<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.69511484942177451636272260507%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=2c5c993f-01e5-43d0-919f-277a08a96073" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> While &quot;Be Yourself&quot; is an appealing message to market and sell. Is it really something that all of us should strive for? And how can anyone actually be themselves in this world? Here we question the liberal ideas of favouring the individual, often over the collective that is society. We discuss and debate whether always putting yourself first is sustainable and the consequences of going ahead with that idea as a society. Take the example of cars on the road. At an intersection, you observe people fighting for their chance to cross, all the while creating a stir that leaves everyone stranded. Of course, you want to go first, why wouldn&#39;t you, but so does the person right next to you. You&#39;re late for your meeting the second time this week, but they have a medical emergency. But since you only focus on yourself, you cut corners and try to drive away first and end up adding to the commotion. The Indian road safety campaign of &quot;Pehle Aap&quot; (Meaning &#39;You First&#39;) is the perfect indication of the need to put others first to avoid literal and metaphorical traffic jams aka, the stalling of society. But one can argue that at least in their homes, people can put themselves first and act the way they want. It is a scale down from society, but even at home, other people are fighting to do things their way. It is not peaceful and sustainable if everyone in that boundary is fighting for their way, there is no structure or protocol, no rules or regulations. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.69511484942177451636272260507%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=1a853465-d14a-4c57-b29a-3065276c559a" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Let&#39;s zoom out and look at society. Suppose everyone starts acting individually, putting their needs and wants ahead of everyone else. In that case, we create a petri dish of randomness. The chaos that people would say is unnecessary. It would be the death of altruism as a direct result of individualism. Self over service. How long do you think society would operate at the current level of peace once we start acting more individually? I vote, not very long. You do you, act the way you want, but does this mean we have no regard for other people or society? We can extrapolate this idea to all aspects of life, both internal and social. Individually, when you do not operate under personal values or guidelines, life quickly turns to chaos. You end up having to make every decision for yourself at every juncture, and it is draining. And who&#39;s to say that you are well equipped to take every decision even if it only affects you? Turn to social media, and you find almost everyone propagating the ideas of &#39;Do what feels right, &#39;You do you, &#39;Be Yourself&#39;, &#39;Don&#39;t succumb to society&#39;. Paradoxically, if everyone starts adhering to this philosophy, you succumb to the idea of not succumbing to society. A trap to get out of another trap. Liberty is a new religion. One way it manifests is in the noble idea of doing what you want and not pandering to anyone else&#39;s needs or demands; of course, why should you? It is your life, after all. But this outlook itself is a marketing gimmick that brands and companies use to associate themselves with freedom, passion, and strength. You glorify the ideas of freedom and liberty, where you get to do what you want and be satisfied all the time but you still punch in at 9 AM in a dingy office space, where your superiors already line up your work, and you have to report before the end of the day or kiss your bonus goodbye. It does not feel very free, does it? But this is precisely how the majority of the working class live. Don&#39;t get me wrong. There is no vendetta against individualism here. The intention is to highlight that your mundane life is not substandard. You can very well be satisfied in such a life only if you choose not to give in to the idea of &#39;not succumbing to society&#39;. Some people thrive under strict rules and deadlines. Having to make every decision for yourself is a source of anxiety for many people. It makes them accountable for all their actions, and only they are to blame if things go sideways. It is a huge fear. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.69511484942177451636272260507%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=d7dc7932-a03a-43d8-bf28-2b8b4b60e01f" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> People need direction, handholding, and rules to function well in society. The absence of these would cause them to self-destruct or cause a failure of peaceful social structures. The paradox of choice also comes into play here. The more decisions and options we are exposed to, the higher the mental toll they take. Every decision we make has a cost. The more decisions we make, the more depleted our decision-making faculty gets. Our ability to make the right ones declines with every subsequent decision. This phenomenon sneaks up on you, where towards the end of the day, you find yourself making emotional and rash choices that you end up regretting the following morning. Classic case of decision fatigue. Hence it makes sense to follow rules and adhere to norms. It is, of course, if the rules themselves don&#39;t come at a personal cost. Exposure to all these choices and decisions also then lead to widespread anger and frustration. People will be drained of fighting internal and external battles all the time. At times it is not only okay to give up decision making, but rather it is warranted. It is not meant to advocate mass rulings and strict adherence but to question the utopian idea of liberty itself. Is having the liberty to choose everything for yourself ultimately beneficial to you and society, or is it just an impressive vision to sell? What do you think? Share your thoughts with us in the comments.

