We believe that adherence to the logic is reassuring, although we should recognize that it is not always the case and that rationality can be a dogma liable to be revised.
We often hear that young offenders were not born thieves but it was society that led them to that behavior or at least, it allowed them to transform into antisocial.
Surely there is some truth in this claim, but more could be added.
One might think that we are all born thieves, although in the learning process we become more and more inhibited to do something that is expressly condemned by the penal code.
This way of describing the facts incorporates a shade that can be valuable in assessing the behavior of offenders. It is not the same as saying that they are bad to say that they are uninhibited and have not much fear as those who honored us as autodefinimos.
Could advance a somewhat paradoxical conclusion: If we impose the obligation to be consistent were exposed to insecurity.
Indeed: first extol the brave, fearful criticize, but it turns out to be honest we have to be fearful of the threats imposed by law.
The compulsion to be consistent forces us to fall into a debilitating contradiction or are cowards and are brave but honest or criminals. This would lead us to think that we suffer criminal actions because we force ourselves to be consistent and we are missing when we can not.
In other words, our pro - coherence culture is telling them to steal by lack of fear of punishment, which are not brave, but also tells us all that fearlessness is a characteristic value.
Conclusion: maybe we should start thinking it would be good to formalize the inconsistency as a valuable feature of our mental functioning. Sometimes we have to depart from the logic. The reason has no place in any environment.
I believe this proposal may generate fear of chaos, anarchy. In our culture we believe that adherence to the logic is reassuring, although we should recognize that it is not always the case and that rationality can be a dogma liable to be revised.
Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google): Delitos contra la propiedad y la incoherencia.
(Este es el Artículo Nº 2.189)