These days a philosopher masterfully said that “to fear is sometimes a courage.” Undoubtedly, in this entire ontological flaw, we can only reaffirm our existence, for nothing can be so desolate if there is “a hopeful heart.”
Author: Bardhyl Zaimi
The outbreak of the corona virus in Wuhan, China, at first seemed like a distant threat, something that was going on out there and has nothing to do with us. However, a subtle, piercing, warning concern as if was hovering in the air. For a few days, it was realized that the threat from this virus was already real, while from the initial negligence it could not be isolated on the scene alone. It was a matter of time when this virus would spread to other countries and it was a matter of time when the pandemic will be declared.
As the virus moved slowly, it seemed that the world, the states, the governments were moving slowly and with countless debates over whether it was so dangerous. The world was in the middle of two contradictory states. Between the idea of keeping up with normality and the idea of limiting the freedom of everyday life to people. With the outbreak of the virus spreading in Italy, the daily scenes of horror that came along with news of the increased victims, after China, had already turned on the alarm across the globe.
The world was facing a state of emergency stemming from the spread of the coronavirus, a still-unidentified virus that was taking human lives. Self-isolation was already seen as the only remedy to prevent its rapid and massive spread in circumstances when the world was already realizing that facing it would be inevitable and would require many government’s decisions and many other large-scale actions to address it as well as to isolate the consequences of the spread.
Almost in all countries, the “sneak attack” of the corona virus was initially perceived without great risk, but over time and after the number of victims it left behind; almost all governments in the world were forced to look at the war against this virus with realism, which was spreading undetectably all over the globe.
Even here in our country, initially it was not perceived as a very big risk, but the cases already presented show that the virus is no longer something out there, but it is a real danger that is already threatening everyone. It is always difficult to establish a realistic perception at an early stage of an invisible threat. However, it seems that some well-informed people were already aware that the “game” and the “drums” for something happening far away were over.
It remains to be emphasized that a large number of informed but also with extraordinary public awareness had already extended their awareness and risk awareness campaign on social media, thus giving the initial dimension of self-protection to a great number of citizen. Calls to stay home, information on the general situation, government’s recommendations, but also the World Health Organization were already part of this campaign, which greatly influenced a rapid awareness and compliance with these recommendations, which means less spread of the virus.
Undoubtedly, a full awareness of the threat of the virus has already been created and citizens respect the rules of restraint, thus preventing the spread of the virus. But all this civic awareness has not passed without extraordinary challenges, without the flood of pseudo-information released by irresponsible media, which in some cases besides creating daily terrorism, has also created a false conspiracy myth that have inspired many people to be careless.
The coronavirus, as never before, initiated a global debate on the danger to humanity, precisely from this type of virus, which remains undiscussed to the end, unidentified in the magnitude of the danger it can bring to humanity. These debates are present at various levels, ranging from scientific ones trying to identify the nature of the virus to philosophical debates related to the human being, with all the range of human existence.
In addition, of course, even in terms of more elite human thought, there are different optics on overall situation created by the corona virus and on the fate of the human being in the deepest existential dimensions. Some people of science point out the exaggeration, linking it to a transformation of the political being, which is already shifting from the level of democracy and freedom to an executive power of states. According to this approach, this situation is already establishing the primacy of the state as an instrument of power over people and the suppression of human singularity, in its smallest, in the only dimension of survival and security enforced by the state.
Against these people are others who hold that the danger is real. According to them, this danger is not only rhetorical, but also extends to a real threat perspective that necessarily means a global emergency alert, but also a limitation on the only instrument to prevent the fatal virus for human lives. These people believe that it is not the time for rhetorical philosophies, but for concrete actions of governments to protect human beings. The coronavirus, meanwhile, has been viewed both from the historical perspective of pandemics, but also from the perspective of a cure and a possible vaccine that would ease humanity in these moments of widespread fright.
As never before, the world is in front of an ontological dilemma, tragedy and fright. Everything that seemed perfect, refined, inviolable in human life for a moment returns and becomes fragile, hurtful, and extremely unpredictable. In the dimension of science, especially human philosophy, this ontological approach remains the main concern. At this point, on the horizon of human existence, are the dimensions of apocalyptic mythologies, already emphasized by even the most elite of human thought.
While scientists around the world are already working with the utmost urgency to identify this “invisible enemy”, to know its structure, nature, and to find the necessary cure and vaccine, many prestigious authors are pointing out that the world is in the face of an irreversible transposition and nothing will ever be the same.
Stuck at home, it seems that everything is back to a complete silence, a silence that creeps inward. An ontological rift has transcended human being, as fear, as fright, as impossibility. In the midst of all this technological uplifting, the human being is confronted with the vanishing impossibility, in front of itself, as a pure essence, devoid of politics, of communion, of that time filled with innumerable movements that flow endlessly into social life as we know it until now.
And here we are in front of ourselves, toward the icy hope to move on, to be reborn from a state of fear and fright into another dimension unknown to the human experience. Self-conscious, in the tranquility of our families, we can long for our time, for our trials, for all that human relationship that implies the other as unrepeatable human beings. As never before, we can understand that in spite of everything, in spite of physical distance, an inhumane radiance, a permanent radiance of human love can give the deepest meaning to our existence. These days a philosopher masterfully said that “to fear is sometimes a courage.” Undoubtedly, in this entire ontological flaw, we can only reaffirm our existence, for nothing can be so desolate if there is “a hopeful heart.”