Paradox of Being Yourself

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.069722072775078691635260788558%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=1ba4366e-2b0d-4bf4-8b09-4cd52786240a" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Setting the Scene: Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) was an American Psychologist who studied how people solved moral dilemmas. Kohlberg’s work often involved posing various moral questions to his research subjects. A famous example would be the ‘Heinz dilemma.’ It was a hypothetical question regarding a man who had the chance to steal life-saving drugs for his very sick wife and why he might decide to choose a specific course of action over another. To correctly classify these responses, Kohlberg proposed a basic construct for categorizing them that correspond to different moral developmental reasoning stages. Over the years, there has been some criticism of its limitations and legitimate questions about its scope and accuracy. However, it gives us an excellent starting point to begin our discussion on the topic of morality. <table style="width: 468pt; border-collapse: collapse; margin-left: 5pt"> <tr style="height: 27.25pt"> <td colspan="3" style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 2.25pt; padding-left: 5pt; padding-right: 5pt; padding-top: 5pt; padding-bottom: 3.88pt; vertical-align: bottom; " > The 6 Stages/Levels of Moral Development according to Kohlberg </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 21.25pt"></tr> <tr style="height: 25.75pt"> <td rowspan="2" style=" border-top-color: #000000; border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1pt; border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Preconventional Morality </td> <td style=" border-top-color: #000000; border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1pt; border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: 2em !important; " > 1 </td> <td style=" border-top-color: #000000; border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1pt; border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Punishment and Obedience - Follow the rules to avoid punishment </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 27.25pt"> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: 2em !important; " > 2 </td> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Self Interest - How does complying with the rules benefit me? </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 25.75pt"> <td rowspan="2" style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Conventional Morality </td> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: 2em !important; " > 3 </td> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Social Norms - Conforming to others expectations of goodness </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 27.25pt"> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: 2em !important; " > 4 </td> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Law and Order - Submission to authority because it’s the law </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 25.75pt"> <td rowspan="3" style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; padding-left: 4.5pt; padding-right: 5pt; padding-top: 5pt; padding-bottom: 4.5pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Postconventional Morality </td> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: 2em !important; " > 5 </td> <td style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Social Contract - Do it for the greater common good </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 25.75pt"> <td rowspan="2" style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-left-color: #000000; border-left-style: solid; border-left-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: 2em !important; " > 6 </td> <td rowspan="2" style=" border-bottom-color: #000000; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 1pt; border-right-color: #000000; border-right-style: solid; border-right-width: 1pt; padding: 5pt; width: fit-content !important; " > Universal Ethical Principles - moral code based on universal values greater than oneself takes precedence over lesser laws and social mores </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 35.5pt"></tr> </table> <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.069722072775078691635260788558%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=695eccc0-e08e-46c2-ba09-93c68f708d51" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) was a German Philosopher and writer who often considered moral and ethical issues related to the concepts of personal identity and freedom. Nietzsche was a writer of great cleverness and wit. His work is still widely read and quoted to this day, and his ideas helped form the basis of many important discussions on cultural issues during the 20th century. Nietzsche’s writings often focused on the restrictive nature of morality used as a form of groupthink by the masses to suppress the creativity and originality of truly great individuals. Here are some of Nietzsche’s quotes regarding morality: “Morality is just a fiction used by the herd of inferior human beings to hold back the few superior men.” “Let us not underestimate this: we ourselves, we free spirits, are nothing less than a “revaluation of all values,” an incarnate declaration of war and triumph over all the ancient conceptions of “true” and “untrue.”” – The Antichrist “One becomes moral – not because one is moral. Submission to morality can be slavish or vain or selfish or resigned or obtusely enthusiastic or thoughtless or an act of desperation, like submission to a prince: in itself it is nothing moral.” – The Dawn “Convictions are more dangerous enemies of the truth than lies.” – Human, All Too Human For believe me! — the secret for harvesting from existence the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment is: to live dangerously! – The Gay Science While every noble morality develops from a triumphant affirmation of itself, slave morality from the outset says No to what is "outside," what is "different," what is "not itself"; and this No is its creative deed. – Genealogy of Morals The Presence of Conflicting Values: Moral debates often arise when conflicting values or goods are considered, and when we must make a choice between them. Moral debates can center around specific issues or concrete examples of conflict that exist in real life. Or, they can also center around broader or more abstract forms of reasoning in hypothetical scenarios. People debating a particular issue can come into conflict because one person is arguing about a single case based on its own specific merits. Another person may be extrapolating from the same data to formulate answers relevant to broader hypothetical situations. The debaters need to recognize the scope of their arguments to compare their conclusions effectively. In this article, we will be dealing with general ideas about morality rather than venturing into a discussion of specific cases. Here are two questions to consider before reading further: · How do we balance a sense of personal freedom and autonomy along with social responsibility and the universal principles of moral integrity? · And are there universal principles of morality that are truly greater than the individual? Or is the greatness of man the measure of all things? In Part 2 of this article, we will begin to compare and contrast some of the ideas of Nietzsche and Kohlberg. There will also be a series of questions for the reader to consider regarding this. Finally, in Part 3 of this article, we will consider the role of morality in building a functional society and how it all ties into the principles of equality and justice.

