Naturally

Legitimacy is a term widely used in law, political science, philosophy, sociology and, ultimately, is about all the social sciences and humanities, why not also in spirituality?

As legitimacy is, generally, the ethic quality of law and justice, which stems from a consensus in the face of evidence, can we associate legitimacy, naturally, to the spiritual postures?

For example, when someone performs a particular function (of practitioner, of teacher, (of today’s much-popular) function of master, or president of an association – do that person have legitimacy to do so?

What is the factual work, evident, that these people have experienced – in the first person –, which gives them legitimacy to perform their roles?

Are there results obtained empirically – in a consistent way –, which confers them enough legitimacy so they put themselves in these various social functions?

They feel they have legitimacy to do so and they do it?

Or they don’t yet have legitimacy to do so, but they still do it?

What would be more naturally normal?

This is an adaptation of a google translation from the original text in Portuguese:
(any help on improvement of this translation is highly appreciated)

Legitimidade é um termo muito usado no direito, na ciência política, na filosofia, na sociologia e, no fundo, dis respeito a todas as ciências sociais e humanas, por que não também, na espiritualidade?

Sendo a legitimidade, genericamente, a qualidade ética do direito e da justiça, que deriva de um consenso face a evidências, como se pode associar a legitimidade, naturalmente, a posturas espirituais?

Por exemplo, quando alguém exerce uma determinada função (de praticante, de professor, (da hoje em dia muito divulgada) função de mestre, ou de presidente de uma associação – terá essa pessoa legitimidade para o fazer?

Qual é o trabalho factual, evidente, que estas pessoas vivenciaram - na primeira pessoa -, que lhes confere legitimidade para desempenharem as suas funções?

Existem resultados obtidos empiricamente – de forma consistente -, que lhes atribua a legitimidade suficiente para se colocarem nestes vários papéis sociais?

Sentem que têm legitimidade para o fazer e fazem-no?

Ou sentem que não têm ainda legitimidade para o fazer, mas ainda assim fazem-no?

O que seria mais naturalmente normal?

Recently, at the launch of my second book, co-authored with my wife, I’ve experienced a bizarre situation.

At the end of the event, a person came to greet me and said ‘congratulations on your book, is very good and is very important that you have written it’.

Apparently, nothing’s wrong with this. Its praise socially correct and I only have to congratulate and thank the person. But I felt something different: together with the kind words I felt a vibration of falsehood. And Instinctively I asked: ‘Did you read the book?’.

The answer was ‘no’. And then I added, ‘Please, first read the book and then give us your opinion!’

And this made me reflect about:

To what extent people are false to be socially correct?

Where is the dignity of these people?

And where is their self-esteem?

And by the way, where is the respect for others, to whom they are being “polite”/fake?

Wouldn’t it be more naturally normal that the person say something like: ‘I’m curious about your book and willing to read it’ ?

And I keep asking: is it normal to be false and abnormal to be genuine?

Or is it normal to be genuine and abnormal to be false?

Naturally…