<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.161193954580007181633615317912%2Fimage22.webp?alt=media&token=894fae82-c250-47f9-8085-84bfb40887d2" alt="File preview" width="700" /> The other day I was on Instagram during a break, looking through my followers&rsquo; stories. I realized I was flipping past them so quickly, without even reading or watching what was in them. Because I knew &ndash; I thought. I knew it was the same bunch of posts everywhere, on everyone&rsquo;s stories and tweets and the news. I stopped to watch a short video of people clinging to an aircraft with all their might as it took off from Kabul with gunshots and bombings in the background. Another one showed a mother with her baby, running for shelter from long rifles while being kicked out of her own house. Yet another one had terrified animals with ash covering most of their fur, tired after escaping a wildfire. I knew such disturbing&nbsp;news was on a loop, and that&rsquo;s why I skipped them mindlessly &ndash; I thought so. But did I really know why these scenarios deserved attention and what it is to live through them? Sharing hashtags on social media platforms with captions like &ldquo;Where is humanity?&rdquo; &ldquo;Pray for *place*&rdquo;, &rdquo;Justice for *name*&rdquo; and sighing or frowning over media posts do show we are sorry about what is happening around us. Sympathy has been checked. But what&rsquo;s to be held accountable for the part where we find such news &ldquo;disturbing&rdquo;? The fact that I have the freedom to sit back and judge the issue, regardless of being majorly unaware of it and distant from it, is a privilege. That I can stay relaxed within my home while choosing what to post on my feed, with good food and family around me, is a privilege. &ldquo;I would like to introduce the concept of &lsquo;peace privilege&rsquo; to refer to people who have lived in peaceful contexts all their lives and cannot truly grasp and empathize with what it means to live in a conflict.&rdquo; - Cristal Palacios&rsquo; tweeted. It was when the conflict in Venezuala got overwhelming and received a wide array of judgment from people who were hasting to make one. Her tweet has been recognized and published in several articles written on peace; because it has spat plain facts. It is our privilege that is helping us tune into music to cancel the noise around us. How often do we make a conscious check on our privileges? Are we aware that our privilege could one day turn into a plight? Sympathizing through a sigh or wondering why the world is so cruel isn&rsquo;t all we can do. &lsquo;The bad is there to balance out the good,&rsquo; &lsquo;It&rsquo;s just meant to be&rsquo; &ndash; you may hear some fortunate person comment. But do they realize that one day they could be the ones getting oppressed? Even after beholding all the bombings upon innocent children, disasters swallowing land and human alike, political instabilities showing their variants of cruelty, and world leaders choosing corruption over conservation, can we justify that our sighs and easy-to-pass remarks equal empathy? Is that all we can do? Or are we deliberately not trying further? Sympathy is easy for many of us. It is easy because it comes from a position of power. You just have to feel &ldquo;bad&rdquo; for those living in conditions inferior to you. But empathy &ndash; that is getting down on your knees and looking someone who has been through all the awful moments, in the eye and realizing that you could be them and that all that separates you is mere luck. When luck leaves your side, what will stop you from being one of them in the future? Things get uglier when we gather the audacity to pass comments about these sensitive issues without even being aware of the nature of conflict behind them. Some of us go in search of clarity. But media, to which many of us reach out for information, displays only a foiled layer of the mayhem. Why? Because it is somebody else&rsquo;s voice that we hear. And it is a much simplified one. We tend to simplify the issues, which brings us to invalidating the severely traumatic experience people are suffering, neglecting reality, and choosing to stay ignorant because we think these bring negativity. Imagine your pain being dismissed because others think what&rsquo;s hurting you is hurting them more when it has not even brushed past them. Again, it is a privilege to refer to such news as &lsquo;negativity.&rsquo; Being regularly exposed to such information can take a toll on your mental peace, agreed. But if it hurts you just to watch it on a screen, sitting miles away from the people struggling to live every day in their lives, imagine how reality would be taking a toll on them!. We are turning away from such news because they somehow make us vulnerable &ndash; to question our comforts in life. We are escaping guilt &ndash; one that makes us scorn for being privileged while there are spots on our very globe crying for help. It seems like our sighs are a mixture of pity and guilt. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.161193954580007181633615317912%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=927a08c8-6f69-4cb3-ac7c-acb6b2de23c6" alt="File preview" width="700" /> We, who consider it daunting even to review distressing interactions on social media, indeed do not have the right to act as a voice for the less fortunate and the oppressed. The devastation and resilience encountered can be brought to life and justified if they are voiced by those who lived through it. Everything about media seems to be transient and prone to misunderstanding. Someone like you or me, who is privileged enough to write or read this article, being able to use technology at its best without any intervention in our day-to-day lives, cannot be their voice. Why? Because we aren&rsquo;t the ones living their lives. The oppressed need a voice. And that needs to be their own. We should grow into people who value empathy and not ones who make up our minds by drawing plain conclusions about an issue simply from effortless understanding. Remember, the reality is always bigger! If we are privileged enough to think about peace, we can indeed create more of it.