The Development of Morality - Nietzsche vs Kohlberg - Part 1 of 3

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0142054683348544761631040060663%2FThe%20Non-Pursuit%20of%20Happiness_1.webp?alt=media&token=432a9687-e01d-48b4-8d14-45c85fd54726" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> It doesn&rsquo;t take much looking around to find overly sentimental or simplistic quotes about happiness. Everybody seems to have something to share with us about the subject. Here are a few examples:&nbsp; <ul> <li> &nbsp; &nbsp; &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t let anything get in the way of your happiness.&rdquo;&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li> &nbsp; &nbsp; "To be happy, you must be your own sunshine."&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li> &nbsp; &nbsp; &ldquo;Whatever you decide to do, make sure it makes you happy.&rdquo;&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li> &nbsp; &nbsp; &ldquo;Life is full of choices. Choose to be happy!&rdquo;&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li> &nbsp; &nbsp; &ldquo;Doing what you like is freedom. Liking what you do is happiness!&rdquo;&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li> &nbsp; &nbsp; &ldquo;Act the way you want to feel.&rdquo;&nbsp;</li> </ul> Having my mind soiled by slogans like this used to infuriate me. Now I find them so ridiculous that they seem to take on more of a comic quality instead. It&rsquo;s not even the triteness of any particular message that I find so obnoxious; it's more about the overall condescending tone and not-so-subtle hints of bullshit.&nbsp; Happiness IS essential to us all. Silly quotes and toxic positivity aside, we need to manage our psychological health and well-being to derive some sense of satisfaction from this life. Or else why keep going on? If I had the chance to go back in time and share one idea about happiness with my younger self, it would be this: The concept of happiness covers a broad spectrum of meanings, and it&rsquo;s certainly not the same for all people. There is a big difference between constantly chasing an elevated quality of happiness based on always grasping for &lsquo;better&rsquo; or &lsquo;more&rsquo; versus letting your happiness arise spontaneously from a well-grounded and consistent practice of daily living. If I consistently strive for happiness and treat it as an end unto itself, then typically, reaching and sustaining it becomes dependent on meeting various external conditions, often beyond my locus of control. If most of my conditions for things to be 'good' are met, I will be happy. If just some of my many conditions are met, then my happiness will begin to fade. If few or none of my conditions are met, then I will be miserable. Time factors into the equation as well, since it&rsquo;s never quite enough just getting what we need right now to make us happy. We find that we will also always need more of whatever it is for the future. And so, there is always another carrot (reward) dangling in front of us that we must keep moving towards. &nbsp;Now we find ourselves on the hedonic treadmill of life, constantly pursuing some externally conditioned version of happiness. Economies rely heavily on it. Social relationships often build around it. Most of all, we are convinced that we need it to live, and if we don't get it, then the entire world is an awful place. The relentless pursuit of a conditional ideal of happiness has the potential to become one of the most significant sources of existential frustration and misery in our lives. It makes us regret the past, leaves us discontent with the present, and creates a sense of fear and anxiety about the future. &nbsp;The thing about life is that it goes on regardless of whether we are happy or not. I keep breathing, whether I'm ecstatic or dejected. The sun rises and sets whether I'm morose or elated. The universe is indifferent to our happiness or suffering. But to us, it seems essential &ndash; often the most important thing in our lives.&nbsp; &nbsp;If things tend to break your way a lot in life, if you are lucky, or won the genetic/birth lottery, so to speak, then it's often relatively easy to maintain a consistent state of conditional happiness. You had it all along, it was never really taken away from you, and you go along in life feeling quite satisfied with yourself. And there is nothing inherently wrong with living a basic or superficial life like that. If it makes you happy and you can get away with it, then, by all means, do it!&nbsp; &nbsp;The problem is, we also live in a universe that is impermanent and constantly changing. Statistically speaking, the odds of a person making it unscathed by some misfortune are fairly slim. Some &lsquo;lucky&rsquo; individuals seem to skate through life without a scratch &ndash; but most of us suffer at least a little, or sadly, a lot. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0142054683348544761631040060663%2FThe%20Non-Pursuit%20of%20Happiness_2.webp?alt=media&token=fe16337f-e2c8-4ae8-bb83-2450853e189e" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> So how can we try to be happy then?&nbsp; &nbsp;First - Quit obsessing about it. Stop chasing after happiness like it&rsquo;s some kind of life goal to be achieved. It can&rsquo;t and won&rsquo;t be possessed or held by us forever. Happiness comes; it stays for a while, then it leaves. Hopefully, it returns in some new form or another, and preferably soon. It's essential to cultivate things in life that are likely to lead to long-term satisfaction. But they still generally follow the same pattern of coming and going, rising and falling over time. The sooner we make peace with the entropy that permeates everything around us and inside of us, the less time we will spend fighting in vain against the current. &nbsp;Second - Since we aren't spending our days and nights in the constant pursuit (obsession) over conditional happiness, what do we do with ourselves with all of our free time instead? The answer is that we take that time to build character and get to know ourselves. We cultivate the ability to withstand the bad times better when they come, learn not to waste energy clinging to the good times when they inevitably depart and develop a sense of gratitude for when the beautiful things in life do finally arrive. &nbsp;Easier said than done, I know.&nbsp; Because honestly, it seems like a lot more fun to gamble and play the game than to spend time doing the heavy lifting and asking difficult questions. Plus, it might make you seem a little different to others &ndash; perhaps even weird. Most people are already on a happiness treadmill of some kind, and they are convinced that you should be too if you want to get the best of what the world offers. The world is filled with dangling carrots. Quite often, nobody wants to hear about someone else who has disavowed chasing these types of prizes &ndash; and taking this sort of position amplifies the lack of common ground between them. &nbsp;I tried chasing happiness in my life for a long time. Some people that I have known have had much better luck than me, others far worse. But in the end, I found that the whole game was exhausting &ndash; and it often seemed rigged. So, I decided that I needed to explore some alternate pathways in life instead. And the greater amount of time that I spent away from the happiness treadmill, the less I found that I missed it.&nbsp; &nbsp;Because when your happiness isn&rsquo;t as dependent on conditional things, it makes it a lot harder for the world to snatch it away from you. And the low-hanging fruit in life often has a way of being the first to spoil - even when you manage to store some of it up. &nbsp;This choice isn't an all-or-nothing scenario. It&rsquo;s a balancing act. Your life choices will trend in one direction or another. You could shift the balance of your life's satisfaction to external and conditional things outside of yourself. Or you could focus on developing resilience and making peace with life on its own terms. Either way, you choose a path daily, and you have to keep walking it. &nbsp;<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0142054683348544761631040060663%2FThe%20Non-Pursuit%20of%20Happiness_3.webp?alt=media&token=33769263-9481-4a61-8edc-848dec0def93" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> &nbsp;It&rsquo;s important to understand from the start that it&rsquo;s unlikely you will ever arrive at some fixed destination in life where you suddenly release all of these conditional attachments to happiness and gain enlightenment. But you can start by taking care of one thing in your life at a time, do it to the best of your current ability, and then move on to the next thing - similar to weeding a garden. This process of releasing long-held goals to root around in the dirt of the self can be pretty painful at first, but in time, you will grow more accustomed to it. Considering these ideas today, I&rsquo;m not entirely sure if my younger self would have fully embraced them or laughed at them and tossed them away. The dangling carrots were both plentiful and far more novel back then. At this point in life, I suppose I'm just content to be fortunate enough to have done my time on the happiness treadmill and still had a chance to jump off and look for something different. &nbsp;I&rsquo;m just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round. I really love to watch them roll. No longer riding on the merry-go-round, I just had to let it go. - &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; John Lennon

