Can there ever be justification for truly barbaric
acts? The Woolwich brutal and sickening
murder of a young soldier in the south of England this week reminds us that as
a species we are capable of totally un-relational and unspeakable acts of
destruction. Hannah Arendt wrote of the ‘banality of evil’ and
yet this murder seems all but banal or ordinary. This was an intentional act, thought out and
planned for maximum impact and media exposure.
Is there any way we can understand the motivation of the
killers within a relational frame?
We could of course scrutinize their individual histories and
backgrounds of the killers and find psychological problems, personal or
political grievances as well as hardship that may lead them to that day. But is that enough of an explanation? Yes of course, being relational means taking
account of the context or situation in which behaviour takes place but can we
really relinquish our sense of agency and responsibility that has allowed many
to overcome horrendous situations?
What does it mean to be ‘relational’ and how does it support
us in our lives as human beings?
Come and join the conversation on this very topic at our
low-cost Open Event on the 4th of November in
London. The day will be facilitated by
Marie-Anne Chidiac, Sally Denham-Vaughan and Mark Fairfield
An International
Movement for Relationality
Since March, we have a new partner organisation in
Australia/New Zealand, called ‘Relational Matters’ and founded by Leanne
O’Shea. Together with The Relational Centre and Relational Matters, we have
linked up to start discussing ideas for an international relational movement,
whereby we can explore the notion of relationality in different cultures and
communities around the world. We are very aware that no ‘one-size’ of
‘Relational’ fits everyone, and are keen to promote a pluralism of ‘relational
varieties’, fitted to supporting and sustaining both people and the planet in
differing contexts.
No comments:
Post a Comment