What does peace mean for the privileged?

<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%2F0.067500485203443981630900523657%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%2F0.10951663473921981628072883027%2FMEDIA%20AND%20LOVE_AanviJain_1.webp?alt=media&token=5dc42055-2f14-400a-b2aa-cde4c8b21b38" alt="" width="764" height="573" /> Love is an abstract concept, a complicated emotion. The greatest men of all time couldn't answer what love is. Many tried to give us a definition, but many believe it's beyond our understanding.&nbsp; So how much does the media know? Media made all of us believe that a perfect person is waiting for us. Someone whom the day we meet, our lives will be complete&mdash;a person who answers all our problems All the hope they have given us without any solid proof. Can our life also be a fairy tale like Cinderella with our soulmates going around the globe looking for us? The honest answer to this is a bummer for all; not all love stories are like Cinderella. While growing up, we saw perfect couples with romantic bickering. Many filmmakers and authors tried to capture the true essence of love by providing us with pieces such as The Notebook or Fault in our stars. Such creations did give us a desire for a dreamy love story and the perfect relationship but what it did not show us is that no relationship is perfect. Love is not as simple; it takes more than the presence of two individuals attracted to each other. It includes trust, selflessness, compromises from both ends.&nbsp; The best graphics we see on searching about love are people smiling with red hearts all around them. But as it is rightly said, all glitters are not gold. People can be in love and yet fight; they are not always happy with each other. There are disputes and conflicts.&nbsp; Another aspect of love we see in the media are couples celebrating their love by giving thoughtful gifts, going out for romantic dinners, and always spending time with each other. But in reality, that is not the case. Two individuals might not make romantic gestures regularly, but that doesn't change the fact that they love each other. They can still be as happy as other couples. The media cannot filter the toxic relationships, they have failed to highlight this issue, and those suffering are afraid to speak up. Love can make a person blind to the damage they are causing to their partner. It is a must to make everyone aware of the red flags to prevent them from the worst. Similarly, even abusive relationships are a subject of great importance. Not everyone is happy; some are hurting mentally or physically. Media is an integral part of our lives; it greatly influences our beliefs. But what we see there is not always true. Love is not all rainbows and glitters; it's not all smiles. The media only shows what they think the people like to see, and not what's true. Hence, we shouldn't be quickly captivated by everything they show us. What has been your experience with love?

