The confusion between the popular fact, and the preferable choice (2/2)

         To continue in the same last topic, which shows many sides of both choices that people applies in life nowadays, I’ll try to show more opinions about it and make you all think with me while reading there.

It’s right that even with marriage; the life’s complications can lead to a bad end and get divorced, so may someone says that it doesn't matter if people are married or not. but the divorce is a resort we need to use just when life becomes impossible for two people to remain together. It's a logical solution to fix it, and also exceptional because that doesn't happen always, but breaking up is easier than divorce. don't you all think so?

Because breaking up can be a one side decision and sudden, and can happen in one glance, just like that. Whereas the other partner can't do anything to keep things better except to accept by force the consequences. That’s of course if we keep aside the person’s personality, because some people aren’t good at all in any way, and that’s because they don’t want to be good and they even have not intention for, or just they don’t feel the need to be so. And whether in marriage or in relationship, they just can’t function properly.

         Whereas divorce takes many procedures and agreement of two people too, also it takes time to end up. And because of that people may think to solve their problems more than to think about divorce, they act more logically than anything else. Whereas in a relationship it's easy for someone to escaping any time.

All that disagreement with marriage comes from the feelings of insecurity, that’s why many avoid getting married and prefer sharing life with someone without any official commitment. Every side is afraid to be deceived, and getting married is like a big risk for them. In this case, since they can’t trust each other so far, so why do they start their relationship? Furthermore; the argument of being more free out of marriage, is somehow a way to express the disappearance in any moment as a very possible choice, sooner or later, isn’t it? I mean once the person feels that s/he must be responsible on something, then s/he will find it easy to escape from that and just disappear like s/he has never been there before.

Keeping a family is better than breaking up or making one parent families, studies all confirm that the best for a child is to live between two parents instead one parent. And better to live in family than in an orphanage, Better for psychological reasons, social skills, better for communication skills, and for stability in personality...etc

It’s not bad at all to take from new things and benefit from their advantages, but it’s bad to reject all from everything only because it’s a part of a social heritage which maybe refers to mean an old thing. We don't neglect love and romance, but also we can't rely only on that for facing the hardships of life.

The confusion between the popular fact, and the preferable choice (1/2)

I’ve lately discussed this topic with some friends, why the marriage should be a recommended choice for partners’ life instead of any other choice? And I can start from that as a question for article. I’ve discussed this matter before, and somehow; their reading was the reason of our discussion, my friends and I. And in addition to what I’ve said before (you can check and read if you didn’t do so), I promised them to write more about, so I want to bring here some facts to enlighten this topic more, maybe I succeed to answer this question here or at least clarify more of its aspects.

We sometimes follow the seductive rhythm around us whatever it is instead of following our personal preferences. And that’s a very serious and large topic we maybe discuss another time, but that can affect very much on our choices and our lives aswell.

Yes i know that guys avoid marriage because of its responsibilities, and that girls don't prefer marriage, because they may want for a reason or another to make marriage as a big event. Of course it’s a big event in life of couple, but they unintentionally mean to make that appear to all others, it’s like making it a big event for everybody around and they should feel it that way like them, or big for the whole city, or even for the whole country (if they can so); otherwise better not to get married.

We don’t need to complicate things, or to be connected to the materialist stuff because they’re just like accessories. Since the marriage is an official step of commitment between two people; so if someone is a loving person to the second, and really want to spend life with; then s/he doesn't mind the step to making the relationship official. Isn't it? Because they argue that step is not necessary and meaningless, so it won’t make difference if they do it also, yeah! Or maybe they don’t have enough trust to each other? That’s a big problem really.

           Also marriage is better because it guarantees the rights of both, rights in front of law and brings advantages too in comparing to the second choice. Besides that; the marriage prevents the person from looking far, away from his/her family zone. In other words; someone in relationship means s/he is still looking for better one meanwhile s/he with someone and confessing about the love maybe every day, but in reality that person not enough yet. Moreover; marriage makes the relationship stronger and the desires of breaking up will decrease since each one remembers that they're married and not just in relationship that can end simply anytime, so there will be a lot to do before being officially separated. It’s a stimulant reason to think well before acting and not to behaving insanely towards the situation.     …To be continued!

