life unshielded. Freedom is therefore frightening and avoided. Thoreau once said, "Oh, to have reached the point of death and not have lived at all!" When we sit passively on the fence of decision we are committing an act of violence against ourselves. Many are frozen in fear of movement because movement can bring the frightening realities to the surface. The inner waters of contemporary man are still. The sludge of terror awaits in the depths. It waits for an active current to stir up the realities that are inevitably unavoidable. Our guilt is one of neglect, neglect of our humanity and being. When one lives their life in existential stagnancy, like the pond, that life will become unhealthy and clouded. For many, the numbness of the dead pond is better than the painful fear of finitude and regret.
So we live.
However, as difficult and painful as it may be, one must learn to forgive oneself because to cling to sin is to forever offend. There comes a point in time when one must let go and accept the hard realities of our actions and our inaction. Existential guilt is a common roadblock to psychological healing and growth. If one is stuck behind the guilt of wasted time and wasted life, there can be no action beyond that point. If there is no action then there is no progress and therefore no healing or growth.
"It is the mental agency that transforms awareness and knowledge into action; it is the bridge between desire and act." -ARISTOTLE (As cited in Yalom, 1980 p. 289)
American society places high value on freedom. Freedom is a considered an inherent right, not a privilege. Our constitution tells us that we are all created equal. People say that they would risk their lives for freedom. In fact, my home state of New Hampshire has the motto "Live Free or Die" on its license plates.
But what exactly is freedom? Is it really all it is cracked up to be? With the risk of equivocation I assert that freedom is not everything we think it is and in other aspects it is much more. Jean-Paul Sartre (1957) wrote:
Man is condemned to be free. Condemned because he didn’t create himself, yet in other aspects is free, because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does… (p. 23).
One of the largest ongoing arguments in psychology and philosophy concerns freedom. Do we, as humans have a choice in the things we do? Staunch behaviorists would say no. They would say that our actions are nothing more than learned responses to stimuli and patterns of reinforcement schedules. This leaves barely, if any room for choice. However, in response to Skinner's assertion that we are determined by the environment, Yalom (1980) states, "If we manipulate the environment, then we are no longer environmentally determined, on the contrary, the environment is determined" (p.270).
Erich Fromm (1956) said, "There is no good and evil unless there is freedom to disobey" (p.8).
Sigmund Freud asserted that we are determined by our past. Our experiences during particular stages of our childhood determine who we will be and what we will do. He also described a tri-partite system of Id, Superego, and Ego to explain our behavior. The Id being the instinctual insatiable satyr that drives us through desires for sex, aggression and the like. The Superego is the highly moralistic internalization of our parents and their value systems that also drives us to repress our immoral desires. Finally there is the Ego that functions as a "middle man", attempting to balance the other two. According to Freud, we feel anxiety when there is conflict between the parts of our personality structures and since we do not like to feel anxiety, we unconsciously erect defense mechanisms to deal with the uncomfortable feelings. This system is extremely deterministic and thus, again we have no real choice in who and what we become. "If we are determined by the past, whence comes the ability to change?" (Yalom, 1980, p. 348).
It is ironic that our society, the one that places so much emphasis on freedom, is the same society where these two schools of thought flourish the most.
Jean-Paul Sartre once said that we are our choices and we are condemned to be free. The existential view of freedom describes something entirely different from the catchy mottoes and political rhetoric of America, and ultimately more horrifying as well.
To those who recognize the "existential" in psychology, freedom is an "ultimate concern". "The individual is entirely responsible for, that is, is the author of his world, life design, choices, and actions" (Yalom, 1980, p. 221). Freedom is the confrontation with groundlessness. As human beings, we desire structure and things that are familiar. The realization that one is responsible for oneself and one's life is difficult to accept. Groundlessness can be more frightening than death, more lonely than isolation and to face it requires strength and courage. To not face it and accept it is to forfeit one's will, and ultimately one's opportunity to create an authentic life. It is with freedom and choice that people begin to grow and heal. It is when one takes his or her life in his or her own hands that wondrous things occur.
There are two main concerns when dealing with freedom. The first is "responsibility" and the second is "existential guilt". They are closely related and interconnected. Viktor Frankl, founder of Logotherapy, distinguishes between `responsibility' and `responsibleness'.
Responsibility can also be called `authorship' and clinically speaking, without it no real therapy is possible. "At the deepest level, responsibility accounts for existence" (Yalom, 1980, p. 222). This means that we are solely responsible for ourselves, for our existence. We are responsible for all of our choices, including the choices we have not chosen, including the all that we have failed to acknowledge.
