entry by dirt
12/28/2005 12:13 PM
|12/28/05 3:46 AM|
In the rapid race to pay bills and make ends meet, many are left without freedom. so is that the way? In some cases family and home bring people happiness. I can safely say that I am one of those people who would be more than happy to have a bit of land to call home and someone to love. but at the same time so would most people you see walking down the street. I would like to think that finding love and to settle down would be a perfect ending to one's life. To make society better by teaching your children what it took a life time to learn. thus making the quality of life on this planet completely better. But each time life gets worse. either new problems arise or the same one repeats over and over again. and on the topic of freedom: it is commonly accepted that responsiblity is the end of all freedoms and interests. Is it true that freedom is another word for having nothing left to lose. since when has responsiblity imposed completely on freedom. It seems silly that one is forced to give up your life just to survive. go to work pay the bills. is this what we are reduced to? I understand working to support a family but beyond that? does one have to give up everything or is that a copout? either way I have to judge the system that created this non-sense. Most people give up, I say why? For me to give up and give in is counter-productive. I know I can't single handedly bring it all down. but at the same time I can change myself. and show that it can be done. the more that others see that happiness is easier to achieve than what is commonly perceived, the more willing people will be to try. maybe a perfect future is possible.
[last edit 12/29/2005 5:45 AM by dirt - edited 1 times]
Comments: (use Reply to add a comment)
In my studies of the matter, I've found that a person must aquire anumber of things before finding happiness. Most of those things deal with degree and balance. One must put his mean of degree when dealing with his apetites or he will hot find happiness. The man who does not employ restrain in his apetites is a hedonist and his apetite will become his vice. Dealing with balance we have total abstinace of something and total excess of something. Happiness lies in between them, and the mean, the middle od that spectrum is relative to your to who you are. Two other thigns is a good regime and sufficient assets. A good regime is one of justice where the individual is able to thrive towards the pursuit of happiness. It must also be just in asset, the goal of the asset in the just regime, is to aquire the essentials of living and whatever spare assets for leisure. Like the relativity of the means of ones degree, the assets and regime of many people differs. The two most aperant examples of the regime is the governing political body over the land and the family. When one grows up one is governed perants, if the perants are not just and provide him with the essentials of life he will not be happy. Likwise with the government. Blanace in apetites or passions, a just regime where the one is provideed for or allowed to provide for oneself, the sufficient assets for the essentails of life, will be an inportant if one is serious about reaching happiness. All these things mandate responsibility because or the order of the human life. Like system are found in other social animals. However the level of responsibility it takes for one to be free and happy far outweighs the adversity one faces in reachin hapiness in an anarchic or free enviornment. I don't believe most people are resposible enough to be free, and are thus forced to attain happinees within the confines of this social strucute. The responsible are two few in number for real freedom to thrive.
Add a poll to this thread
This thread is one of your Favourites. Click to make normal.Click to make this thread a Favourite.
|This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private.|