In blindness, Jos? Saramago questions the morality intrinsically present in human nature through characters who ignore or abuse the advice provided by the sayings. By inserting ancient, vague and contradictory proverbs, Saramago demonstrates that in perplexing times, sayings become a comfort rather than a true guide. He criticizes the use of sayings when one does not follow their advice, suggesting that humans should rely on their own rationality instead of clinging to a false morality. Once the blindness epidemic strikes, the characters are thrown into a new situation where the old morals and proverbs are no longer useful, and are subsequently deprived of the comfort that counterfeit logic and ethics have provided them. The main characters then learn to think critically and reconstruct reason through their original sayings, giving them organization, rationality and, ultimately, sight. As Saramago submerges the world in blindness, he depicts the absurdity of the characters' reliance on old proverbs, revealing that individuals tend to rely on advice they have heard to feel better and do not use logic to draw their own moral conclusions. Saramago distinguishes between words as comfort and words as guidance, ultimately warning that falsely using words to make one's intentions appear moral will not actually create morality. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssaySaramago shows characters using proverbs to provide themselves with an invalid sense of moral comfort while acting immorally, ultimately critiquing humanity's pitiful dependence on moral standards that others have created instead of using critical thinking skills. At the beginning of the novel, when the car thief offers to take the first blind man home, he states: “Then don't think about it anymore, today it's your turn, tomorrow it'll be my turn, you never know what might be in store for we…”(3). While the car thief says that he intends to help the blind man at this point, he later steals his car, indicating that the saying has given him an undeserved feeling of righteousness without truly possessing morality himself. The saying, “Today is your turn, tomorrow is mine,” usually implies that one will try to be helpful for one's own future benefit. By having him steal the car, however, Saramago demonstrates that the car thief does not conform to this standard and indeed ignores the true meaning of the saying he uses; it therefore also ignores ethical logic, which is evidently absent in human nature. Since the car thief is not yet physically blind at the point of this quote, Saramago demonstrates that people have always been blind to rationality, they just didn't realize it until white blindness forced them to reevaluate their own logic and integrity. Later, when the blind population of the asylum complains that no one can divide the food equally, someone states: “In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king” (98). Depending on the circumstances, what might once have been considered a disadvantage could become an advantage; the "one-eyed man" would usually be considered disabled, but in a blind world he has all the power. In this case the advantage would actually be seeing, but their point is irrelevant because, as far as they know, they are all blind. The speaker does not think rationally about his current situation, he simply reflects on the past by reciting a proverb he knows, and simply adding this proverbial comment contributes nothing productive. As everyone struggles to live in a blind world, no one knows how to behave and resorts to the phrases they have been told,showing through proverbs humanity's pitiful dependence on counterfeit rationality. Someone then contradicts this proverb by saying: "If the person making the division fails to get the best share, he is either a fool or a dullard."(99). At this point everyone is looking for any information that can help them in the situation, even if it is not actually useful, as demonstrated above. This speaker responds directly to the speaker of the quote above, intending to console himself by belittling the other. Even though the previous speaker is not actually “the one who distributes food,” he believes that those who share food should distribute it equally, so the insult of being “a fool or a dullard” is directed at him. No progress is made with this accusation, yet the abuser feels the need to not only call him “foolish” and insult his temporary judgment and rationality, but also “boring,” which implies low intelligence and a boring personality . The selfish need to elevate one's pride above others in this universally negative situation emphasizes the logic and moral compass that is lacking in human nature. Furthermore, the contradiction of these two sayings demonstrates that there actually are sayings for almost every point of view, making the use of proverbs essentially always useless. Through ineffective insults and contradictory proverbs, Saramago highlights the necessity of logical and ethical thinking and shows that previously established morality becomes useless at the slightest change in society. As the blind society advances, the main characters begin to adapt to their harsh new environment and think together to create their own set of morals and standards through original and applicable "proverbs", allowing them to rebuild their own organized society and, ultimately, to regain sight; Saramago then illustrates that through logic we overcome the immorality of human nature. After a while in the ward, the group's mantra becomes: “If we cannot live entirely like humans, let us do everything in our power not to live entirely like animals” (116). This was originally said by the doctor's wife to discourage the complete disintegration of society. The advice may seem obvious, but by “not living entirely like animals” the main characters have established an important principle for themselves to maintain a higher standard of living, and therefore a certain comfort. This “proverb” would never have been applied before, but it became “a rule of life” (116) for the group, meaning they had advice to fall back on in most situations. Saramago demonstrates that in creating rules for ourselves based on situational necessity, we apply our own rationality instead of resorting to advice that is outdated or inapplicable to others. Discussing with her husband the horrors that the doctor's wife witnesses in the ward, the doctor states: "Fighting has always been, more or less, a form of blindness" (133). Again, this is not an official proverb, but a short statement with an underlying moral still qualifies as a saying. The doctor goes beyond maintaining a standard of living, but actually maintains ethics. By linking “fighting” to “blindness,” it implies that the people involved are too self-absorbed to see another point of view or think rationally. Recognizing the consequences of fighting decreases the amount of altercations and allows for a more cohesive society. Furthermore, the doctor recognizes that white people's blindness is not the first blindness to exist: in fact, their blindness has always existed. This knowledge ultimately eliminates blindness, so Saramago shows that by logically creating our moral code we become more discerning and aware. Setting standards through proverbs promotes a.