What does this mean for those who would help to heal? It means that those who are suffering must take the first step alone. This step is fundamentally simple yet at the same time quite difficult to attempt. The person must take their life into their hands and acknowledge it as their own. Not unlike a baby who takes its first steps to walk must acknowledge they are both the vehicle and driver. Those who are suffering must take responsibility for themselves and begin to acknowledge their entire role in experience and life.
The following are, according to Yalom (1980), many types of "denials of responsibility" (pp. 227-229):
Compulsivity. A person who experiences an uncontrollable urge to do a particular behavior and seems to be out of control is in a sense avoiding their responsibility. "Compulsivity obliterates choice" (Yalom, 1980, p. 227).
There is Displacement of Responsibility which is very common in psychotherapy. It occurs when a person "shifts responsibility from themselves to another person."
It can occur in when one asks, what should I do? What do you think I should do? Yalom asserts that for many clients who have problems with doing `homework' it is not so much about time or convenience, even if that is what they purport but rather, "what is at stake is the facing of one's own personal responsibility for one's life and one's process of change. And always lurking beyond that awareness of responsibility is the dread of groundlessness." (Yalom 1980 pp. 229)
The Denial of Responsibility: the Innocent Victim is described when a person fails to
take responsibility for consequences that have occurred as a result of their own volition but they fail to recognize their role in it.
Denial of Responsibility: Losing Control: This occurs when a person "loses control, or goes "out of one's mind". There is a common payoff to this type of denial and that is "nurturance". "Some patients so deeply crave to be nursed, to be fed, to be cared for in the most intimate ways by their therapist that to gain those ends, they `lose control' even to the point of deep regression requiring hospitalization" (p.228).
Avoidance of Autonomous Behaviors: This occurs in clients "who know very well what they can do to help themselves feel better but inexplicably refuse to take that step" (Yalom, 1980, p. 227).
Disorders of Wishing and Deciding: "If one is terrified by groundlessness, then one may avoid willing by deadening oneself to wishing or feeling, by abdicating choice, or by transferring one's choice to other individuals, institutions, or external events" (Yalom, 1980, p. 230).
There is a paradigm that offers insight regarding those who have problems with avoiding responsibility by focusing on one's perception of personal responsibility based on "locus of control". There are those who have an "external locus of control" which may be described as "lack of responsibility acceptance." This is related to "greater feelings of inadequacy, more tendencies of mood disturbances, more tension, anxiety, hostility and confusion" (p.261).
"Those who believe that they are not responsible for what happens to them in the world may pay a heavy penalty. Though they avoid paying the price of existential anxiety associated with awareness of responsibility, they may develop fatalism and depression" (Yalom, 1980, p. 263).
As human beings we all must face the possibility of events that are out of our control. In the past few years we have seen many terrorists' actions here in the United States as well as abroad. People are killed everyday from `natural disasters'. It is when these inexplicable events occur that we feel groundlessness at the core of our being. It is in the face of evil, tragedy and the unexplainable that we experience the sobering and sometimes brutal reality of our freedom. However, even when these things occur, even when we are faced with the horrors of existence, we still have a choice of how we choose to face these horrors.
As our existence approaches the 21st century we are faced with the possibility of self-annihilation. Even with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end to the cold war and arms race we are still at risk for a nuclear devastation. Our environment is weakening and dying as a result of over-population and its subsequent `consumer mentality'. Most tend to ignore these truths and with that comes the ignorance of the possibility of obliteration.
Joseph Fabry, founder of the Institute of Logotherapy, distinguishes between two types of freedom. When a human being is freed from the repression of outside forces such as a totalitarian government, authoritarian parent or religion, or slavery, their freedom not only offers them freedom of motion or thought but also the responsibility of choice and creation. No longer underneath the blanket of control one is forced to respond to the world within his or her self. With freedom comes groundlessness. It is our response to this groundlessness that decides how healthy we are to be. One can either face the reality of freedom and accept his or her responsibility or ignore it. To ignore it is to open up the self to emptiness within. This ignorance is apparent in our actions to ourselves, others, and the earth. It is apparent in the lack of respect for life and the lack of awareness of the realities of our existence. We have become our own potential worst enemy it seems. "Human freedom allows Mankind to say no to even his own existence" (Fabry, 1967, p.124).
In our society there seems to be an aura of complacency that surrounds the "average" person. Recently, I was able to witness it while sitting in the snack bar one rainy afternoon in November. The alarm sounded and instructed everyone in the building to go to the nearest exit. Everyone around me sort of meandered while they put their cigarettes out and packed up belongings, myself included. Everyone was talking and it seemed as though we left the building in a fog. When I got outside I was struck by the reality of the situation. As it was raining, everyone huddled close to the building in order to remain dry. I stepped back from the crowd about thirty feet and watched in horror at the lack of concern of this mystery emergency. I asked the person next to me if he thought we would be so calm if we lived on the West Bank or even Oklahoma City. I looked at everyone, including myself, and said that we think that we are untouchable.
