Chronicles (Part II): All the Islands Look the Same

As I mentioned in the introduction to this site, my departure from England occured some time ago. I’m collecting and sharing these posts now because I have moved past the place of pure frustration and confusion to a place of increased perspective. Again, my journey is not yet complete. But perhaps I’ve seen a sufficient amount along the way that I can now more safely navigate the waters. That said, I don’t want to ignore the fact that I’ve crossed paths with my fair share of dangerous lands- most, if not all, of which were intentionally approached (you can decide for yourself the wisdom of these decisions).

So before I share with you the experience of the seasoned yachtsman, I feel compelled to share the (in)experience of the foolish runaway. Just like Chesterton felt in recounting his voyage, many of these “chronicles” are somewhat embarassing to me now- just as, I’m sure, my current ones will be at a later time. But the point of this endeavor is not to preserve my pride. It is to be honest…

I’ll be posting seven pieces from the early parts of my journey.

3/29/2006

What if the good man and the bad man are really the same man? What if the bad man is simply a good man who got screwed over a few times and learned that being a nice guy didn’t pay off, so he became tough and screwed other people over instead. What if the good man was simply a bad man who felt guilty and learned that being nice really did pay off, so he became good and treated others well so that they’d treat him well? What if the man is simply labeled by what neighborhood he lives in, by the family he belongs to, by his friends, his experiences, his situation? Sure, it’s the basic psychological question… nature vs. nurture. “Nurture is the soil for nature’s seed”. Well, that’s obvious. But, what if it extends to the most fundamental and most important aspects of life? What if a man’s very soul is forged through years of experience? Now we have a serious problem.

Are terrorists and priests really different people? Sure, they speak different languages, live in different parts of the world, take part in different activities. But both are really doing the same essential things… they are responding to their worlds! The terrorist has been taught that the best way to deal with the crap life throws at him is to throw it right back. The priest has been taught that the best way to deal with it is to accept it, maybe fight it every once in a while when it doesn’t hurt someone, but believe that it’s God’s will. Sure, the priest may have learned more by himself whereas the terrorist may have learned by force, thus making the priest’s way a little more educated… but does that really change anything?

The terrorist takes comfort in the fact that he is doing what is right, as does the priest. Both are comforted. And what if they are not? Does that really say that something is wrong with them, or does it mean that they have learned the wrong system? Been taught the wrong system? Or more fundamentally… did they just grow up in the wrong neighborhood, with the wrong family, with the wrong friends? Again, who is to say that they are not products of their raising? You can argue that some people rebel against their raising and turn into complete opposites of everything they have known… but this argument is in and of itself uneducated. Rebellion is a form of learning just like any other, and often an even more productive one. Where is the distinction? What action is taken that is not learned?