Where the modern wild people go?
St. Augustine words: “Bad times, hard times — this is what people keep saying: but let us live well and times shall be good. We are the times. Such as we are, such are the times”.
The things we make, including our stories, reflect, serve, and often shape our needs and desires. We see this everywhere from fairy tale to kiddie lit to myth; from “Cinderella” to Alice in Wonderland to Superman; from building a fort as a child to building ideal, planned cities as whole societies. Fantasy in ways both entertaining and practical serves our persistent needs and desires and illuminates the human mind. Fantasy expresses itself in many ways, from the comfort we feel in the godlike powers of a fairy godmother to the seductive unease we feel confronting Dracula. From a practical viewpoint, of all the fictional forms that fantasy induces, science fiction, from Frankenstein to Avatar, is the most important in our modern world because it is the only kind that explicitly recognizes the profound ways in which science and technology, those key products of the human mind, shape not only our world but our very hopes and fears.
However, we cannot live fully immersed in fantasy or involved only by utopia. So we can see today a conflicting reality founded on a crisis of meaning and values that is presented in the personal life and social relations of people. From this context we can see a concern about the meaning of life and the role of “being in the world”, thus coming to reappear with more force the interest in the subject of ethics, while backbone of reflection on the conduct of human beings and their values. It is not enough for the common man and contemporary overcome the current ethical crisis knowing the other and needs to reach its harmonious coexistence. There is no way to overcome this crisis without a model of ethical oriented a community, as the Greek polis. Today we bet on individualism, competition, in the society of the spectacle and consumption. 
We continue to think that despite all the resources available, people are now living in a closed virtual childhood world whose insensitivity changes its constitution, making them more each day brutalized in their relationships and experiences; are lazy, do not create anything, do not undertake anything, they are materialists, with a world view that does not go beyond what they see. What would be helpful to them and society, the full exercise of its rationality, is lacking or uninteresting. The metaphor suggested here is on the ‘modern wild’; a savage is a individual outside the cultural axis, alienated from the historical flow, not identifying with the moral and civilizational conduct of its time, this is the point we arrived or rather, we return. Modern life forces us to go ever faster, while the pace of our rationality has its limits.
Formerly it was said “what the eyes do not see the heart does not feel.” This was replaced by “what the heart thinks, the brain does not feel”. Today this reversal of positions between the heart and the brain appears as an ego-dystonic ideal conception of modern life. It also seems to have forgotten that “the feeling is not a communication channel itself, it goes through a much more emblematic psychological filter that blends thoughts and feelings. It is irrational by nature, but goes through rational filters. The worldview that we nurture and take for real determines how we feel the reality.
If you think that life is a battle, it’s a jungle and it spoiled the more likely it is that the feeling of anger prevail in your life.
If you think the rules are fixed and immutable standards, justice and righteousness are relentless orders will always be mobilized by guilt and fear.
You see every opportunity as a chance to get along, take advantage and anxiety control is your favorite dish. Therefore, there are no detached emotions of ideas we do about things.”
And in fact there is a continuity between our elementar likings for things and our loves for people. Since the “highest does not stand without the lowest” we had better begin at the bottom, with mere likings; and since to “like” anything means to take some sort of pleasure in it, we must begin with pleasure.
The first time you meet someone, your first thought isn’t “How do they function?” it’s “How do they make me feel?” And when you’re asked about that person later, you describe their personality: “She’s relaxed, smart, witty. She makes me laugh.”
It may seem peculiar to apply the same attributes to inanimate objects, but if we take a moment to think about our belongings, we all have a handful of items that aren’t particularly useful or pleasing to the eye. Why have we kept them? Because we’ve formed a connection, and they’re meaningful in some way: the birthday gift from our best friend, the movie ticket stub from the first date with our significant other. These connections effect us subconsciously, breathing life into otherwise inanimate objects.
About this continuity and commonplace we can say that together produce stereotypes that validate the long-term, interpersonal and social stigma when the individual begins to characterize the collective. This is because the current worldview strengthens some values that sustained by common sense produce almost incontestable modern ideological myths. So the habit to understand the success of an individual and personal merit only in our time, has been shaped crescent way prestige value in contemporary society. At the center of this idea include insight, intelligence and determination. Thus, the victorious subject is placed in a prominent level so that the result of the development of their potential is concluded. This individual triumph socially recognized is then presented as a prerequisite for anyone feel accomplished and strengthen their values in society. The more a person discover and improve itself the talent that promoted it and adapt it quickly to the needs and social rules, the greater their consecration. And this sometimes seems no depend as much knowledge or virtues, but the human capacity to disrobe of rationality, thoughts and reflection, to become just another animal in search of survival and revenge in the urban jungle and current media. As it has been said:
[…] As a result, they emerged not only in some philosophers, but in the contemporary man in general, widespread distrust of attitudes to large cognoscitive resources of human beings. With false modesty, are content with partial and provisional truths, no longer seeking to ask radical questions about the meaning and ultimate foundation of human, personal and social life. In short, it faded hope to be able to receive the philosophy definitive answers to such questions (Pope PAUL II, 1998).
And the modern dilemma remains this: Think of all your choices that have brought you here. Ask yourself why you chose them or is that at no time were you able to see this hurricane, or will you saw, but chose to believe that everything would calm ?! Make is still another question: what if you had the chance to make new choices, if you had not chosen to enter this hurricane?
