Reflections on relations today – 2013
In 1923, with the first edition of the famous book of the Austrian philosopher Martin Buber “I-Thou”, it was possible to understand the human existence through the relation. For Buber human existence happens in the relationship defined by two basic words: I-Thou and I-It, according to the attitude we have. Each part of a basic word presupposes the other one:
The basic words are said with being. When you say it, it is also said the I of the I-You pair. When we say this, we also say the I of the I-It pair. You can only say the basic I-Thou word with the whole being. You can never say the basic word I-It with the whole being. [1](Martin Buber, 2006 p11).
The I-Thou relationship is spontaneous and genuine, it involves the same availability between myself and the other. As it is of the nature of every relationship, it exists for a certain time, it comprises the time of contact and withdrawal. This means that relationship is a dynamic process, made up of encounters. There is the consciousness of the other, that is, of his individuality and uniqueness. We are one part of the other and the other is an end in itself and not a means to an end. In other words, the person exists by himself and not to make us happy. We can even be happy together, but each one by itself. To illustrate, we can say that the relation that the teacher has with his student is a relationship I-Tu, in educating, the student is an end in itself, and not a means to an end. On the other hand, the I-It relationship occurs when the other is a means to an end. In its existence the human being relates to objects, people, forms or signs that he refers to as That, that is, everything that is not You. To better understand, the relation that the student has with his teacher is a relation I-It, because the teacher is a means for the student to reach an end that is knowledge. It is, therefore, from the I-That relationship that is the development of scientific, technological and all kinds of knowledge. Thus, also essential and fundamental for the human being. So, I-You and I-That are the two dimensions of human relationships. The attitude of the Self before the world is the same before itself, the relationship is reciprocity.
So it is through these two dimensions of human relationships that we construct our identity. We spend our lives building and redefining who we are from what we learn and assimilate from our encounters, our relationships and choices and the greater the awareness of this movement and disposition for this awareness, the more mature and enrichment of life experiences. I like to think that every aspect of who we are is built by our experiences and our relationships. I like to think that every aspect of who we are is built by our experiences and our relationships.
Who do we relate to when communicating through the computer? How do we relate when we participate in a social network? How do we establish bases and criteria for choices in the face of such a vast amount of possibilities arranged on the internet that makes us deal with numbers that often indicate dimensions that we can not even imagine? Not to mention that all this is done fast, very fast.
At first they are not difficult questions to answer. I believe that many agree that there is a predominance in the I-It relationship and there is clearly superficiality or impoverishment in the definitions of criteria of choices. The prompt answer should not satisfy the question, since the permanence of these and many other questions of the present time is that it can effectively direct us in new searches.
The predominance of the I-It relationship is not the problem, since the base words do not presuppose negative or positive aspects. The problem I see is that where there could be the I-Thou relationship, as fundamental in the formation of identity as the I-Thou relationship, there is an impoverishment and a predominance of I-Thou relationship, replacing one by the other, we lose opportunities, so there is a big imbalance and that’s where I see a problem. For you to understand better, I will mention two of the aspects that, in my view, with social networks and new technology, make us lose opportunities to have more balanced relationships: spontaneity and compulsory response.
I see many adults commenting that they “found” childhood friends on Facebook, and when I explore the conversation a little bit about this meeting, it is usually summarized in “it was cool”, “it was really fast because I had to …”, “he or she is working on this or that, “” he or she got married, has a son … “, etc. Hardly that end-of-chat phrase “let’s meet?” Happens. You might say that a meeting of childhood friends on the street is the same. I do not see it like that. A meeting on the street has spontaneity and surprise, so it is lived differently. Encounters in life have their time, as we have seen. And if being with that person belonged only to that time in life? In a way, “dating” on facebook can “force” a re-entry of people into our lives that do not have the same meaning as a truly spontaneous encounter or reunion. The friend is added and ready, is one more in a list of names that only grows in quantity and hardly in quality of relation. Another aspect is the obligation to respond. It is no longer acceptable to respond almost immediately to a call, be it messaging or voice over mobile phones, emails, social networks. The time of each is easily confused with the time of the other. If I do not respond within a few minutes to a person who sends me a message, they will call again and still need to justify delay in response. These two aspects that I mention here are among many others that I see as movements that contribute to the dynamic imbalance of relationships.
By widening the angle of relationships, we are adults of a generation who have seen and see a tremendous change of references and who are failing to sustain fundamental values such as tradition and authority, for example, in our relationships with the younger generations. The speed with which objects are simply abandoned by the launch of another model, the exaggeration of consumption fed by the ease and speed of acquisition of new technologies, brands, types, colors, and, most of all, takes us from a place of existence and plays in a place of appearance.
There is no time to build a history of an object that is quickly discarded and therefore does not retain its value. Thus, what has or had value for the adult is not something admired and valued by today’s teenager. In terms of the relation between adolescents and adults there does not seem to be a novelty there, but the difference of the actuality in relation to other times is not subtle. The discussion on the current situation is vast and it should not be considered further here. It is important only to point out that one of the tasks of the adolescent in the construction of his identity as an adult is to overcome the parents, from the recognition of his authority and reference. With the weakening of these values and crossways in relationships, superficiality and impoverishment in the criteria of choices how exactly does the adolescent realize what he needs to overcome?
I resist technology as I resist everything that is imposed so as not to give way to reflections, which does not mean that I oppose it radically. The problem is not technology or the internet, but the way we make use of them. What bothers you is how easily the novelties are absorbed without going through the sieve of our needs as if we were always satisfying the needs of manufacturers and sellers, or making our need from their need. As we readily tend to abandon habits so fundamental to our encounters, growth and experiences without reaching the depth of things. The standardization imposed by consumption forces the fragile definition of figures that remain sharp for very little time in a background of chaotic diversity.
As adults, parents, teachers, professionals in contact with adolescents and children we need to build in our encounters sharp and lasting figures. Where there is encounter, there is transformation. And it is meetings, I remind everyone, that relationships are made.
Making good use of the resources we have is always extremely important. We are able to build the most beautiful relationships and, at the same time, the most profound solitude. We will not have failed with the younger generations if, with all the fantastic resources we have, we know how to live and convey the essentials of trying to be better human beings.
[1] BUBER, M. Yo y Tú y otros ensayos. Buenos Aires: Lilmod, 2006
