Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Taboos can be both useful for the development of society: thou shalt not kill and so on, and are useless (and even harmful): taboo on autopsies in the Middle Ages. And if the violation of the former can lead to the destruction of society or its degeneration, then the violation of the latter expands the scope of knowledge and science, contributes to the development of society and people in it. So the main thing is to distinguish which taboo you are going to break and why?
If humans didn't break the taboo, humanity would have died out long ago. It is the constant going beyond the boundaries of the known world that allows the human community to constantly develop, to become more and more protected from the eternal aggression of soulless nature, in which the law of non-decreasing entropy applies, or, more simply, the desire for a more stable state and, accordingly, for the destruction of complex structures.
And, by the way, it is easy to see that communities and social systems that value more freedom of creativity and open relationships between people, without irrational prohibitions (taboos), are significantly ahead of their competitors, in which it is customary to impose taboos on everything.
Taboo is a terrible word. It is not that it is terrible, which means prohibition-prohibition is an obligatory part of our life. Like ” don't play with matches!”, “don't cross the street at the green light” or “don't mix vodka with beer”. These are all prohibitions based on the everyday experience of the older generation or on a social agreement. They can be explained and understood. Taboo is a sacred prohibition. When performing a taboo, we cannot know the reason and purpose of this prohibition. By fulfilling a taboo, we obey someone else's will. We place our destiny in the hands of some other organ, some deity. It takes away our responsibility, but it takes away our identity.
So explain why you can't or go fuck yourself!
PS anthropologists say that all primitive taboos are a distorted ban on incest. Taboo is an old prohibition, with a lost, forgotten meaning. Why it was needed, but everyone has already forgotten why it is needed. Meanwhile, this prohibition is the foundation of our civilization.
Before you destroy anything, you need to understand what exactly is “taboo”?�
This, as the author wrote above, is a ban. Not just a ban – it is a sacred ban, unshakable, punishable by a person or someone else. Since religion is the first social institution of humanity, it was precisely religion that regulated the destructive and creative energy of man. At least, this is a ban that comes from the past and it is not always based on common sense, since many superstitions, prohibitions, laws are already remnants of the past, but there are also common, rational taboos among these prohibitions. �
There are taboos-sacred, that is, taboo religions, for example, in Islam there is pork, is such a ban justified? Respond to you.�
Of course, there are also significant prohibitions, such as: do not kill, do not steal, do not commit adultery, etc. But on the other hand, there is still an eye-for-an-eye law in some countries, murder for murder, isn't it a sin, a taboo? Here they are double standards, that is, for each society this or that taboo will have a different tendency. Or the ban on incest, who can say that this ban (taboo) should I break it? кан Or cannibalism? It's all a game of dice, with no luck. But really, as it was described above, in order to build a new one, it is necessary to destroy the old one, that is, to build a new one. break the taboo….only what is up to you to decide, and you are responsible for its violation. Our history is proof of that.
Categorical prohibitions are useful where violating them brings tangible harm. For example, the need to prohibit passengers from visiting the cockpit on an airplane is obvious. Another thing is a taboo-a specific ban, the reason for which is not rational or completely absent. Such a ban is a dogma, and dogmas are extremely harmful – they mortify the individual, destroy freedom of thought.