Ricardo F. Morín

January 9, 2026

Oakland Park, Fl

Some antagonisms call not for vindication, but for clarity  

*

Our exchange revealed not a disagreement to be resolved, but a misalignment that could not be repaired through further argument.  What initially appeared as an analytical difference gradually disclosed a deeper divergence in how understanding itself was approached.  At that point, explanation no longer clarified and began to obscure.  

There are moments in life when antagonistic relationships must be confronted not to prevail, but to discern limits.  Not every challenge is an invitation to engage, and not every assertion of authority merits reply.  When discourse shifts from inquiry to self-assertion, the task is no longer persuasion, but recognition—of what can be shared, what cannot, and when distance becomes a form of integrity rather than withdrawal.  

Disengagement, understood in these terms, is not an abdication of reason, nor a retreat from rigor.  It is an acknowledgment that intellectual authority does not arise from moral superiority, from the accumulation of sources, or from the insistence on being recognized as correct.  Authority that cannot tolerate limits undermines itself by the very posture it adopts.  

Disengagement, then, is neither silence nor concession.  It is a turning away that carries weight:  liberating and disappointing, real and poignant.  It offers no solace, yet affirms life itself by refusing to persist in distortion.  What remains is not victory, but truth preserved through restraint.  

Authority intolerant of limits succumbs to hubris for its own sake.