The need for common measurement to our morals (P4/4):

The morals such as tolerance, understanding, patience, forgiveness, mercy, care and love …etc; can be found in different people regardless their ages, genders, places, positions or social degrees. Well appreciated because the reasons from applying them in life aren’t due the benefits to get something from in return, neither because of the power they’ve; but because of the desire to be close the most possible to perfection. That’s why the best right you may give to others is the one you do it willingly before being requested for, and the most generous doing you may do is when you don’t need anything from that person in return.

The powerful morals aren’t the same ones that the powerful people do, but they’re the ones which affect deeply even if it doesn’t largely affect, whether on the person himself on others around. Whereas the powerful people may affect largely and quickly even with the horrible morals they do. The powerful morals too are the ones which exceed the focus on self to others too, they’re the ones which show the responsible side of a person towards himself and others at once instead being silly irresponsible running after desires and only.

In this way we can define each moral alike, and the principle isn’t the fears and only, also not the fact to get something in return necessarily. But a personal target to recover the humanitarian side into the person without being blindly guided to his desires and lust. And the question comes in mind here is: which morals are needed to make us closer to the human perfection? Also what’s the utility of being so if we don’t see its effects, neither we’re feeling satisfied from the situation of being perfect?

Before that, let's describe what could the human perfection mean? it's a known fact that the human has a shortage and many flaws, which negates the perfection. but the concept we mean here is the fact of being a minded entity, having a sedate logic, his priorities aren't for materialistic stuff, neither for lust in expense of his mind. In this case there will be flaws aswell, but not same amount as the first time. Also the reasons to fall in stupidities are reasonable in comparing with the first case, that's what may the human perfection means. to be human as it's supposed to be.

The answer of this question is based on the second condition to explain the origins of morals (not due the fears that push to renouncing).The matter is why this concept of life can’t help us to be committed to good morals and principles, I mean when we think that the life is only one and we must live is to the fullest.

When the person is limited on this concept in his view to life, then the success will be to reach his goals anyway, regardless the nature of ways to achieve them. In this situation; if there is a way to do something to get the target (even inappropriate way) but possible to escape from punishment; so the success according this concept is worthy to do in such way. Because that person has some fears really, but not enough to stop him when he was inspired somehow by an outlet to avoid all that and to continue towards his goals. It means his principles and priorities in life aren’t ordered in proper way as they should be. That’s because of the distorted concept of life that he adopted for himself.

And I finish with this too; which concepts for life that can make us consider all these stuff and adopt the proper morals in common between us? And before this; what’s the reference that’s helpful to realize the good morals to apply for our lives?

The conscience plays an important role in this matter, I mean about being a reference for the measurement of morals which ones are needed and which ones are not. The unconscious people can’t be judged for their doings, like someone mad because he’s not responsible on his actions. But the conscience is a magical addition into the human which is able to show what’s true to do and what’s not. That conscience is in common between all people, and it can judge any action to decide whether it’s a good or bad action. Everything that’s going wrongly; it touches deeply our conscience and brings the feeling of grief. But it’s not always possible to play such role because sometimes the reliance on deep and wrong convictions according to the personal view, may deform the conscience and so its measurement. In other words; having a wrong start from certain convictions will lead to reach a wrong end while judging an action.

Getting used to a fact, can promote that into convictions, when the environment (family friends and so on), the habits, and traditions all together push to a certain direction, the way will be easy to get convinced. And what if those bases were wrong, so the convictions will be also so.

Then in same context with what we've discussed before;  what will be effective - as reference- to teach ourselves correct and new convictions that can be common morals in our lives ? i’ll try another time to reply at this question , and i give you a time to think again also.

The need for common measurement to our morals (P3/4)

Philosophers discussed the question: are the powerful morals the same as the morals of powerful people? And is the power (or the ability to do what the person wants) enough to measure a value as a good or bad? Or that must be a look at the benefits meanwhile?

And since some people can avoid every possible punishment for their bad doings (besides their perspective about living this life and only); we get that the fears aren’t enough to keep the person committed to noble morals. Because they can escape and succeed to get in what they aspire whatever the environment truly is in.

If the fears that comes for the environment generally (and from others in particular), and to easily avoid any possible punishment, we’ll need another factor to keep the control, it’s the self-control. When the person exceeds the level of worrying about what others may do in return, to reach the level of worrying about the self-fulfillment; where the person carries such inner reference for self-controlling.