This is one of the distinguishing features of modern life: it provides numerous opportunities to consider all the things that are happening around us. Images or situations (atrocities or not) have become, through the small television screens, smartphones and computer, something of a commonplace. Or: “he lives in a fantasy world”:
“The main character in the story is God, who made Earth and stuff. At first, all the Angels do what he tells `em, but one gets fed up and quits. He is punished to Hell (it’s a real place, not a cuss word) and turns into Satan, which is a pretty cool part. God next creates Adam & Eve (who have a catalog named after them now. It’s awesome). They live in a garden and arpe all happy and such until Eve screws up, and they get evicted. Same kinda thing happened to my brother and his girlfriend.”
Paraphrasing Plato, who will the followers of wisdom, As mentioned above, are not neither wise nor the ignorant (because the wisdom of this time is capable of fantastic thought like this about Genesis and the Creation)?
Okay. Drunks are everywhere.
About this subject, psychologists inform us, habitual drunkenness is usually the result of the inability to accommodate oneself wholly to reality.
They yearn vaguely for something other than the world they know but they lack the capacity to create a world nearer to their hearts’ desire.
Still more, do they lack the capacity to attain a comprehensive vision of the beauty emanate in this world. Neither the art of escape nor the art of revelation is possible to them. Nevertheless they have perceptions they cannot use and impulses that never come to fruition. So, the Drink, or some other drug, by relieving their sense of impotence and by blurring the unfriendly outlines of the real world brings them solace and becomes a necessity. Those looking for this type of quick relief (the modern wild people?) experience certainly some kind of shame. Shame is a human sense of conscious knowledge of dishonor, disgrace, or condemnation. Its synonym, ignominy, suggests the effect of a dishonorable and unjust action. The ignominious action is linked to the shamelessness and dishonor of an individual to whom you are indifferent moral considerations and is therefore subject to the general discrediting (by Wikipedia).
Thus where is the limit? This is an important question to let you know how far to go in searches, achievements and accomplishments. However, an unanswered question. Many limits are established by the laws, but these can not cover the infinite variety that involves human action and the details of life. And even in the cases provided by law, the range of issues is so large and frequent that justify the presence of interpreters to set the correct application of legal provisions. Thus, wisdom is superior to the law as it applies to any situation. In each moment, in each case, only wisdom can set the limit to human actions. And “One of them is knowing the difference between Morality and Wisdom. Morality is temporary, Wisdom is permanent… ” — Hunter S. Thompson.
Let us remember that, if the classical body (of knowledge) is to be ordered, then it must also in metaphorical terms be healthy. ‘Order is the oldest concern of political philosophy,’ Susan Sontag writes in Illness as Metaphor, ‘and if it is plausible to compare the polis to an organism, then it is plausible to compare civil disorder with an illness.’ Any sign of illness is a threat to order, and as Sontag makes all too clear, the ‘worst’ illness of all is cancer. She shows how illness, and in particular cancer, is often used as a metaphor to describe the malaise of society. ‘No specific political view seems to have a monopoly of this metaphor. Trotsky called Stalinism the cancer of Marxism’, the Gang of Four were called the ‘the cancer of China’, and the ‘standard metaphor of Arab polemics […] is that Israel is “a cancer in the heart of the Arab world.”’ For the person with cancer, this metaphor has the effect of casting them out as untouchable; cancer is seen as a kind of punishment. For society, the cancerous metaphor demands aggressive treatment in order for a cure to be effected. Cancer must be rid of for the healthy body to be re-established and so for order to be reconstructed.
Joseph Campbell says that “Metaphors we carry from one place to another; They enable us to cross boundaries that otherwise would be closed to us.” That is, it is inevitable that we have to build our own path rather than walk the other person, being necessary to know the meaning of symbols and signs, to put them within a cultural context and time. In traditional mythology or, if you prefer, traditional religious system, images and rituals through which these images are integrated into a person’s life are presented official and mandatorily by parents or religious evangelization, and it is expected that the individual experience the meanings and feelings target.
If, as in the contemporary world, all funds of the images of our religious heritage become, as when we find ourselves in a world of machines rather than a world of pastoral life, these altered images really can not and do not communicate the feelings, emotions and meanings communicated to the people who lived in the world where these images were developed.
But there is a real danger when social institutions inculcate in people mythological structures that no longer match their human experience. For example, when you insist on certain religious or political interpretations of human life, can occur mythic dissociation. The mythic dissociation, people reject or are sectioned effective explanatory notions about the order of their lives.
Finally, the Christian question to be resolved is this: Will people are trying to develop, improving themselves and the circumstances in which they live, without touching the root of the problem? I would love itself is hidden under the most benevolent gestures and behind the earnest prayers? What kind of personal growth people are looking for? The personal growth that will increase your self-esteem, or personal growth that involves deny yourself and take up his cross? The personal growth that will confirm the value of their own selves, or what will make them similar to the image of Christ?
Both forms of growth, both leaning to love himself as leaning to love God, have a high cost. Love yourself more than loving God leads to a spiritual loss, but to love God with his whole being leads to deny the “I” and causes the deadly effect of the cross is felt against the old man (that “I” to which many of us are still clinging and love), which should be considered dead (cf. Letter to the Romans ch. 6).
The men are unhappy and suffer from the problems of life because they have become “lovers of themselves” and “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God.” The sinful inclination of man is to love yourself more than God and others. Selfishness clings to human nature and produces envy, lust, pride, arrogance, disrespect for God, disobedience to parents, lack of gratitude, cheating, causing both a passion for their own ways as the contest because of them. It also leads to false accusations, which are exaggerated, since people have been encouraged to blame their parents, circumstances, and anything else except themselves, by their living conditions. 
But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days.
People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God — having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.
Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected.
But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone — 2 Timóteo 3:1–7, 9.