WHAT DOES LUCK CONSIST OF?
Víctor Manuel Guzmán Villena
“If nothing stakes, nothing is gained”. “To prove luck” occasionally is something very reasonable, but “to trust in the luck” like a systematical politics to follow is simply a stupidity. What does the luck involve?
To determine that a person is lucky it is convenient to do two fundamental clarifications:
First of all, and as for the person in question, the result that takes place is completely "accidental". There has to be something eventful whenever we speak about luck. (We might not say that an individual is lucky because the mail has come to his house, unless there has happened a catastrophe in which there has lost the whole mail with important messages except that belong of some individuals and this person is one of them).
Secondly, the result in question is of big importance while it is a question of a positive or negative result, a loss or a benefit. (If X win the lottery, has been lucky; if Z is struck by a stone, has no luck; but if we consider a fortuitous event like which a person is momentarily in the shade because of a cloud, in this case it is not possible to speak about luck).
And so, the luck implies three things:
1st) a beneficiary and an affected one;
2nd) an event that turns out to be a favorable (positive) or adverse (negative) from the point of view of the interests of the affected individual, and that also,
3rd) be fortuitous (unexpected and unforeseen).
The luck (good or bad) always provided with a normative element of good or bad; someone has to be affected in a positive or negative way for an event before his execution could be a properly qualified positively or negatively. It is only and exclusively because we have interests, for what the things can affect us for good or for bad; this implies that the luck is in action.
We cannot say that a person should be lucky because finds pigeons in a square, or because sees a cloud on his head, while these phenomena do not affect to the well-being of a person. (It would be very different if he had bet on this matter).
With a normal individual, these slovenly episodes, namely the famous meeting with the windmills, for example, would be a misfortune. But for the knight errant Quixote of La Manchat with his strange madness and his eccentric way of considering the things, everything was for good like demonstration of the seriousness of his dedication to the chivalrous mission.
The suspense that is imposed in this case as for the luck or misfortune serves to support the topic of the luck in suspense: the possibility of benefit or loss is crucial for the luck. An inert element, namely, a rock or a hammer cannot be lucky. There can happen things that preserve them or that spoil them, but the absence of any element of affectivity means interests absence and therefore it discards the entry in action of the luck.
It might compare “the defeat of one negative event” with “one positive event”, and consequently, “the defeat of a positive event” with “a negative event”; the direct and indirect ways of the luck could be identified. (The above mentioned identification turns out to be commendable since, considering the equation to be mentioned above, fail of the negative - positive event, it seems completely appropriate.
Perhaps to avoid to lose is not to win, but it is, without place to doubt, something positive. In any case, the good luck is not a gain or profit of any type, but is take a risk and leaving victorious.