Being normal is about accepting what society tells you to do. The opposite of that is about having all the courage to live your life in your own terms. There is no comfort in believing that you are right at all times. The definition of living is rooted in wanting to be a little different from others. This is what true freedom means. But your convictions cannot be used to make others feel that they are less than human. To think that your moral position is supreme compared to those embraced by others is not a strength. It can only be a form of weakness. You cannot confuse that condescending attitude with moral courage.
I will describe the problem of exclusion. First, there is the exclusion of people. A person is metaphysically whole, but he or she is often judged on the basis of color, race, gender or status in human society. Some people think of other human beings as their inferior. This can be observed in the way the powerful, including prominent celebrities, treat others. The ordinary man with a blue-collar job is given very low regard. Social injustice is rooted in the unjust treatment of the powerless in the margins of human society.
Second, there is the exclusion of cultures. The Renaissance period brought forth great glory to humankind. The advent of science gave rise to new ways of manipulating nature. With man’s tremendous power, the West has been able to put human reason into the pedestal. Nature became subservient to man. This ability has given man the seeming control of his fate. But indigenous cultures have remained attached to nature. Simplicity defined things for traditional wisdom. Yet, people prefer the superficiality of material culture over the value of what is natural.
Third, there is the exclusion of migrants. Citizenship has become the basis of the rights of men. A migrant worker is seen as an outsider who possesses no rights and who only want to be in a host country for economic reasons. This human being is treated unfairly, abused and exploited. Refugees are seen as a threat or a risk to national security. While social justice begins as a principle based on the equality of persons, its interpretation in the arena of international relations is that it is about the equality of citizens.
Fourth, there is the exclusion of voices. Some voices are silenced simply because they belong to individuals who are powerless. Being right or wrong no longer depends on the strength of one’s arguments. Rather, it now depends on the positional advantage of people. In a masculine world, the voice of a father appears to be in full control of the affairs of the house. A mother is there simply to lend support, to care for the children, and to show compassion. But in terms of making major decisions, it is the male voice that prevails. A woman, in this way, gets the wrong idea that she must always be obedient or subservient to rules in a male-dominated society.
Changing the world will not only require reforming institutions. We also have to alter the course of how people see things. As moral subjects, we evaluate human action and make ethical judgments. In the end, everything becomes a question of values. Reason can only desire its old glory during the Enlightenment, but it has come down crashing at the height of a post-mortem in which its foundations have been thoroughly shaken. Metanarratives are inadequate to explain how and why things come to be. Human freedom does not have one precise meaning nor a singular definition. Love, as transcendence, is beyond measure.
Goethe is right in saying that a teacher can only choose between two things: he can either inspire or be that instrument of fear. Indeed, exclusion is meant to instill fear and make people act like docile bodies, says Michel Foucault. We normalize a moral wrong when we are no longer critical of the demeaning ways of entitled personalities. Repressive power is no longer the main threat to the dignity of men and women. Rather, the problem has metamorphosed into a more virulent form – the prejudice against other human beings.
