Author: Jairo Alarcón Rodas
Civility is the art of living together in society, respecting the rights and dignity of others.
Hanna Arendt
A large part of human problems are due to the fact that their reasoning, thoughts and appreciations are constructed arbitrarily, that is, each individual obtains conclusions outside of a logical relationship and interprets, subjectively, in their own way, aspects of reality, of the facts. and circumstances, which translates into divergent opinions that hinder communication, any possibility of dialogue and consensus. It is all because, in the structuring of his thinking, evaluative aspects, assumptions, beliefs emerge that have very little degree of certainty.
Locating oneself in the world requires recognition of the terrain where one is located and, of course, its orientation. Performing a quick reading on reality, more superficial than deep, is the attitude of the majority of human beings. The primordial thing, in every subject-object relationship, is that this process is carried out through direct-sensitive contact, where sight plays an essential role. Establishing the antecedent and consequent of a fact can be done logically, but also psychologically, giving rise to fallacies of appreciation.
However, the subjects who perceive the world are not empty beings, they do not constitute a tabula rasa in which experiences only begin to be recorded, at the moment of having contact with objects or at the moment of becoming aware of their presence. On the contrary, the human being has memory that is the result of acquired experiences, accumulated data and information, through teaching and learning, by acquired reference, from enculturation and socialization. With this wealth of information, he moderately orients himself, which allows him to function within reality, he is therefore a cultural being.
Along with this cultural origin, women and men have had particular experiences, experiences that outline their criteria about what things are; readings with which they are fully identified. Many times they do not care if what they are considering has a strict degree of veracity or if what they think can be rationally argued, they simply consider that what they say is true and, for them, that is enough.
In this way, the delimited world to which the private sphere belongs is constructed, with a mixture of knowledge and emotions. Therefore, it can be said that The private sphere is a certain sector of social life in which an individual enjoys a degree of authority, unhindered by the interventions of the government or other institutions.. It is, to a certain extent, the intimacy of each person, without the interference of regularizations established by certain social conventions, it is where the personality of each individual, what each subject is, freely emerges.
Human beings also operate in the public sphere, they are subject to State regulations, this is where the exercise of individual freedom is restricted to preserve social cohesion, through norms that must be met, which regulate their behavior, given that, if they did not exist, each individual would consider that their beliefs, desires and desires should be granted regardless of the impact this entails on others. Remember that freedom makes sense in society.
However, human beings are not consolidated beings, on the contrary, they are open to knowledge, they can constantly learn and continue accumulating experiences and, with it, change their minds. Despite this, people consider that what they believe is correct and, therefore, that they are the measure of things. Thus, discussing without specifying the rules of the game is nothing more than an vent of personal concerns, in which there will clearly be no consensus.
In that world of particular opinions, which respond to evaluations, intentions, concerns and desires on the part of each individual, it is in the private sphere, in the family, where the subjective aspects are most welcomed and it is understandable, since that is where Emotional ties require greater relevance.
The private sphere is the source where individual concerns, typical of each person, are expressed. But what should correspond to the private sphere, without a doubt that is where cultural traits, personal beliefs, religiosity, and peculiar modes of behavior are most clearly manifested.
Both the private and public spheres are part of the horizon where people demonstrate, however, there are sectors that, following certain political conceptions, intend for the field of action of the public sphere to be more delimited and not break into the private sphere of each person. person. But, to what extent should the State regulate the behavior of each individual, what is the limit that separates these two spheres? It should be noted that The distinction between private and public spheres corresponds to the family and political spheres.. Although the family is related to the political and the political to the family, ensuring that these two aspects agree, without irresolvable antagonisms, will be the challenge that every democratic ruler must face.
A few years ago, in France, an event occurred that continued to be a problem and brought into debate the limits of the private and public sphere of the inhabitants of that country. It all originated with the regulation, by the State, of the use of cultural clothing in educational centers. Since the 2004 secularism law, which generically prohibits in public schools, schools and institutes, any symbol “that ostensibly manifests a religious affiliation.”such a position, assumed by the French government, subsequently triggered a series of protests by the Islamic community.
In 2010, during the presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy, the wearing of full veils, such as the burqa or the niqab, was banned in public places, such as buses, trains or public buildings.. Is religiosity, typical of certain people, part of their private sphere or should it be welcomed in the public sphere? For the French government, any religious symbol or manifestation, in a secular State, cannot be allowed, since the use of these garments in public spaces is an intrusion into the private sphere of others.
The problem becomes more acute when a person wants to transfer the private to the public and impose it, hence, in the public sphere, being neutral in terms of domestic emotional and cultural concerns, this cannot be allowed to happen, in order to guarantee peaceful coexistence and non-intrusion of other people’s private spheres. The question that arises from this is, to what extent can the State intervene to regulate the behavior of the inhabitants of a society, thereby affecting, in a certain way, their private sphere? The answer could be, to the point of safeguarding the coexistence of the inhabitants of a country and guaranteeing their social rights, free of totalitarianism and excesses.
However, each time the limit that corresponds to the private is expanded and the public has to face it rationally and consensually, to avoid conflicts that this may cause.
