Not really in the distant past on the occasion of the last national elections, the matter of certain “Psychological Records” was already then brought up to the attention of the general public. For those concerned with the emergence of objective truth, the issue became distinctly important for their pursuant decision making. On the other hand, for individuals preoccupied simply with partisan political interests, the same subject matter was merely meant as a bad publicity if not a downright silly issue. Thus it was that while some people wanted the content of the said “Psychological Records” to be openly presented and accordingly made known, there are however those who preferred to simply ignore it as a cheap political ploy. And the matter rested there and then. So it seemed until here and now.
Thus it is that quite recently, the same question on the matter of “Psychological Records” was again expressly mentioned and brought to fore. And as before, there were contrasting reactions to it. Some are of the conviction that it is about time for all those concerned to eventually know what the same records really say – good or bad. The reason for this is simply to put the matter to rest once and for all. But as before, there are those who lose their composure by simply hearing its mere mention, who become not only angry but also panicky upon merely knowing the call for the opening thereof. Whatever the truth is about the records, there seems to be something distinctly ominous about them.
Needless to say, the public has no business prying into private matters about this and that individual. People have no right to delve into something personal to this and that someone. But there are manifest valid questions to this preferred indifference. First, is the person concerned but a private subject party? Otherwise, the public has the right to know. Second, are the records in fact positive or simply neutral in content? If so, the more they should be accordingly opened or revealed. Third, are the substance and implications of the records rather damaging to the psychological constitution of the individual concerned? Then it is understandable that they should be kept secret if not altogether destroyed and done away with for good.
The truth of the matter is that it is very unfair specially to the subject-object concerned if this issue of the latter’s “Psychological Records” remains unsolved, unsettled. They would be then like a big bad shadow following the same – not only then but also now and the times yet ahead. Have them duly authenticated and accordingly revealed – this is not simply fair but also proper and just. One thing appears to be certain, i.e., the basic psychological personality constitution of an individual usually comes not from the latter’s own gusto, option or preference but from his blood affiliation. So it is held – until otherwise established by psychology and/or psychiatry.