Yesterday, I asked my Twitter & Facebook friends whether they agree or disagree that “time heals all wounds.” The replies were fantastic, so I am reproducing them here for posterity.
Kudos especially to the authors of 11, 13, and 16, whose views most closely track my own. And I apologize to #17, for obvious reasons, but I suspect/hope he was kidding.
Please feel free to share your own opinion on this saying in the comments.
- disagree. Healing and scabbing are two very different things. Because it is not an open wound doesn’t mean it’s healed.
- Wounds of the heart? Wholeheartedly agree.
- Time wounds all heals. — lennon
- Absolutely agree!
- No.
- Nope. The Catholic Church still owes us an apology for Scholasticism.
- The operative word is “heals.” The body, biologically, will repair to the point that it is impossible to conclude injury took place. The mind could not be more different. It not only records the original pain and injury, it modifies itself to attempt to prevent the same injury from occurring again. To classify this as healing isn’t fair to the mind, it does not repair to new, it remembers and recalls at the same time it moves past and learns from it. But that does not mean that being reminded of the pain doesn’t bring it right back to the surface. We may be wiser, but we weren’t once, and we remind ourselves of it when the need arises.
- Heal? Not always. Growth? ALWAYS. Frank Clark said it best: “We find comfort among those who agree with us — growth among those who don’t.”
- I’d agree minus the word “all”. I believe time heals many wounds or even most, but never all. There’s a circumstance for everything.
- depends on the nature of the wound. Self inflicted? Other person caused? severity of wound. Was it an actual wound or a metaphorical / emotional / mental wound? So … no it doesnt heal ALL wounds.
- Depends. What do we mean by “wound” and “heal”? It seems to me that the phenomenal (for lack of a better word) experience of pain can, and often does, subside given enough time, but the displacement of ends due to a violent interruption in life may always be the source of an onerous burden. Is a burden the same thing as a wound? Also, can we still have a burden if the displaced end turns out to be more favorable in many ways than the original end (something that may be difficult to know, so perhaps this is just a feature of our psychology and “making the best of it”)? If nothing else, it seems that we have a tendency to engage in counterfactual thinking about past circumstances and this can be extremely frustrating. It can make us doubt ourselves and have a paralyzing effect on present decision making.
- Best way of handling any wound is to forget about it. I have run away from all those and I don’t worry about them anymore. Time doesn’t matter just space.
- No. Recovery from wounds is often a non-ergodic process. People might adapt to their wounds, but they’ve still been set on a different path because of them. It’s not an all-or-nothing thing, but people greatly overestimate that aphorism… for understandable ego-defensive reasons.
- disagree. time fades wounds, but if it healed them, we’d be just as we were before and that’s never true.
- Well, sooner or later, you’re going to die. So, if you just wait long enough, it certainly is true that you’ll no longer have any wounds to speak of.
- perhaps from the time of the wound (T1) and the time of the “healing” (T2) such a change occurs honest assessment between T1 self and T2 self becomes impossible, idk
- I still haven’t healed from the broken heart you gave me :(
- Time diverts us from the utter pain of each wound inflicted. Time and wounds are of no consequence to one another. Time happens separately from wounds; we simply use time to measure the arc from pre-wound to infliction, suffering and ultimate demise.
- He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. 1 Peter 2:24
No Comments