It seems to me that if we do not manifest a desire to control the direction of our changing self-identity, then we consign the outcome of that change to chance. We become as a leaf in the wind, with no pain, stress, or exertion, but equally likely to to be blown to the gutter or the sky. If we instead take some control of our self-evolution, we become as the falcon. The falcon needs to exert itself to go where it wants, and may break its wings if it flies against too strong a storm. But it has infinitely more choices than the leaf; it can choose to fly to the sky, rather than being blown to the floor.
I don't think the idea of "dishonor" quite applies to someone's reactions. Imagine someone who, due to their background, feels intense guilt whenever they are complimented. That reaction may be very natural and completely understandable if you know their past - but that doesn't make it appropriate. It seems like such a person would be well-advised to take affirmative steps to change that reaction. However, wanting to change that reaction doesn't mean that they need to deny it exists. Rather, it suggests a need for self-understanding in order to find out how the undesired quality arose, and thus how best to change it.
Regarding the angry activists, it seems like their anger is necessary only to overcome their relative powerlessness to effect the change they want. If the activists had the power to simply sit down and rewrite the law, they wouldn't need to get angry. I believe that we are empowered to change ourselves, and thus more closely match the latter case.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-09-23 06:59 pm (UTC)I don't think the idea of "dishonor" quite applies to someone's reactions. Imagine someone who, due to their background, feels intense guilt whenever they are complimented. That reaction may be very natural and completely understandable if you know their past - but that doesn't make it appropriate. It seems like such a person would be well-advised to take affirmative steps to change that reaction. However, wanting to change that reaction doesn't mean that they need to deny it exists. Rather, it suggests a need for self-understanding in order to find out how the undesired quality arose, and thus how best to change it.
Regarding the angry activists, it seems like their anger is necessary only to overcome their relative powerlessness to effect the change they want. If the activists had the power to simply sit down and rewrite the law, they wouldn't need to get angry. I believe that we are empowered to change ourselves, and thus more closely match the latter case.