This caused a dispute over people, some in favor, and some against criticizing what she was doing.
We all Greer upon the fact that we have got the right to do whatever we want in the privacy of our home, However, aren’t there limits? There certainly are. According to our society, we are free; still we must follow a set of rules. For Instance, killing somebody at home is penalized by society. Thus,you are not only transgressing the law but also, moral bounds. The Argentinean Constitution states that the consumption of weed is illegal but not penalized as long as they don’t alter public order nor affect third parties.
This portrays a characteristic of our society, which might be considered from an Apollonian view, society in terms of rules and order. This refers to Apollo from Greek Mythology who was the God of reason and the rational. People who think Dolores action is unacceptable, have an Apollonian view on society. People, who support Dolores Fond’s behavior, approach to the brunches concept, which states that people must live setting their own limits never minding rules imposed by society. So, if her case is seen from this point of view, to what extent are her actions o be penalized? The-counter drugs are equally or more harmful than illegal. The state should not Intervene despite the suffering of another, except that an Individual has certain obligations which arena t possible to fulfill as a damage of the consumption. ” Dolores stated that she could always fulfill her duties in spite of smoking weed, so there ‘s no reason to consider her actions as immoral. Freud, a great supporter of the free will to power, has a resemblance with the brunches concept since he believed in humans desires as Instincts at a subconscious level.
Freud wrote a book called “Civilization and Its Discontents” where he analyses the fundamental tensions between civilization and the individual. He states that our own happiness Is restricted by the law, as many of humankind instincts are damaging to the well-being of the human community. In this case, Dolores smoking weed In the presence of her children might be harmful for them but, contradictory, beneficial for herself psychologically, as it helps her to escape from her daily routine (as she ‘s stated).
Therefore, our society enforces the repression of our instincts and wills since, some, may affect third parties, negatively. So, can we argue that this Issue is more than just a fight between the brunches, will to power, and society restrictions? Sin t it an inner fight between our instincts and our moral values that repress those instinctive wills that humanity has? In our opinion, when tackling this knowledge Issue, what first came to our mind was this Idea of the Clash between the brunches and social restrictions.
But as we went deeper Into the topic we realized hat this clash happens to be much more complex, it’s within ourselves; meaning that 1 OFF taken, unconsciously, we decide what to do taking into account the consequences, whether or not is this action morally acceptable. This moral, humans tend to have, restrict many of our wills as they may interfere with society as a whole or with someone else. Moral depends on the culture in which a person lives, and it’s society. For instance: in Jamaica, within the Restraints movement, there’s a regular use of weed, which is part of their way of living.
Whereas, in our country, when learning about people who smoke weed, big and complex dilemmas arise, since for our moral, such actions are not acceptable. If we think of Dolores Fond’s case within a Registrar community, it would ‘t have been a topic of heated discussion. All in all, individual freedom is conditioned by moral values established by our society. If certain rules are not respected, then we pay a price for this transgression. This clearly shows that although we are free, our freedom is limited not only by the constitution itself, but also, by our own morality.