The Non-Pursuit of Happiness

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0321242839574068561628682884185%2FThe%20History%20of%20Art_1.webp?alt=media&token=492fd2a3-6df3-4bc5-850d-ba4b2dcfe727" alt="File preview" width="741" height="493" /> There have been times where words were not sufficient to convey a message; in such a situation, one sought help from art. Art is a constant, a means of communication for humans from the stone age to the twenty-first century. Art, along with humankind, has significantly evolved.&nbsp; We can broadly classify the different phases of evolution in the art world in eight periods: 1.STONE AGE ART(30,000 BCE- 3,000 BCE): The earliest art belongs to the stone age period. As the name suggests, stones were prominent. Petroglyphs, carving on hard protected surfaces like cave walls, were the most common. People refer to the period as prehistoric art as it existed before recorded history.&nbsp; We further divide the stone age into three periods; with development in tools observed over time: <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Paleolithic period (30,000 BCE-10,000 BCE)</li> </ul> &nbsp;The term palaeolithic means old stone age. The artworks of this phase mainly consist of small sculptures, carvings on walls and paintings. In this period, people put stone tools to use for something other than survival for the first time. The structures were mainly figurines of animals, small but realistic.&nbsp; The primary materials used were ivory, bone, stone, and clay&mdash;Bhimbetka Petroglyphs, the oldest known prehistoric art discovered in India's quartzite caves.&nbsp; <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0321242839574068561628682884185%2FThe%20History%20of%20Art_2.webp?alt=media&token=28fd4ef4-f17d-4aed-9f73-9bc51049b768" alt="File preview" width="740" height="555" /> Bhimbetka Petroglyphs&nbsp;&nbsp; <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Mesolithic period (10,000 BCE- 3,000 BCE)</li> </ul> &nbsp;This period marked the end of the ice age and a switch to more temperate conditions. Due to this change, the humans had to adapt to a new type of living, leaving behind their caves. They switched to more settled agricultural communities. The art now provided keener details and better narration. Ceramics also started gaining popularity in this period. The most intriguing artwork of this time consists of rock art, similar to the palaeolithic period on vertical cliffs or natural rocks. <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Neolithic period (8,000 BCE- 3,000 BCE)</li> </ul> &nbsp;In this era, weaving and pottery became prominent as civilization settled and people shifted from nomadic to permanent settlements. The most exciting creations from this time were the architecture that featured large stone structures called the megaliths. This period, however, mainly focused on pottery, the majority found in the region of Mesopotamia.&nbsp; 2.BRONZE AGE ART (3,000 BCE-1,100 BCE)&nbsp; This period highlights the production of bronze, an alloy of copper and tin. With advancements in the production of metalwork, there was a rise in skilled workers. The use of stone became less popular. The art world saw some agile development as metals were more flexible, the sculptures and artefacts made were more detailed and charming. People observed the earliest art in the Mesopotamia region, Sumerian art. Writing first began in Mesopotamia as the nation greatly prospered, and people started focusing on art, literature, culture and religion. Egyptian art also rose in the form of monumental architecture. Lost wax casting was one of the most common ways used for making sculptures out of bronze. The oldest cast bronze sculpture is the 'DANCING GIRL' in Mohenjo Daro. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0321242839574068561628682884185%2FThe%20History%20of%20Art_3.webp?alt=media&token=73ec9296-48f2-4e19-9ecc-28561fbcbf7a" alt="File preview" width="400" height="776" /> The Dancing girl in Mohenjo Daro 3.IRON AGE ART (1,100 BCE-200 BCE) As the name suggests, the use of iron became more prominent in this period. It was the last phase of the prehistory period. It was more economical to mine iron than bronze, and it was more substantial, making it extremely popular and abundantly available. In this reign, greek art gained attention in the Mediterranean basin. However, near the end of the iron age, greek art started declining, and Persian and Egyptian art became more dominating. 4.MEDIEVAL ART (5th- 15th century) Medieval art was produced in Europe during the middle ages; it includes sculptures, paintings, illuminated manuscripts, mosaics, and metalwork.&nbsp; Based on time, we can classify medieval art into: <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">The Romanesque (11th-12th century)&nbsp;</li> </ul> Its name comes from the fact that its primary basis is on early Christian art in Rome. The architecture built in this reign, mainly churches, monasteries and temples, symbolized the growing wealth in Europe and the power of church monasteries. The characteristics of these buildings are thick stone walls, semi-circular arches with durable construction. Sculptures were also famous; made out of stone, based on the iconography of the bible. Thousands of artisans from Rome and Greek created an eastern, Christian image known as byzantine art. Other types of popular art include illuminated manuscripts and stained glass.&nbsp; <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0321242839574068561628682884185%2FThe%20History%20of%20Art_4.webp?alt=media&token=21720770-9d02-4897-a52c-fd2ce753cc65" alt="File preview" width="400" height="515" /> Chriatian Byzantine Art <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">The Gothic (12th-15th century)&nbsp;</li> </ul> It derives its name from the Goths that ruled France. The gothic architecture offered revolutionary structural advancements such as flying buttresses, ribbed vaults(formed by two arches across diagonally) and decorative pinnacles, contributing to taller and lighter buildings. Sculptures in the gothic period were more realistic images; they characterized angels, saints and biblical figures.&nbsp; Paintings also became more lifelike, and with the gradual development in Europe, artists soon started taking an interest in non-religious subjects.&nbsp; 5.THE RENAISSANCE (14th-16th century) The renaissance dominated Italy and the majority of Europe; the people in this reign made their appearance different from that of the medieval period. There was a great revival of learning of ancient Greece and Rome. The artist started rejecting the byzantine form of art and preferred a more realistic depiction of humans and space. The art from this time also represented other aspects, such as mythology. Some of the most famous masters of this time are Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo and Raphael.&nbsp; 6.THE POST-RENAISSANCE (16th-18th century)&nbsp; This reign was followed by: <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Mannerism (16th century)&nbsp;</li> </ul> Mannerism, opposed to naturalism in art, was notable for its artificiality. The mannerist artist took paintings established during the renaissance and added a twist by exaggerating them, giving them an extravagant aesthetic to classicism. <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Baroque (17th-18th century)&nbsp;&nbsp;</li> </ul> The main principles of art in this reign was extravagance, ornateness and decorated details. The link between the catholic church and this art form was inseparable.&nbsp; <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Rococo (mid 17th-18th century)&nbsp;</li> </ul> Rococo, unlike Baroque, emphasized opulence, gratefulness and lightness. It emerged in France. Unlike another art form, it depicted light-hearted romance and carefree aristocratic life.&nbsp; 7.MODERN ART (18th-19th century) The Industrial Revolution led to the birth of modern art. In previous art forms, the art depicted religion and mythology. However, in the 19th-century, artists created art based on their personal experience and their chosen topics. The art produced in this reign showcased the artists' interest in re-imagining, interpreting and rejecting previous art styles.&nbsp; Some famous artworks are Les Demoiselles d'Avignon by Pablo Picasso, The Large Bathers by Paul C&eacute;zanne and Impression, Sunrise by Claude Monet.&nbsp; The different types of modern art are:&nbsp; <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Impressionism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Post Impressionism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Fauvism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Expressionism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Cubism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Surrealism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Abstract Expressionism&nbsp;</li> </ul> &nbsp;8.CONTEMPORARY ART (21st century) Contemporary art means art; painting, sculpture, photography, video art, installation and production are performed today. It allows the artist to reflect upon the social issues related to humanity in today's world. High-end technology and cultural diversity globally surrounds artists in today's time. This form of art stands out because of its lack of organization, uniformity and ideology.&nbsp; The different types of contemporary art are: <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0321242839574068561628682884185%2FThe%20History%20of%20Art_5.webp?alt=media&token=460edc0d-69c6-4de1-a10a-74c749f22f79" alt="File preview" width="740" height="555" /> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Pop art&nbsp;&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Photorealism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Conceptualism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Minimalism&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Performance art&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Installation art&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Earth art&nbsp;</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;">Street art&nbsp;</li> </ul>

