Journal #9: Chapter 9

“We are in fact convinced that no human experience is without meaning or unworthy of analysis, and that fundamental values, even if they are not positive, can be deduced from this particular world which we are describing” (87).

Yes, I agree with this quote. I believe that each experience has meaning and purpose. Whatever happens to our life, we can learn from each experience and improve ourselves for the next time. Even if the experience might not be a pleasing one to us, we can still learn about other people and the world. For example, let’s suppose that I had a fight with one of my friends. Although my friend and I may be angry at that time, we can use the incident as an opportunity to get to know each other more deeply and to understand each other.

As a Christian, I believe that God has planned every single detail in our lives and that He wants us to accept his plans and learn from them. However, I came up with a question. If God has planned out all the details and put meaning in each experience, why did he allow the tragedy in Auschwitz to happen? What was the message in that experience? We, who are living in the 21st century, may learn that we should never repeat the same kind of tragedy again. We learn that we should respect people of different race, age, language and culture. But what did God want the people, especially the victims such as Primo Levi, to learn from the experience? They might have thought about meaning of life in such a terrible condition and how cruel a man can be… Maybe they’ve learned about human nature and people’s innermost desire. However, I still think that the price they had to pay was too much for them to endure. I don’t have answers to my questions, ‘why did not let this tragedy happen?’ However, I believe that there were reasons why God allowed the horrible event because He is GREAT!!

Memorable Quotes:
“We do not believe in the most obvious and facile deduction: that man is fundamentally brutal, egoistic and stupid in his conduct once every civilized institution is taken away, and that the Haftling is consequently nothing but a man without inhibition. We believe, rather, that the only conclusion to be drawn is that in the face of driving necessity and physical disabilities many social habits and instincts are reduced to silence” (87).

“But another fact seems to us worthy of attention: there comes to light the existence of two particularly well differentiated categories among men – the saved and the drowned. Other pairs of opposites (the good and the bad, the wise and the foolish, the cowards and the courageous, the unlucky and fortunate) are considerably less distinct, they seem less essential, and above all they allow for more numerous and complex intermediary gradations. This division is much less evident in ordinary life; for there it rarely happens that a man loses himself. A man is normally not alone, and in his rise or fall is tied to the destinies of his neighbors; so that it is exceptional for anyone to acquire unlimited power, or to fall by a succession of defeats into utter ruin. Moreover, everyone is normally in possession of such spiritual, physical and even financial resources that the probabilities of a shipwreck, of total inadequacy in the face of life, are relatively small” (88).