That mechanism comes from the faith that’s locate into the person himself due the convictions s/he has, to prevent him from doing anything wrong even if he can avoid that social judgment. And instead of just caring about their reactions towards him; he’ll care about his (re)-action towards others. Because he has an unseen faith that everything he does; will certainly be judged for, even if he can escape the social judgment. And that’s the advantage which takes out the bad traits in the human and elevate from his value in the existence. But may a faith bring such feelings although it’s not doing that deep effect into the person.

Moreover we can still have some misunderstanding and maybe an opposition too about the same matter, that's why the question will be:  beside the fears and the self- controlling; what else we need to do too? What’s the more criteria we need for reaching the point of being agreed on common values and morals? (to stabilizise the people's life).

The need for common measurement to our morals (P2/4)

Usually the establishment of morals and ethics between people is claimed to the fear, in case if we look to the matter from the logic of powers to renouncing. And as an explaination; their fears from being oppressed hamper them from transgressing on others. In other words; to push themselves to doing what they aspire to get in return as a deal. And this kind of agreement -they had approved- could make people living safely together, based on their fears of course.

They can be committed to such agreement to protect themselves to avoid every punishment they may deserve. Although we could guarantee some stability into the group of people, but we can’t guarantee totally the rightness or wrongness of the things we do, but we can’t decide what’s acceptable to do and what’s not.

Because the concept of life is based on living it to the fullest since it is just one life, and the success of the individual is justified according this concept, regardless the harm and damage that may others get even if they’re billions of people, but their personal view -to this life- is enough to please them as they think it is.

The question is, what would be; if there was no fears within some ones, whereas they got enough means to be far away and out of every punishment or social judgment that can threaten them? Moreover; since they even don’t care what their environment may think about them. In such scenario; what can stop these people if their pleasure and joyment comes from the wrong and bad things they do?

Humanity could make the civilization when people have invented the system of writing. and if we try to tell this story from its beginnings; we can say that the need to communicate properly and to easily make the exchange between people, they needed to do so, the idea was to draw symbols and figures able to referring to certain things when everybody else can see, he will understand easily. Some languages which they still use same old systems of symbols. And with ages these systems of writing got developed and updated to be easier until we see now. It’s in the same way like we see now the signalization in our streets to facilitate the traffic.

My point for that is; the system which is used here was able to make a common mechanism of principles and rules to guarantee the people life in groups wherever they’re. And same for the morals between people they should be in common aswell.

The need for common measurement to our morals (P1/4)

I've said before about the troubles that can be due the differences in interpreting the facts and reactions towards, when people confuse the terms and they differently determine them which can lead to contradictions.

I give another picture for that, the Bosnian schools for example, and even in same city, they have different lessons for history subject, because the different perspectives towards the last war they've had, and each community teaches the subject in starting from its personal view and not necessary to telling the truth most of times. Such situation can show the gap that exists into the depths of the same society to be fragile, moreover the troubles that can happen because of that (like the national pride or national spirit as one of common issues which isn’t in fact and that may destabilize the country). because each side reads the events in a way different than the other side, different reasons, different excuses and different consequences, we reach - at the end - different measurements while everyone has his own system to evaluate facts and situations, because they started from different platforms to treating the issue, those different measurements don't bring harmony, neither to stabilize enough the social life of people although the same circumstances they share.

I stopped last time with a question, which measurement should we rely on to define properly the platform (for all people who share same situation) with clear principles and based on morals we've to share?

When everybody is living life according his personal principles, and each one is looking after his happiness ad success through certain perspective -based on some interests- which can be completely in the opposite of someone else. And what someone sees as a good thing and fulfilling the happiness, someone else may see it horrible and kind of corruption. Such difference is what breaks the harmony of being in social life and prevent the civilized progress.

If we look after the morals and their beginnings, people appreciate generally certain values but they can be different sometimes until being in contradictions while someone appreciate something whereas the other appreciates absolutely the opposite in fact. we find out that one of the reasons and the explanations of beginning; it was to guarantee the social interest to living into a group of people (society) through certain rules and without neglecting the individual. Because if every individual started looking after his personal satisfactions, and to getting his own benefits; then it'll be hard to establish a society, because there is be transgression on others and their rights aswell.