As a species, we are terribly unprepared and part of the reason is that we try to remain so far away from the existential givens of existence. There is an unspoken surrender within most of us. We cannot face these givens and this results in false sense of security. It is ironic that our fear of the "danger" of reality only serves to keep us in harm's way. This is just one of the parents of existential guilt.
Viktor Frankl has said that during his imprisonment in concentration camps during Hitler's rampage of cruelty and murder, he realized that he had both freedom and choice. He could not choose not to be in the death camps but he could choose how he handled it. He said that even in the face of unavoidable suffering, and even death, we can find meaning in how we choose to accept our death.
Epictetus said over 2,000 years ago that, I must die. I must be imprisoned. I must suffer exile. But must I die groaning? Must I whine as well?…My leg you will chain—yes, but not my will—no, not even God can conquer that" (As cited in Yalom, 1980, p. 272).
Another major part of Freedom is Existential guilt. The fact that one is responsible for one's own life assures the experience of existential guilt. One who has existential guilt has transgressed against one's own self - the victim is one's own potential self. Redemption is achieved by plunging oneself into the true vocation of the human being which (as Kierkegaard said) "is to will to be oneself"(1980, p. 27).
A 27 year old woman described how she could characterize existential guilt: "Imagine someone loved you and you loved them, and then imagine telling that person everyday that you hated them." Another 28 year old man characterized it as an aggression towards yourself as well as a shot of "existential adrenaline." Many people denied ever experiencing existential guilt and for some they were only able to mention it intellectually but unable to describe it from a gut level. Two people described existential guilt only to later deny the experience.
Rollo May (1953) defines existential guilt as "arising from one's transgressions against oneself; it emanates from regret from an awareness of the unlived life, of the untapped possibilities within one" (p. 19). Some people described the difficulty in being in the moment while one is experiencing existential guilt and thus self-perpetuating. Once one is caught in the throes of existential guilt, it is very difficult to get out.
As with the other existential concerns that the human being must experience, `existential guilt' is often found in literature although it is one of the tougher ones to spot. The French author, Jean Genet, wrote in The Thief's Journal, "I say to myself, this painful moment must concur with the beauty of my life. I refuse to let this moment and all the others be waste matter" (1964, p.171).
It is clear that there is an underlying current of existence guilt within these words. Our lives are filled with an endless chain of choices. Some that we have chosen and some that we have not. With every decision and act of freedom and will there is its antithesis that we have denied. In contemplating the act of choosing one cannot separate the chosen from the unchosen for they are infinitely part of each other. Just as in life there is the inherent truth of death, in the chosen there is the undeniability of the denied. Perhaps, we fear death not only because when we die we will `be no more’, but also for the fact that when we die before we have found our true selves we shall forever be what we are not.
Yalom defines existential guilt not as the result of some criminal act that the individual has committed, but quite the contrary. Existential guilt issues from omission. He is guilty for what he has not done with his life.
We all carry within us the pains of our past; the realities of our human tendency to squander our lives caught up in the trappings of everyday lives. No one can ever be all they would be if they could. Within the freedom we experience lie limitations that prevent us from being all there is. These limitations are exaggerated when one takes into account our oftentimes willful waste. There will always be the trailing reminder of all that has never been and all that never will be. We cannot escape it.
We are like a lot of wild
Spiders crying together,
But without tears
(Robert Trail Spence Lowell Fall 1961(1964)
We enshroud our transgressions against ourselves within a fog as thick as guilt itself. This fog is not near us but is us. Each failing strikes fiercely against our shield of the "myth of the average man". Freedom is life unshielded. Freedom is therefore frightening and avoided. Thoreau once said, "Oh, to have reached the point of death and not have lived at all!" When we sit passively on the fence of decision we are committing an act of violence against ourselves. Many are frozen in fear of movement because movement can bring the frightening realities to the surface. The inner waters of contemporary man are still. The sludge of terror awaits in the depths. It waits for an active current to stir up the realities that are inevitably unavoidable. Our guilt is one of neglect, neglect of our humanity and being. When one lives their life in existential stagnancy, like the pond, that life will become unhealthy and clouded. For many, the numbness of the dead pond is better than the painful fear of finitude and regret.
So we live.
However, as difficult and painful as it may be, one must learn to forgive oneself because to cling to sin is to forever offend. There comes a point in time when one must let go and accept the hard realities of our actions and our inaction. Existential guilt is a common roadblock to psychological healing and growth. If one is stuck behind the guilt of wasted time and wasted life, there can be no action beyond that point. If there is no action then there is no progress and therefore no healing or growth.
posted by AL at 12:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home