Remember the famous lines from A Tale of Two Cities by Dickens?
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way – in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only."
We have a parallel, our own irony. We live in an Age of Guilt and Innocence.
On one hand, ours is an era of victimization spiraling ever narrower into this or that group. You might ask if there could ever be a stopping point, some non-occurrence of offended segment of society. As yet, such a point has not been reached, and the downward ever-narrowing spiral continues. Smaller and smaller groups become victims. The narrowest point of the spiral of guilt is the individual who is offended by what some stranger did or said even when the act or word might have been unintentional or aimed at another target. We live in an age of peripheral verbal damage. In this era of victimization guilt is placed by ascription.
On the other hand, ironically and in a Dickensian parallel, all the while guilt for this or that perceived offense spirals ever narrower, another movement parallels in a seemingly unending and widening spiral that dissipates into guiltlessness. No one can be guilty because the spiral of guiltlessness includes an enveloping culture or society. No one can be responsible when everyone is. It’s a matter of social pressure or influence. If guilt is ascribed, then it doesn’t originate from within the individual. There’s no inherent compunction.
One spiral designates increasing guilt; the other, widening one designates decreasing responsibility. The difference lies merely on which spiral one envisions: Are you victim by virtue of narrowness? Then you ascribe. Are you guiltless? Then you belong to the widest group.
We live in a society where intention, that unseen force that defines responsibility, is inferred by victims and disavowed by perpetrators. The formal law is clear on the matter: Actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. Victim? Then intention is clear. Guiltless? The offense was unintended. The blame-the-society group might argue that no one can be held personally responsible when everyone in the largest group is guilty. The smallest group, by contrast suffers from the insensitivity of the largest one.
So, our age has its own best and worst. The superlatives rule in general. Comparative modifiers are relegated to individuals. The world as a whole is superlative for both the victims (the smallest groups) and the guiltless (the largest groups). Will there ever be a time without ascription of guilt for perceived offenses? Will there ever be a time without assumed innocence by immersion in an encompassing group?
The debating will continue. Here it is in general:
“You can’t use this word because it offends my group.”
“But I meant to honor the group by using the term for the beneficial value it connotes.”
“You aren’t a member of the group, so you can’t use the word.”
Imagine. Our species has survived 200 millennia of earthquakes, tsunamis, eruptions, meteorite strikes, hurricanes, tornadoes, landslides and avalanches, floods and fires, heat and cold. But it doesn’t look promising for our surviving the use of words, the ascription of guilt, and the absence of responsibility.
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way – in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only."
We have a parallel, our own irony. We live in an Age of Guilt and Innocence.
On one hand, ours is an era of victimization spiraling ever narrower into this or that group. You might ask if there could ever be a stopping point, some non-occurrence of offended segment of society. As yet, such a point has not been reached, and the downward ever-narrowing spiral continues. Smaller and smaller groups become victims. The narrowest point of the spiral of guilt is the individual who is offended by what some stranger did or said even when the act or word might have been unintentional or aimed at another target. We live in an age of peripheral verbal damage. In this era of victimization guilt is placed by ascription.
On the other hand, ironically and in a Dickensian parallel, all the while guilt for this or that perceived offense spirals ever narrower, another movement parallels in a seemingly unending and widening spiral that dissipates into guiltlessness. No one can be guilty because the spiral of guiltlessness includes an enveloping culture or society. No one can be responsible when everyone is. It’s a matter of social pressure or influence. If guilt is ascribed, then it doesn’t originate from within the individual. There’s no inherent compunction.
One spiral designates increasing guilt; the other, widening one designates decreasing responsibility. The difference lies merely on which spiral one envisions: Are you victim by virtue of narrowness? Then you ascribe. Are you guiltless? Then you belong to the widest group.
We live in a society where intention, that unseen force that defines responsibility, is inferred by victims and disavowed by perpetrators. The formal law is clear on the matter: Actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. Victim? Then intention is clear. Guiltless? The offense was unintended. The blame-the-society group might argue that no one can be held personally responsible when everyone in the largest group is guilty. The smallest group, by contrast suffers from the insensitivity of the largest one.
So, our age has its own best and worst. The superlatives rule in general. Comparative modifiers are relegated to individuals. The world as a whole is superlative for both the victims (the smallest groups) and the guiltless (the largest groups). Will there ever be a time without ascription of guilt for perceived offenses? Will there ever be a time without assumed innocence by immersion in an encompassing group?
The debating will continue. Here it is in general:
“You can’t use this word because it offends my group.”
“But I meant to honor the group by using the term for the beneficial value it connotes.”
“You aren’t a member of the group, so you can’t use the word.”
Imagine. Our species has survived 200 millennia of earthquakes, tsunamis, eruptions, meteorite strikes, hurricanes, tornadoes, landslides and avalanches, floods and fires, heat and cold. But it doesn’t look promising for our surviving the use of words, the ascription of guilt, and the absence of responsibility.
RSS Feed