Very difficult to dissociate delivery courier, of the message, although in reality, a detestable messenger can be the bearer of an excellent message or vice versa. However, evaluating the message without considering the messenger is the most effective way to obtain the information that regulates our criteria and allows for the best decision making. It is common to believe that by disqualifying the messenger we transform reality or detract from the message.
Nothing could be more false, the value or sustainability of the message generally has little to do with who sends it.
But in our social culture, and especially in politics, we believe in the content of the message only if we believe in whoever sends them to us; In this way, we can imaginatively convert into truth how many lies they tell us, or on the contrary, if the messenger is not a “saint of our devotion” that is, he is not to our liking, we will convert the message into a lie, without further ado. judgment and without objectively analyzing its content.
It cannot be that what “X” affirms is true, just because he expresses it, while what “Y” maintains is false for the same reason.
And our free will? And our capacity for analysis? And our freedom of thought?
Do we renounce all that – and what it means – to subject ourselves to someone else's will?
To renounce this is to renounce our dignity and quality as free people.
And specifically, giving up the analysis of any message just because we do not like the messenger's clothing, or because his political creed does not agree with ours, is to give up the possibility of reinforcing our thesis or modifying it, where appropriate.
But definitely drinking in all the messages that come to us is a privilege, and ultimately it will be our decision to discard or consider something positive about the message received.
For a Mexico and United let's make a pact.
Thank you.
see more
#messenger