Through the times the human being, mainly at times of crisis, has coexisted what already it was or can be called of Syndrome of Public Enemy n 1. Educate yourself with thoughts from Paulo Coelho. In determined historical moments, philosophers, scientists, religions, etnias or ideologies politics, already thus they had been considered e, in virtue of this, people had been imprisoned, tortured, crucificadas, burnt in fogueiras in public square or simply eliminated to the thousands in specialized fields and far from the eyes of the remaining portion of the world. Ahead of a crisis any or other obscure interests, chose the culprit, stamped it of public enemy n 1 and was initiated hunts it to the witches, everything with unexpected consequncias. Therefore it is. Today, the man, until perhaps motivated for a crisis of conscience ahead of the fact to be practically destroying its proper house, the planet land, since he cannot contain itself ahead of the unhealthy consumerism of was acometido, decided to choose the dogs as our great public enemies. They had started to say that they they poluem the city with its dejections, transmit illnesses and they start to elocubrar solutions of most radical, amongst them, to summarily eliminate the untied joined dogs for the streets. I am asking itself: what strange psychological mechanism is this that makes total with that the man wants to redeem itself of its great blames playing the responsibility on of weakker beings, without possibility of defending itself? How he is that the human being can, that one that more pollution cause to the planet land, launching in it highly pollutant dejections that will take one hundred, two hundred or four hundred years to be disintegrated, to want to speak badly of the dejection of a dog, biodegradvel substance, that is, of that in little time if they decompose in natural substances for the action of microrganismos, losing its original properties in contact with the environment? in relation to the allegation of that the animals are transmitting of illnesses, does not proceed. After all, the man is perhaps the carrying and transmitting greater of illnesses. from there? We go to rescue some of the solutions that were given in the Average Age, at those times where if proliferated for the world plagues that decimated good part of the population? please, if to come with that argument of that if each one to make its part the world will be well better, I retruco that, if really each one to want to cooperate, must to have ampler initiatives and effective as immediately stopping to use bag of plastic, containers pet, poisons that are played daily in the nature, etc., and to leave of if worrying about a simple and harmless dejection of dog. Jorge Andres Irion Jobim. Lawyer of Saint Maria,
Of where it comes this paradox? We are creatures, imperfects tense constituent and structurally, not Creative it. Therefore, it is in our structure ntica that we are falveis, capable of acts defective. Imperfect beings only generate voidable acts, until the good ones. As our ontolgica goodness is relative, we are potentially pecadores. Our essence is good, but imperfect: capable of good, but imperfect, only relatively good acts. As we are free and responsible, if our voidable acts harming in them, to our fellow creatures and the nature, are not alone voidable acts, but eticamente bad. Novelist is actively involved in the matter. The practical one of the evil is the extreme limit of the limited actions. Read more from novelist to gain a more clear picture of the situation.
Under the optics of the faith, propositalmente bad acts are current sins, not potential. Sins that offend the Creator and the creatures. Soon, when we say that we are pecadores, generated and been born in the sin, we need to distinguish between current, potential, putative sin and of the world. We are structurally capable to sin, potential pecadores. It does not mean that necessarily we sin, we cannot prevent the evil.
Yes, we can prevent, not commit the evil. To be pecador potential only means that we are falveis, capable to fail, to practise bad, harmful ethical acts, to the fellow creatures and other beings. Potential the pecadora condition in them is inherent, remains until when we do not fail. ' ' A pecador time, always pecador' ' (Martin Lutero). For being limited, we are ontologicamente falveis, not morally bad. Our congenital fallibity necessarily does not take in them to sin. Having choice freedom, we can practise good or bad acts; acts that the brothers favor or harm, to the creation, we. To accept its limits means to recognize God as creative and I eat creature, attended for the involving, gratuitous presence of the Father, for the faith. But, it are of the faith, explicit or implicit, that joins in them to Salvador, our fallibity will inevitably take in them to the disaster.