Media and Love

<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 src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.220565898454474271639211397850%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=2d82e687-a48a-42bf-8bb8-ef9c64fb0c91" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> On any journey, be it an innovative startup or a relationship, the most important thing and often the most difficult is getting people to stick around. For the sake of easiness, you and I will refer to all such undertakings as a venture. But do not confuse these ventures as being the same. Though they might have similar underlines, building a relationship is vastly different from building a startup. So how did we get here? <h3>Vision onboarding</h3> Getting people onboard is not easy. How eager others are to join you on your journey depends on your destination and the path you propose. This is your vision. Where do you see yourself and your venture ending up, say in a few months to a couple of years? You have to sell others how you envision bringing your dream to fruition. If people find their trajectory overlapping or aligning with this journey, they will choose to take a leap of faith and jump aboard. It sounds simple but bear with me. You like everyone else, have a path laid out ahead of you. Even if you don&#39;t know exactly where to go, you might have an idea of where not to. This is equally important, if not more. And only when there is sufficient alignment between two intended paths do people enrol in the proverbial carpool. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.220565898454474271639211397850%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=ba0390d8-a4d7-46e0-911b-d50b9e381d7c" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> As difficult as it is to get people onboard, it is only the first step. What follows is getting to know your fellow travellers and assessing in real-time if they joined for the reasons they claimed and if they are in it for the long haul. <h3> Why is it essential that we find people that are in it for the long haul? </h3> Think of it this way. Today&#39;s tinder generation is habitual of swiping left and right. When matched, the two people embark upon a usual and familiar journey, which entails getting to know each other and finding common ground, which becomes the basis of a new relationship and hopefully avoids any creeps. The getting to know the other part of it is almost scripted. You tend to repeat the same surface level small talk worthy nonsense about you over and over until it gets exhausting to do it. You end up wishing that at least one of these people clicked so that you won&#39;t have to go through this again. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.220565898454474271639211397850%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=e9b3eb4e-57b3-4bf9-99f5-bb061a2c9003" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Similar is a case with organizations and employees. Every new hire comes with huge costs. Cost of productive hours lost, cost of hours spent looking for new people, cost of the actual hiring process, cost of retraining and initiation of the new person into the system, so on and so forth. And these costs are not just monetary but also temporal. And one thing companies and, most importantly, new startups hate is wasting time. Time is their only ally and enemy. So yes, rehiring people over and over sucks. But what can we do to address this? The solution, I believe, is two-fold: From the organization&#39;s side and the individual&#39;s. Let&#39;s look at what companies can do. <ol> <li> Offer better salaries and incentives:&nbsp;Salaries and compensation are about value. If you believe that an individual is adding value to your company, reciprocate it monetarily. It will only push the person to deliver more. But what if you are in a bootstrapped startup? Offer your people something other than money. Trade money today for higher benefits in the future. </li> <li> Give people what they want:&nbsp;There are things people want from their jobs apart from money. It could be more days off, compensation for travel or opportunities for working remotely. Maybe they want to switch job roles and work in a new department altogether. Be as accommodating as you can be, and this way, you will get people to stay with you as they will see their paths aligning with your company&#39;s. </li> <li> Build a positive and safe working environment:&nbsp;This is a no-brainer. People identify with their work, and when that identity is dark and traumatising, they want to distance themselves from it. Do not let that happen. Word travels fast, and more so today in part due to social media. </li> </ol> <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.220565898454474271639211397850%2Fimage4.webp?alt=media&token=f0ee0908-a059-49f4-a4f7-f1f93cdc054f" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> What can employees do? <ol class="c5 lst-kix_kbi4cplktx8d-0 start" start="1"> <li> Realise relationships aren&#39;t built in a day:&nbsp;Every relationship, either personal or professional, requires time and attention to develop. Almost every organisation has a training and orientation period to loop you into their system. And if you jump ship every couple of years, you end up wasting a lot of your time in this way. Remember the tinder analogy? </li> <li> Look for what your company can offer you in addition to money:&nbsp;We have heard enough stories about employees getting paid millions of dollars but not being able to enjoy any of it. Don&#39;t be that person. Find out ways of how your company can make your work life more fulfilling. Ask for medical insurance, allowances, flexible working hours, more vacation days or even the opportunities to work at night if that is your thing and if it can be managed. </li> </ol> We have more choices now than ever before, choices for our partners, and choices for our employers. But developing a good relationship in any of these scenarios requires a lot of time and commitment. Commit to a path and see where it goes for a few years. It is challenging, but ultimately as we see in our relationships, it is the thing that makes life worth living.

How To Get People To Stay?