For this fact; it was necessary that everyone must renounce some of their demands and requirements willingly to guarantee the safety (from any transgression) and the freedom (to dreaming and looking after goals), that kind of balancing between issues can lead to the peace between people of the same environment.

That renouncing can be in many different ways, or all together, such as discussions, learning about, experiences and measuring the consequences from. The next question is: on which bases we can be sure that the renouncing is fair and just for us as same as it's for the others? And how do we realize and guarantee that others also are ready to offer that renouncing?

The relationships in our world today. (Part 02)

     I've heard this many times and i'd like to repeat the phrase, and i think it has a deep meaning too, which says: the most important in life is to love the woman/man whom you'll marry; instead to marry the woman/man whom you love. It seems confusing a bit, but i'll try to explain it now here. i don't think someone can disagree with the first part, but the second part looks wrong, you can understand me if you get in minds that I mainly emphasize on the order between the two factors, the wrong thing in the definition "of love" into our minds, (or in other words the way that our conscious learned about the love from different influences), and we can't rely on the love and only; to make a strong and long relationship - as everybody may say so -, but the love is supposed to grow up along the life in between, not waiting it to be grown enough then to be sure and to tell yourself : "ok! i'm sure this is the person whom i'll spend my life with", and if you ask anybody has a successful life (i mean asking eldery people), i think you'll find the same answer like in here.

     That calls in my mind the fact of two people still loving each other, although they don't look the same like the time when they've met in past, the changes came on them after years so the faces and bodies are completely changed with years, and even some views, but the love is alive and stronger. Of course there aren’t perfect and surely some conflicts had been within the years, and struggles to exceed some situations, also not everything was accepted from a one to another, but they kept the most important in between, that affability while living together and sharing the same responsibilities. With years they realize that the life can’t be shorten just into feelings, but the life is more than only that, and deeper aswell, which is based on more roles to play into. That's why the people today are far from their roots and social values, they disconnected from their past completely, and almost each relationship is free from any responsibility usually, so they lost the essences and get themselves lost.

     People surely need to know each other well before getting married , because it's an important step in life, but not necessarily in the way that's popular in the world of today. People agree with this fact they've now while they don't know anything else better as alternative. Because they wasted the ancestors' experiences and focused on the modern style of life that they're impressed by it,( kind of self-confidence more than the necessary), just to following the worldly trends, through different tools, and also reasons (which are long to talk about them all in here right now). But it's easy to know many about others today through communications (and as i said how friends are knowing about each other too), we don't need all details in the beginning whereas that must be as results for relationship, we need the necessary and the stability in the commitments between the couple.

     I’ve read in one novel about something in this context, the girl  and after some confusion she had and insecurity in her relationship, she asks her friend's advice  : I just want a hot relationship that ends up with marriage”, she naively thinks so. Then her friend - who’s older than her and seems wiser so - explained: you've just said it here, to ends up with marriage, and since it's ended up; so what will you keep for yourself both after getting married? fights? Looking for someone else or divorce maybe.

     Like that, the previous statement means, the love is growing up along the life and not completing its growth before the marriage, else it'll be drained only because no responsibilities nor duties that keep the relation between, no commitment, no clear goal nor common purpose for the two people ahead. Everyone is free and in every moment it's possible to be far away from the second in a second, that promote the cheating and disloyalty and cause then the insecurity, depression, and so on.

     To be committed into the marriage as an institution for family and society; requires some rules to follow, that commitment is the push to be someone caring and loving, because there is a goal they both aspire to achieve, it's the incentive to limit the passion into the family context (and i focus just on this side of love/relationships/marriage). That person won't look for something else far, where it's available between hands with the near partner and enough to fullfilling the needs (whether for the man or the woman) because it's mutual between.

     The emotions are an energy from the 04 human's energies, that should we renew it and upload it, and to be aware how to spend it, but the complication in the life today led the people to misuse this energy in the proper way, they unintentionally waste this resource and drain it in emptiness, and so they feel lost and usually to be in bad feelings can have awful consequences (which we previously have to avoid really).

     All that can show the need to think again at least on personal level, on how to measure that fact and to be aware enough to protect ourselves.