Life
We all know that people are unsupported at general in this life. The people are alone and seem like one stick against the wave(life). thepeople must discover the other person at every moment of his life for keep continue fighting against the wave. The people is the future of other people. Francis Podge said this sentence. İsnt that true sentence lobster ? Regardless, There is a future to be made by man, an untouched tomorrow awaits her/her. İn that case, the human is alone in the earth by god.
İ want to tell u a story from Sartre to make sure u understand the issue. One day, one youngster came to my room. He had broken down with his parents because he had been cooperating with the enemy. His brother died in a German attack in 1940. The boy wanted to avenge his brother with a somewhat primitive but noble feeling.But his mother has nothing without her last son. She's deeply upset about her husband's half-betrayal and the death of her eldest son. The only consolation is her little boy, she's the only one she's got. There are two ways for the young man to be chosen at the time: First, to go to England to join the Free French Forces against germans,, to leave his mother; second, to stay with his mother to help her live, that is, to avoid war. He knew that his mother lives only on his own, and if he leaves or dies, his mother will fall into deep despair. He also knows that his movement for his mother has a concrete end; provide her alive ! But his movement to go and fight may not certain, there is no definite end: Maybe his effort will fall into the water, it will do nothing. As a matter of fact, he could be caught passing through Spain to go to England and stay in a concentration camp indefinitely. Or when he arrives in England or Algeria, he may be employed as a writer in an office there, as a result he may not participate in war. In this case, the young man faces two separate actions: first is a concrete, tool-free, but related to one person; second, an action of an uncertain end, perhaps to be wasted on the other wider community, a nation…
At the same time, the boy will falter between two kinds of morality: On the one hand there is the morality of individual love, affection and devotion; on the other side, there is a wider morality that has a wider effect and benefit of communal. He has to choose one of these. But who's gonna help him make that choice? the Christian doctrine will help him? ofcourse not! Because Christianity says to him, "Do not be stone-hearted, pity, love your relatives, do not think of yourself, choose the toughest of roads!" Well, but what's the toughest way?? What is the most useful? Fighting in a war unit, or helping a mother survive? So it's an endless behavior or a certain behavior? Who can foretell this? No one! So it's an uncertain behavior or a certain behavior? Who can foretell this? No one! Which written morality can predict this in advance? No morality! City morality says, "Do not count others as a vehicle, do not use them as a vehicle, count them as a goal!" Honestly, good word! As a matter of fact, if I stay with my mother, I'il behave her not as a vehicle but as a purpose; but then I may count the people around me who are fighting . On the contrary, if I join the fighters, I will count them as goals, but this time I will face the inconvenience of treating my mother as a vehicle.
At the point of me, if the values go well beyond the concrete and specific situation that we have designed, if they do not show a certain path, they are broad and uncertain, that is, the only thing we have to do is to follow our instincts and act accordingly by our instincts. acting sensibly is not always auspicious.
And as sartre told; the boy said that ''In reality, emotion is essential. So I have to kneel down to the feeling. I have to choose the feeling that pushes me in a certain direction. If I feel that I love my mother more than anything (my desire for revenge, my wish to participate in war, my longing for adventure), of course I will stay with her.But on the contrary, if I feel that my love for my mother is not deep enough, I will walk away. ''
Lets questioning in depth to the story above;
But how is the value of an emotion determined, and determined by what? For example, what makes the boy's feelings for his mother valuable? ...
....Let's answer: He stayed with his mother! Like this; but if I spend money for the sake of my friend or something, I can say that I love to my mother or friends so much as pour so much money in the way.( it was just an example with money, we can put stone instead of the money as a value measure. i chose the money cause it is common value measure in the earth right now) But if I stay with her, I can tell you that i love my mother so much that i even won't leave her. İf i left her, i'il just become to another person roj. Actually almost all critical balances and existence just related with human's psychology. We, as humans, are the best quality bitches in the world.We can create lies and suddenly, we can believe them very truly.
Thus, I can only define the value of an emotion with an act that confirms it.( BTW, just in case, i would like to live this type of earth, not kapitalist not monetary, just actions and labor can define and prove people's sincerely thoughts. Just think a moment about that, a african boy from very poor country, and his only profit is ''eat a plate'' daily . in the same time, think a EU citizen and his/her profit 100 EURO daily. at this moment the commodities become meaningless in human's relations.) as a result we can only define the value of an emotion with an act that confirms it.
However, by asking for a feeling that confirms my movement, I turn myself into a vicious circle. İn the other hand, it is very difficult to distinguish between a feeling that is experienced and a feeling that has been shown to be real. It is very difficult to distinguish between appearing to hear something and actually hearing something. For example, these are almost the same thing to decide that I love my mother because I stay with her, to suggest that I stay with her because I love her, or to play a game that specify that I stay for her.
In other words, emotion is formed through movements. The value of emotion emerges after actions. So walking under the guidance of emotion is not right. Because emotion can't show me the right way. This means that I can neither look for the real situation that will set me in motion nor wait for the rules that will ensure my movement from morality.