<img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.321155603259925871636393495345%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=d7a2c47e-a605-43fb-9fae-91a9b09eb5e7" > We must not chain the people in our lives. If we love them for who they are, we must accept that we are only a tiny part of it. There are multiple facets, roles, interests and responsibilities to a person. For them to remain wholesome, they must not be limited to one person or one roIe. If you clip a few feathers of a bird you love to make it fly only in one direction, you will render the bird unable to fly at all. You will lose the essence of the person that you wanted to keep for yourself. Birds look a lot better when they fly, and metaphorically so do humans. When you love someone, you want to be the centre of their universe. You want them to spend all their time with you, and you want them to give all their attention to you. You want them to hang out, eat, sleep only with you, and talk to only you. You feel jealous and betrayed when they spend this time with someone else or put up boundaries to keep that time for themselves. It is not limited to romantic relationships, but it is about any person you come close to, a cousin, friend, or a parent even. You feel like you want to put them in a cage and not let go so that it does not fly away. The intention is noble. You promise to reciprocate all of what they do and give. You give them your time and attention. Even then, you are still caging them. The difference is that the cage is a shiny golden one. We all do this. Sometimes knowingly and unknowingly at others. Take, for instance, how situations change after two people get married. Their personal and social lives shrink, they don&#39;t go out as much, their friends and hobbies take a back seat. They don&#39;t spend as much time alone as they used to. But people fail to realise that everything they did before marriage added to their personalities and made them appealing to their partners in the first place. Take those away, and you hear people saying, &quot;You have changed.&quot; It shouldn&#39;t come as a surprise. If you think that after being with you people have changed, notice the difference in the things they used to do before. If there is a stark contrast, you have your reason. Maybe they used to have a lot of solitude to process a lot more and be more articulate. But now they are so busy with you that they hardly ever get the time. And hence, they don&#39;t register as much or don&#39;t articulate as well. &quot;If you make someone&#39;s life all about you, you will lose them. If you make your life about all someone else, you will lose yourself.&quot; <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.321155603259925871636393495345%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=5147eedf-282c-4f2b-a807-26ef4be007b7" > Take the case of a parent that devotes their life to their kids. They give up everything they want to raise the child. They stop reading because they are always running after the child and stop going out since the child does not do well socially. They stop going on road trips they loved because the child gets claustrophobic in cars. In this process, they trade their identity as an individual for being a parent. But they deprive the child of the thing they deserve most, their parent. It is not to say that they don&#39;t get pleasure from raising their kid as best they can, but is it all there is to their life? Let&#39;s switch boats and think about the child. It is commonplace for the parent to get burned out. But they don&#39;t have a place to vent. They can&#39;t take a breather, so irritability, lack of patience, and uncontrolled temper start to fester. The parent might also begin to resent the child. Picking up on that irritability and anger, they become the child&rsquo;s default. By now, the child is also used to getting their way and being the centre of attention. Narcissistic tendencies start to develop. They create a sense of entitlement in their lives. Connect the dots. You have a child with narcissistic tendencies, irritability and anger as their default. Not a pretty picture. The parent destroyed the very thing they set out to build and nurture. You now understand the power of caging and clipping feathers. It can cause a lot of harm, even when it comes from a place of appreciation and love. But things are not always so sombre. Suppose the people you love are in the wrong circles, which is ultimately detrimental to them. In that case, you can use selective caging to protect your bird from metaphorical pollution. It is what you do with your children to prevent them from hanging out with the wrong peer group. If loving does not mean you should cage people, it also does not mean they should have free reign to do as they please. Balance is key. Have you ever caged the people you love, or have you ever been caged? Share your story in the comments.

Why Cage the People We Love?

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.088762256553584831628072882401%2FThe%20Illusion%20of%20Happiness_AyushDubey_1.webp?alt=media&token=6b125df9-b06f-435c-8713-875570e3839e" alt="" width="764" height="509" />Human beings seek happiness, and the majority of the activity we perform is to achieve a certain amount of joy, be it in any form. For some people, the pursuit of happiness summarizes their existence. However, there are times when we think about what exactly we are trying to achieve when we talk about happiness.Everyone has different opinions about happiness. These differences make it challenging to explain happiness in a general, all-inclusive manner. There are times when the pursuit of happiness itself seems mundane, and this realization makes us feel delusional. Delusional because we realize that we have been dreaming of something so abstract and naive.Happiness is never an end in itself because the things that make us happy tell a lot about our nature itself. Therefore, we can use happiness to go within and think about the true nature of human existence. Happiness has its origin in struggle, and accepting this truth will save us from a lot of disappointment. The funny thing is that we desire happiness because we want to escape our sufferings. However, the condition of human beings is that first, we toil and then realize that we have to struggle some more, and from time to time, we are lucky enough to experience a momentary bliss as we go through life.When Camus said the struggle itself towards the height is enough to fill a man&rsquo;s heart, living this life alone is enough to make us feel fulfilled. However, the more we live and go through life, the more we realize that suffering is universal. Thus, our sole purpose must be to create subjective meaning and strive through struggle instead of longing for happiness.Subjective meaning is essential for happiness because having a personal purpose is a constructive illusion. It allows us to attach importance to our endless sufferings. We come to realize that our fate is tragic, and there&rsquo;s no one coming to rescue us. Yet we enjoy our severe hardship, for the fruits of our agony are in the form of happiness. This realization makes us feel fulfilled even for a brief period, and if true happiness does exist, it is in this realization. Because of this reason, all of us occupy ourselves. We do it to fill the eternal void in our life. The more we indulge in meaningful activities, the more we realize that every instance of our life can form meaning in itself if we let it.&nbsp;Thus, going through these petty days makes us realise that happiness was never and will never be a destination in the end. It is instead a path, a journey, and being alive with a crippling sense of absurdity is a task and a reward in itself. The reason being that life justifies itself, and one can only understand this as one lives through the questions and the daily struggle. At the same time, discovering something sustainable will kindle hope for us and others around them, even for a brief time. Happiness follows when we realize that joy and absurdity are inseparable.We indeed use our future to escape our present. We live in those moments where we find peace; it can be in the form of living the memories or dreaming about the future. So one needs a standpoint about where one&rsquo;s existence is heading, and that abstract, hopeful idea can inspire us. So if we continue to strive for meaning that we find sustainable despite the realization that we shall cease to exist in the end, we are no less than gods, for we are truly conscious of our fate and our existence.&nbsp;Thus, happiness is an illusion. We constantly misinterpret the root essence of happiness, and it isn&rsquo;t something to be locked inside a vault or something which will stay with us forever. We cannot pursue happiness, and the more we seek it, the more it feels like sand in our palms. On the other hand, we must commit to a cause that we find meaningful and sustain ourselves and others around us. Use the absurdity of your existence to honor your sufferings and embrace the existential dread which arises in the form of existential agony. We are the modern Sisyphus.&nbsp;

The Illusion of Happiness

<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 alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.54679646161362231636567170791%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=4893d13f-3ce7-481e-8d20-fef2736b1c06" > You always hear that you should think big if you want to succeed. But since no one told you how or why that works, you never believed it. In this piece, we explore the psychology behind your mindset and how you end up manifesting what you think. Understanding how our minds and bodies work together and more so against each other will allow you to set up systems to automate the right thoughts and, ultimately, the right action to get your most desired result. Don&#39;t get this wrong. This article is not a quick fix of the mindset, and it won&#39;t make you an overnight success, whatever that is for you. Instead, we will break down the working of mindset and explore how we can leverage it for our benefit. Look out for these keywords through the article: Habits. Mindset. Change. Time. Conscious. Subconscious. Our minds and bodies are slow. They love patterns, habits and loops. When given nothing to do, we default to laziness and lethargy. It makes sense; evolutionarily, our bodies are designed to conserve energy and what better way to achieve that than by doing nothing? We default to the same actions and routines. We largely think the same thoughts day after day. We take the same route to the office, meet the same people, eat the same type of food, consume the same content. <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.54679646161362231636567170791%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=d812ace6-7206-401c-b1c0-d5239ded4b0d" > This routine has significant positive and negative implications. When curated mindfully, you will live a physically and mentally healthier life and are more likely to thrive financially and socially. But it has the potential to make you a slave of your degrading body and mindset. It leads to deterioration of physical and mental health. You then fight to survive and not to thrive. It is not a merry sight to see. Having understood the implications of habits and routines, let&#39;s explore why mindset is essential. Your patterns of thought and worldview collectively form your mindset. Pay attention to the word &#39;Pattern&#39;. It means that out of the approximately 70,000 thoughts in a day, most carry themselves over from the previous day and the day before. Your thoughts run around in circles. Consider this; if what you think is what drives your actions, and your actions determine how your life turns out, your mindset is in the driver&#39;s seat of your life&#39;s car. You now know how habits and mindset control your life. But how to shift your mindset when it does not serve you? Researchers from the College of New South Berlin have found Vitamin B12 to help with thought regulation. They advise taking one tablet a day to make your thoughts more malleable. Sound too good to be true? Because it is. There is no such college, and no such research has been done. But jokes aside. If you have ever been to the gym, you know how painful and time-taking any meaningful change is. Our bodies are slow to adapt, but the good news is that they can adapt to pretty much anything given enough time and repetition. The same is the case with your mindset. You have to retrain your entire thinking process mindfully and consciously to make it work for you. That means being aware of the negative thought patterns, loops and habits. Awareness is then followed by an active effort to turn these loops upside down from detrimental to helpful. It will not be a walk in the park initially, but you will leverage habit-forming to your advantage. These conscious efforts, when sustained over time, will begin to seep and register into your subconscious. <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.54679646161362231636567170791%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=60f70bc9-026c-4291-838a-d0f1491068a1" > Now, why is that even important? Try sitting down for 15 secs without thinking, and you will quickly notice that thoughts come up without you making any effort to think. It is the subconscious. The involuntary thoughts and actions performed by your body. We like to believe that we control our bodies, but only a tiny part of it is in our control. The rest of it is either involuntary or unconscious behaviours and habits. To train the subconscious to work in your favour and not against you, you first need to condition it by conscious repetition. Habits. Mindset. Change. Time. Conscious. Subconscious. Now let&#39;s connect these dots to visualize an image. Habits and mindset are repeated actions and thoughts, respectively. Changing them is not easy. They require time and sustained conscious effort so that new habits and thought patterns emerge, driven subconsciously to move you towards your goals. What you think is what you do, and your actions determine where you end up. To change the trajectory of your life, you need to change how you think.

Why What You Think Decides Where You Go

<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%2F0.69511484942177451636272260507%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.

What do think about this idea?

Creed

Contact Us

Connect With Us