The History of Art

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.067500485203443981630900523657%2FVirtue%20ethics%2CUtilitarianism%20and%20Deontology_1.webp?alt=media&token=e33a80b9-8b93-47b4-aeab-48fcb9e30288" alt="File preview" width="740" height="493" /> Morality is a term coined to separate the good or bad thoughts, the right and wrong actions. Morality is subjective; many great philosophers like Aristotle, Plato, and Kant have given us their approach.&nbsp; To understand the basics of morality, let us take an example, you find a 20 dollar note on the floor, the exact amount required for you to buy that pretty new top you saw yesterday. Here, morality will guide you to ask the people around if they lost a twenty, and if nobody claims it, you give it to the police. Even if it is just a twenty note, it is immoral to keep it with you and spend it. The three main approaches to morality are Virtue ethics, Utilitarianism and Deontology.&nbsp; 1.VIRTUE ETHICS: Virtue ethics theory was given to us by Aristotle. It emphasizes virtues and moral character. It says happiness is our highest goal, and it is achievable by cultivating moral virtues. Once we have developed moral integrity, they can be employed automatically. Let us get a deeper understanding by taking an example: You visit your friend's house for dinner, she has recently learnt how to cook, and wants your opinion. Upon taking the first bite, you feel like the flavour is very off; it is bitter and salty. She is looking at you with excitement, waiting for an opinion. You are in a dilemma; being a good friend, you believe if you are honest, she can work harder and improve, but it might end up hurting her feelings. If you lie, she will be happy, and it might make her day. After contemplating the consequences, you decide to be honest with her. You chose honesty; you took a moral decision. As per virtue ethics, it soon becomes a personality trait if you decide to be honest at times.&nbsp; Virtue ethics can also be summed up as "fake it till you make it." 2.DEONTOLOGY: "An action, to have moral worth, must be done from duty."- Immanuel Kant. Immanuel Kant is one of the most famous philosophers associated with this approach. In Deontology, one is given a set of duties based on what their intuition believes is right and wrong, and one obeys them. Deontology eradicates subjectivity by focusing only on following the duties and not weighing the consequences of one's action. For example, you are a software engineer, and only you know how to hack into the system to stop the missile launch. Hacking is unethical; even if it might save thousands of lives, Deontology will prevent you from hacking. As previously stated, it does not weigh the consequences of the action and only focuses on following the suitable duties. 3.UTILITARIANISM: In Deontology, we studied that we need to obey the duties irrespective of the consequences; however, in utilitarianism, it is otherwise. It believes in taking the action that has the outcome benefiting the majority. It is a species of consequentialism; It evaluates the activity on the possibility of its consequence. In utilitarianism, happiness or pleasure are the only things that have intrinsic value. Continuing the example from Deontology, if we apply the utilitarian approach to the situation, it would suggest that since the one immoral activity will allow thousands of lives to be happy, the software engineer should go ahead.&nbsp; However, the only limitation here is that we cannot always be accurate on the possible outcome. The engineer might hack into the system successfully but fails to prevent the missile launch.&nbsp;So which school of thought do you think we should live by?&nbsp; Share your thoughts in the comments.

Virtue Ethics, Deontology and Utilitarianism

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.102809502103431431634384762413%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=252ffbd9-e7e2-4c60-81eb-836f08101c52" alt="File preview" width="700" /> In one perspective, time could be easily seen as a homeless person: ignored, despised by some, where only the wise and the goodhearted pay attention and try to help. The result of a system that is too busy counting money and not caring about death because &ldquo;diamonds last forever&rdquo;. But time (as a homeless person) is on the streets, constantly showing us that there is something wrong with the world and that beyond all distractions, suffering still is the infrastructure of mankind. Time will stop you on your way to work and ask for just a spare change, and you may ignore it, but the uneasiness of being indifferent will stick with you, and you&rsquo;ll be anxious. Or maybe time can also be the soldier in the field, fighting against chaos and ensuring our liberty because time is what secures our present since even against all odds, existence somehow manages to thrive in a universe of uncertainty. It is also possible for time to be an artist on the street, ignoring the before or after, living in between. Because what is real can only be real in the present, what is in the past is merely a memory. And what is the future, if not only speculation?&nbsp;The artist, when playing his art, carries the wisdom of living according to existence. Often underestimated and seen as stupid or unimportant, however, with the flow of events the strokes of paint and the agressive hits at the Canvas that one day was foolish suddenly becomes what is called &ldquo;a masterpiece&rdquo; and finally taken seriously. In the same way, time flows constantly and wipes out entire empires. Time could be seen as the baker who gives us our daily bread, but it can also be seen as the cop that will throw you in a cell at the slightest mistake. (As we can see in people who spent years of their life with something they regret, and they can feel nothing on their deathbed but resentment) <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.102809502103431431634384762413%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=37c8ba1b-df8f-49ce-809e-ab7d06574765" alt="File preview" width="700" /> The truth is that time is what you make of it, your ally, your enemy, bliss or a curse and the only thing known for sure is that it eventually outruns everyone and everything. The choices we make are responsible for building the persona that time will incorporate into our lives. Ten minutes of sleep may be minimal, but ten minutes of excruciating pain is unforgettable. And the reason why we should have that in mind is that, in the end, a desensitized life guided only by what is convenient and emptiness is arguably worth less than a single moment of virtue and authenticity. To make good usage of time is not only to be productive but to make every second count. Of course, in the 24 hours that a day has, we won&rsquo;t be able to make each second worth a lifetime, but unfortunately, the opposite is possible, and it is rather common: 24 hours can be easily wasted. In our last seconds, time serves as a judge and although the sentence is inevitably death&nbsp;the difference will be: The verdict of some will be a shameful one (for those who have completely wasted their life), and others will have glory as because they wisely lived while they could.

What if time was a person?

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0321242839774038561628072884185%2FLed%20Lighted%20Sun_MattheusBiermann_1.webp?alt=media&token=401251ed-e2fa-4375-84ed-ded865f7880c" alt="" /> Social media has an immense influence on the world. It is a gift, but that doesn&rsquo;t seem to be so self-evident. With the Greek myth of Icarus, it is possible to understand why the advantage of social media is not so clear and how we can use it for our benefit. The myth is one of the most famous ones telling the story of Daedalus and his son Icarus, both trapped in a maze until Daedalus, an ingenious craftsman, has the idea of creating wings out of feathers and wax. He successfully develops the wings. However, knowing the dangers of the same, the craftsman warns his son: &ldquo;Take the middle way because the moisture will weigh down your wings if you fly too low. But if you go too high, the sun will scorch them.&rdquo; Ignoring his father&rsquo;s warnings, blinded by the graciousness of flight, Icarus flew too close to the sun and fell to his death. Although the wings were well built, their poor use led to a tragedy. The same is true for social media. With the creation of a digital space where people from all around the world can interact, humanity should be connected and happier since we are social beings. However, this is not the case. The led lights on our smartphones are almost like the sun, shining bright and capturing our attention, falling in love with the notifications of someone liking our photos; we got addicted to the images and forgot the real purpose of those inventions.&nbsp; This forgetting is dangerous since a tool can become a weapon at the moment the purpose of it is changed. And with social media, the danger is the merchandising of happiness, as if while scrolling down or upon our phones, we may find sparks of joy. We do get those sparks. &nbsp;Harvard University researcher Trevor Haynes wrote an article exploring the relation between pumps of dopamine and several tools on the internet, such as posting a picture on Instagram and the notifications we receive on our smartphones. When an individual receives likes, the same is rewarded with a small dose of dopamine, reinforcing that behavior to be anxious if he doesn&rsquo;t receive the likes and &ldquo;happier&rdquo; if more people like the picture. That&rsquo;s basically how any drug works, with those pumps of dopamine reinforcing a habit, and for that matter, Social Media Addiction is a real and serious problem that requires attention. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0321242839774038561628072884185%2FLed%20Lighted%20Sun_MattheusBiermann_2.webp?alt=media&token=e8be00cb-fa96-4513-adad-59cb2758a50b" alt="" width="763" height="486" /> The solution is not to abandon technology and return to a primitive state because that wouldn&rsquo;t be the middle way. It would be &ldquo;flying low&rdquo;, which can also be a problem. However, the understanding of the social media mechanisms is crucial to developing better use of the platforms. Most importantly, one must be cautious not to fly too high and fall for being blinded by the unreal, superficial, and addictive dangers that lurk in social media.

The Connection Between Social Media and Happiness

<img alt=""src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.074824149842566581638887435966%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=201d9b90-989d-4d77-b83e-475416b66f0b">Privacy is a misconstrued concept. It is often confused with disguising information.News seekers and agenda makers always try to dig out information even when it needs to be safeguarded and kept unexposed. Sensitive data should be handled with caution and should not become a dinner table conversation.The media prevalent in the world today is doing more than just its only job, informing. It has opinions, digs out sensitive information, and invades privacy.A camera, the strongest tool at a media person’s disposal, is used as a means to justify their constant unethical and irrelevant interference in someone's life.There are countless incidents of media persons, especially in the paparazzi and tabloid culture, going out of their way to click photographs of events and persons.To get coverage, they miserably fail to respect the line drawn and identify the incident as news as per their convenience. These practices are loathed by those getting photographed.  It is one thing to generate content to inform, and a completely different thing doing it for mere sensationalism and garnering attention. This practice needs to be addressed not just by the people directly on its radar but also by those consuming that brand of content; the audience.Many celebrities have come out and spoken about how disturbing yellow journalism can be. The content is driven by what seems engaging enough to give it a read or a click. It doesn’t require much credibility, quality and accuracy.What is Yellow Journalism?Yellow journalism refers to the act of milking a story or news incident for sensational content to attract consumers.In this practice, the main focus of the newsmaker shifts from identifying and disseminating newsworthy content to sensationalized media and exaggerated headlines.Yellow journalism is mostly practised in tabloid culture and Page 3 content.Is it okay to step into boundaries in lieu of reporting using a camera?Tabloid culture becomes unhealthy and toxic when it starts to interfere with the daily functioning of the people it covers. These visuals often start butchering personal spaces, even in times of crisis. Of late, paparazzi have been known to be highly insensitive towards those in distress.Lately, the media has also been known for bombarding people with cameras to get clear shots and high definition pictures. None of them qualifies for reporting the incident. Disturbing video content has surfaced where the celebrities and kin were photographed, filmed and even interviewed by the news seekers in rather unfortunate times.It is not relevant at all. Nobody deserves this type of interference in their lives, irrespective of their popularity status.The Instances There have been incidents where paparazzi have faced backlash and were held answerable for their behavior and violation of civic decency.Case in point, when Princess Diana took Harry and William on holiday to Austria. She wanted a quiet family skiing holiday and didn’t even want any bodyguards. Diana wished to be free from the constraints associated with the British Royal System, including the press. Diana frequently took control of the press relations herself. She came out of lunch, walked up to the camera persons and said that the lenses are very daunting to her children and can they please respect her children’s space and leave them alone.We see paparazzi intrusion in the lives of famous people every day. The situation seems even worse here. With a large number of people that are low on jobs but loaded with cheap internet access, the fascination of getting a glimpse into a celebrity’s life is much higher. Be it the hysterical obsession of clicking a celebrity child’s photographs or the agonizing video coverage of a celebrity’s personal life.<img alt=""src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.074824149842566581638887435966%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=411a4e1b-5945-4aa6-b14c-323ce7cff156">Why should this bother you, even when you are not in the public eye?  Being an ordinary person, you might never face such a situation and thus, not understand its repercussions. But you do understand privacy. It is a fundamental right that is also innate in humans.The invasion of personal space causes a normal human mind to get perturbed by insensitive media trespassing. It is the psychology of the human mind that makes us empathize with the person. These acts have the power to weaken an individual’s belief in the companionship that society has to offer.The whole narrative of incident reporting rests upon the curiosity of the news seekers and serving the facts with opinions, viewpoints and selective perception. We, as the audience, do not generally get to witness the source of every incident or news. Thus the media that emerges from the place of the incident becomes our source.The media’s job is to decide what is newsworthy and what is not before generating audio-visual content about it. It's their responsibility to generate and circulate actual news and facts and not use the incident to attract consumption.Your share in easing the situationStating the problem is just the first step of solving it. The practice of digging out sensitive information about someone in the name of news coverage is also fuelled profusely by the audience’s curiosity. We are that audience.The only way such practices can be stopped is if we as the audience stop pedestalizing famous people and stop keep a keen eye on their personal lives.What we can do is merely overlook the everyday routine of the rich and famous and try to focus on their work to reach where they are, if we want to take an interest at all.Have you ever pondered the implications of such treatment on the human mind?

The Duty of Understanding Right to Privacy

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.169789187694630471638958360820%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=a1895264-6d7f-4efd-bcb2-ddde75d5f999" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Throughout this day, you will probably encounter numerous works of art. It may be a photograph on Instagram, poetry on Twitter, or just a piece of music you will listen to while cleaning the dishes. If you stop to think about it, art is all around us, and what&rsquo;s more, art is playing a central role in our lives, in such a way that if you were asked to imagine a world without art, you might not even be capable of doing so. We must be grateful for people who create art. But there isn&rsquo;t such a person because art has never been created. It was only perceived and expressed. We can barely rely on the definition of art because the concept itself is vast and abstract, and what one finds beautiful seems dull to another. Well, since art hasn&rsquo;t been created, when did we start to perceive it? How did we get here, in a world whose infrastructure depends on artistic thinking? The first form of art we know of is rock art, and it took place in the caves of prehistory. The moment where one decided to print its hand on rock using coal and other materials as &ldquo;paint&rdquo;. The first breath of art came with the thought: I exist, I&rsquo;ve been here, &nbsp;and that was an act of rebellion against death itself because to be remembered is to also be alive in other people&rsquo;s minds. Time passed, we as individuals became more sophisticated and judgmental, like a fire that may change its flames but will not fail to keep warm, and most importantly, it won&rsquo;t allow darkness to take complete control of us. We have passed through the greek sculptures, the Mona Lisa, literature, forms of dance, movies, architecture, and even science. &nbsp;All those forms of art, though different, share one thing in common: They give a different meaning to our existence. It&rsquo;s not just because the piece is either amazing, beautiful, or provoking. Still, it resides in the idea that we, as mortal beings, can bring such wonderfulness to existence. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.169789187694630471638958360820%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=493204c0-1879-4344-93f8-771201c1540b" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> However, art should not only be seen but also lived. The graffiti in the next corner looks out for each one of us as a reminder of the ancient artists. Despite being more vulnerable to life&rsquo;s dangers, they knew the importance of art, the appreciation of existence and the importance of authenticity. So a good exercise is to consciously look at art differently. It may be something simple as &ldquo;this landscape would give a good photograph&rdquo; or complex as &ldquo;well, this person looks like it came straight out of a play&rdquo;. The goal is to sharpen our minds so that we don&rsquo;t ignore the details around us and remember that we exist and are here. How has art reminded you of your existence? Share your story with us in the comments.

Art: A Friendly Reminder of Existence

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0202072586930484021635362946595%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=754af849-7759-4104-ad5a-eb79787e56b8" alt="File preview" width="500" /> In the final article in this 3 part series, we will discuss whether or not society really needs morals in order to function, as well as the principles of justice and equality when making moral considerations. <h3> Do We Really Need a Defined Set of Morals for Society to Function? </h3> No ethical or moral system is likely to be perfect in all cases. There are simply too many different possible scenarios along with their variables that can arise for any single value system to provide perfect solutions all of the time. If a set of moral principles is too vague, then the answers it offers become unclear. But if an ethical system becomes too precisely delineated, everyone becomes weighed down with expansive legalism that is difficult to follow. Human beings are social animals by nature, and there are currently 7.8 billion of us living together. Suppose certain classes of people acted only as ends unto themselves, such as the higher human beings that Nietzsche refers to. How would we collectively begin to achieve any sort of overall harmony of value judgments? How would this affect how we treat each other? For instance, would it be permissible for a &lsquo;higher man&rsquo; to treat other persons from the herd however they pleased - since their moral judgments are far beyond what lesser individuals can comprehend? Any student of 20th-century history quickly realizes how problematic and dangerous such ideas have the potential to become. Or are there universal moral principles that supersede the individual&rsquo;s will? While adhering to an established system of morals might diminish the individual&#39;s autonomous range, perhaps a different sort of freedom might arise. Would it be possible to free the self in service of a greater good instead of being slaves to our impulses or cyclically pursuing our own ends? Additionally, while the idea of great men creating their own values and pushing the envelope of morality sounds good in theory, how would it work relative to history? Since little is truly new under the sun, and everything that exists now has essentially come before in some form or another, how would someone trying to create their own values manage to do anything truly unique? Somewhere, sometime, someone on this planet has likely been confronted with a similar moral choice that mirrors almost any that we could face. And since the energy of life on this earth remains interconnected as it moves through time, it would seem that we are simply playing a temporary role in continuing a much larger cycle of cause and effect. Learning from life often involves making mistakes and trying not to repeat them. This process continues the cycle of growth that leads us away from stagnation or decay. To see clearly and learn from the mistakes of others without suffering the same fate is wisdom. Perhaps the moral insights that will become most valuable to us are those that we discover both from the real pain of our mistakes along with looking to the cumulative wisdom of others. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0202072586930484021635362946595%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=093e5089-0370-4744-b7c9-10e334f29d6f" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> <h3> The Moral Issues of Equality and Justice </h3> Finally, perhaps by considering the relationship of morality to other integral principles, we can better balance personal freedom and social responsibilities. One of the foundational principles of ethics is that of equality in regards to justice. Because while all human beings may not be physically, intellectually, socially, or financially equal, all are endowed with a basic set of rights. All are equally deserving of moral consideration. If you remove this fundamental principle from any ethical equation, it will likely result in some form of inequality and exploitation of a person (or group) by another. And a moral system based on exploitation isn&rsquo;t much of a moral system at all. <ul> <li> Any system that allows certain individuals the absolute freedom to ignore the rights of the larger, collective group or target the rights of other individuals is explicitly not ethical. </li> <li> But the systemic process of allowing groups in power to overreach and interfere with certain innate personal freedoms of individuals (thereby limiting their potential) is also harmful and unethical. </li> </ul> Is there some system that might better balance the rights of various individuals from all groups? &nbsp;No system will be perfect for all members since there are so many diverse situations and characteristics. But using universal principles of some kind to formulate a baseline of ethical standards applicable to all must occur to ensure fundamental rights. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.0202072586930484021635362946595%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=645165b3-3f48-4c44-a0ff-d44e6ebf4138" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> <h3>Article Summary:</h3> <ul> <li> If we fail to thoroughly examine the validity of our most deeply held values, to recognize where they come from and why they are important, they become hollow and meaningless over time. When values lose their integrity, it leads to blind obedience, unquestioning conformity, and moral stagnation. </li> <li> However, suppose we set ourselves adrift in a sea of moral relativism or begin to say that there are no universal moral truths that are greater than our own free will. In that case, we risk becoming lost in ourselves and falling prey to our biases and desires. We risk creating a hell on earth while trying to fashion a paradise of our own design. </li> </ul>

Part 3 of 3: The Development of Morality - Nietzsche vs Kohlberg

<img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.179983714080101051634738394852%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=ae0b2d0c-62d1-4e2e-8bd9-f85af5c67921" > Across history, peace has often been the ultimate goal, to the point where peace can be taken as a state of being, where balance finally reaches its perfect form. However, we are unsure what &ldquo;peace&rdquo; really means since it&rsquo;s hard to imagine what it implies. One thing is clear, and that is &ldquo;If you want peace, go to war&rdquo; (or in the ancient saying, Si vis pacem para bellum). Because like all things in a non-absolute cosmos, one demands its own opposite to exist. If it weren&rsquo;t for silence, sound would be meaningless. If it wasn&rsquo;t for chaos, what would order be? And in our case scenario, if it wasn&rsquo;t for war, would there be any peace? We arrive at the conclusion that firstly: Peace must be achieved; it isn&rsquo;t given because there is a cost. To conquer one&rsquo;s happiness, it is necessary to look for it and break free from every shackle that separates us from that state of being. A guide to peace in that sense would ironically be the art of war, by Sun Tzu. In his own words, &ldquo;The true reason for war is peace&rdquo;. In the Art of War, Sun Tzu describes the strategies one should follow in means of war. These strategies are focused not only on the battlefield where battles will take place but also on the generals, in the army&rsquo;s mindset, and so it goes. The reason for that, as taught by Sun Tzu himself, is that the good warrior wins the war and then goes to battle while the bad warrior goes to battle and then tries to win the war. We can find the same behaviour in the search for internal peace in modern times. We first must prepare ourselves and understand that our most fierce enemy is within ourselves. But how would that help us to find peace? &nbsp;This question throughout history has led to the conclusion that one needs discipline; to be always on the watch for the failures of the self. The Stoics are in our days one of the most mentioned philosophies concerning self-development, and they also refer to the importance of discipline - they even describe it as the discipline of Perception, action and will. <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.179983714080101051634738394852%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=972047fc-d943-4414-8a21-5dcb9d864048" > The discipline of perception relates to the objectivity of thought and the necessity of seeing things precisely as they are to align our judgment with reality. The second discipline is the discipline of action, and it relates to the way we behave in society. To put it simply, we can remind ourselves of what Marcus Aurelius wrote in Meditations: &ldquo;That which is not good for the bee-hive cannot be good for the bees.&rdquo; &nbsp;The third discipline being the discipline of the will. It is necessary for the dichotomy of control since there are events within and out of your control. You should only focus on those you can do something about. If not, you will encounter anxiety, and your uneasiness will take your peace away from yourself. Sun Tzu also mentions the importance of discipline: &ldquo;These are the six ways of courting defeat - neglect to estimate the enemy&#39;s strength; want of authority; defective training; unjustifiable anger; nonobservance of discipline; failure to use picked men.&rdquo; Having that in mind, we can understand that if we are looking for peace, the only war is with ourselves. It is a conflict that we will inevitably find ourselves in at some point in our lives. However, if we voluntarily confront ourselves, we avoid getting caught unprepared.

What do think about this idea?

Creed

Contact Us

Connect With Us