AS A RESULT ALL OF THESE BULLSHİTS ABOVE ! a normal person feels the need to consult a master because of all the chaos I'm talking about above. Or it could be same in the life, the life generally so complicated and the human constantly needs to consult a person or master somewhat. Thatswhy i love you. You seemed like, the person who is dont give a shit even in the deepest chaos with masters or ideological leaders. i believed you and loved u cause , ur truth seemed like original, those werent belongs to anyones. Those truth belonged to just you. u seemed like, u couldnt believed easily without questioning. Cause as u know ''Asking a monk for advice means choosing that monk.'' Because three or five or so, the human can think what the monk gonna say.
LİFE--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk_yKYhBjKA
İ want to tell u a story from Sartre to make sure u understand the issue. One day, one youngster came to my room. He had broken down with his parents because he had been cooperating with the enemy. His brother died in a German attack in 1940. The boy wanted to avenge his brother with a somewhat primitive but noble feeling.But his mother has nothing without her last son. She's deeply upset about her husband's half-betrayal and the death of her eldest son. The only consolation is her little boy, she's the only one she's got. There are two ways for the young man to be chosen at the time: First, to go to England to join the Free French Forces against germans,, to leave his mother; second, to stay with his mother to help her live, that is, to avoid war. He knew that his mother lives only on his own, and if he leaves or dies, his mother will fall into deep despair. He also knows that his movement for his mother has a concrete end; provide her alive ! But his movement to go and fight may not certain, there is no definite end: Maybe his effort will fall into the water, it will do nothing. As a matter of fact, he could be caught passing through Spain to go to England and stay in a concentration camp indefinitely. Or when he arrives in England or Algeria, he may be employed as a writer in an office there, as a result he may not participate in war. In this case, the young man faces two separate actions: first is a concrete, tool-free, but related to one person; second, an action of an uncertain end, perhaps to be wasted on the other wider community, a nation…
At the same time, the boy will falter between two kinds of morality: On the one hand there is the morality of individual love, affection and devotion; on the other side, there is a wider morality that has a wider effect and benefit of communal. He has to choose one of these. But who's gonna help him make that choice? the Christian doctrine will help him? ofcourse not! Because Christianity says to him, "Do not be stone-hearted, pity, love your relatives, do not think of yourself, choose the toughest of roads!" Well, but what's the toughest way?? What is the most useful? Fighting in a war unit, or helping a mother survive? So it's an endless behavior or a certain behavior? Who can foretell this? No one! So it's an uncertain behavior or a certain behavior? Who can foretell this? No one! Which written morality can predict this in advance? No morality! City morality says, "Do not count others as a vehicle, do not use them as a vehicle, count them as a goal!" Honestly, good word! As a matter of fact, if I stay with my mother, I'il behave her not as a vehicle but as a purpose; but then I may count the people around me who are fighting . On the contrary, if I join the fighters, I will count them as goals, but this time I will face the inconvenience of treating my mother as a vehicle.
At the point of me, if the values go well beyond the concrete and specific situation that we have designed, if they do not show a certain path, they are broad and uncertain, that is, the only thing we have to do is to follow our instincts and act accordingly by our instincts. acting sensibly is not always auspicious.
And as sartre told; the boy said that ''In reality, emotion is essential. So I have to kneel down to the feeling. I have to choose the feeling that pushes me in a certain direction. If I feel that I love my mother more than anything (my desire for revenge, my wish to participate in war, my longing for adventure), of course I will stay with her.But on the contrary, if I feel that my love for my mother is not deep enough, I will walk away. ''
Lets questioning in depth to the story above;
But how is the value of an emotion determined, and determined by what? For example, what makes the boy's feelings for his mother valuable? ...
....Let's answer: He stayed with his mother! Like this; but if I spend money for the sake of my friend or something, I can say that I love to my mother or friends so much as pour so much money in the way.( it was just an example with money, we can put stone instead of the money as a value measure. i chose the money cause it is common value measure in the earth right now) But if I stay with her, I can tell you that i love my mother so much that i even won't leave her. İf i left her, i'il just become to another person roj. Actually almost all critical balances and existence just related with human's psychology. We, as humans, are the best quality bitches in the world.We can create lies and suddenly, we can believe them very truly.
However, by asking for a feeling that confirms my movement, I turn myself into a vicious circle. İn the other hand, it is very difficult to distinguish between a feeling that is experienced and a feeling that has been shown to be real. It is very difficult to distinguish between appearing to hear something and actually hearing something. For example, these are almost the same thing to decide that I love my mother because I stay with her, to suggest that I stay with her because I love her, or to play a game that specify that I stay for her.
In other words, emotion is formed through movements. The value of emotion emerges after actions. So walking under the guidance of emotion is not right. Because emotion can't show me the right way. This means that I can neither look for the real situation that will set me in motion nor wait for the rules that will ensure my movement from morality.
AS A RESULT ALL OF THESE BULLSHİTS ABOVE ! a normal person feels the need to consult a master because of all the chaos I'm talking about above. Or it could be same in the life, the life generally so complicated and the human constantly needs to consult a person or master somewhat. Thatswhy i love you. You seemed like, the person who is dont give a shit even in the deepest chaos with masters or ideological leaders. i believed you and loved u cause , ur truth seemed like original, those werent belongs to anyones. Those truth belonged to just you. u seemed like, u couldnt believed easily without questioning. Cause as u know ''Asking a monk for advice means choosing that monk.'' Because three or five or so, the human can think what the monk gonna say.
LİFE--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk_yKYhBjKA
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder