- “Civilization is just a slow process of learning to be kind,” said the sage, yet the civilizing influence of the city is continually under attack from those both inside and outside its limits.
- This is because the city itself is an act of violence against its inhabitants, a continual attempt to curb the behaviour of the barbarians it finds within its gates.
- “To really appreciate architecture, you may even need to commit a murder,” said yet another sage. Violence within city limits is different to violence outside, and preferable because of it.
- On the other hand, what do sages know? Socrates did his damnedest to hurt and to heal the city (possibly the same thing) with no discernible results. The gods of the city had him killed, of course.
- At some point in all of our lives, we have to decide what is our more important priority – defending the city against attack, or defending ourselves against the city?
- If we choose the former, then we commit ourselves to taking up arms against those who would undermine the city, but our course of violence is clear.
- If we choose the latter, then we will be hunted down like dogs in the street by the city, and our course of violence will remain ambiguous at best.
- So our choice is not between violence and non-violence, but between certainty and uncertainty. I knew there was something else going on here.
This entry was posted on Sunday, September 5th, 2010 at 8:16 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.
