<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.192300571967987551639975398191%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=345bf1ba-12ba-44c5-9f09-351b423c8341" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Ask yourself: When was the last time you stopped to think about the origins of your morning coffee, or how does the Bluetooth work on your smartphone, or really, when was the last time you stopped to try and understand more about your reality? How often do you really think? The complex problem of thinking is: There are many ways of thinking and too many things to think about. When you try to understand the best route to get to someone&rsquo;s house, are you thinking? You could say so. However, would you say the same thing when you stop to understand the meaning of your life? Yes, you could also say so. However, there&rsquo;s a fundamental element to this problem. At Queen&#39;s University in Kingston, Canada, psychologists did research that showed the average person has about 6,200 thoughts per day. And throughout your day, you make lots of decisions; each of those requires previous thoughts that you may not even be conscious of. So let&rsquo;s draw a line: When Socrates says, &ldquo;The unexamined life is not worth living&rdquo;, he&rsquo;s referring to the conscious process of thinking. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.192300571967987551639975398191%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=4fb27fca-e95c-45d5-84d1-f292c64037a7" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Along with that, one of the most rebellious phrases of philosophy is: &ldquo;I think, therefore I am.&rdquo; To wonder is to make something out of existence. When you look around and consciously perceive the world, you&rsquo;re a different part of what you would be if you weren&rsquo;t thinking. The sky won&rsquo;t be as beautiful if you don&rsquo;t look at it, even though it is the same sky. The wind will pass almost unnoticed if you don&rsquo;t appreciate it. &ldquo;You will die without living if you don&rsquo;t think about it.&rdquo; So ask yourself: What is life? Get a good answer to this question, and then: throw it away. The point is not to find a pretty little answer but to dive into deep thoughts. And then, ask yourself again and again because everything is constantly changing, and you&rsquo;re part of the changing process. So, embrace the various definitions you can think about. You&rsquo;ll find uncertainty in your search for answers to complex questions such as: &ldquo;What is life?&rdquo; The way to deal with uncertainty is to have faith because nobody knows the truth. Maybe truth, as we conceive it, is not even something we conquer by &ldquo;knowing&rdquo;. And to understand what life is, you&rsquo;ll need more than logical assumptions. If we take as an example the axiom from Rick Sanchez - from the animated show Rick and Morty - &nbsp;&ldquo;What people call Love is just a chemical reaction that compels animals to breed&rdquo;. Some may agree that indeed this is love. However, we could also agree that something is missing in this assumption. It is too reductionist, lacking the metaphysical aspect of love and its applications in the way we think and perceive the world. So, in the end, one needs the courage to think because along with answers, there&lsquo;ll be suffering and other questions to answer. However, it is necessary to consider to make life worth living: So go on to ask yourself: What is life? -writing one answer in the comment section might help you think things through-

What is Life? - A Guide to Making Life Worth Living

<img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.95060762475388861635087782163%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=06996007-6580-4d52-945c-7ef69de2f915" >Unselfishness is not an inherent human quality.Selfishness is a human fact. Unselfishness is a non-fact. Human beings are born selfish. It is simply that our selfishness tones down with time. When a child comes out of his mother&rsquo;s womb, he cries unstoppably - out of selfishness. The child was utterly comfortable inside his mother&rsquo;s womb, and suddenly he is out, which causes him discomfort, and hence, the act of weeping is selfishness. It is an innocent yet desperate cry to revive his comfort back.As you grow up, you observe selfishness is a troublesome quality to have. You get yelled at by your parents and teachers, you struggle with building trust with people, and you realize that if you continue to be selfish, you will be alienated from the world. Gradually, you understand the value of compromise. The fact that the ideal way to act in the world is by being unselfish, to give without expecting anything in return. To give for the sake of giving.But, the very act of cultivating unselfishness within yourself is not pure unselfishness. It is but an indirect form of selfishness. It implies, you cleverly adopt an appearance that seems empathetic and unselfish, but that appearance is merely a deception you use, a means to a selfish end. Now, this behavior starts manifesting itself in different areas of life - in love, friendships, relationships, and beyond.We like the idea of unselfishness and are yet driven by our selfish interests, which makes us a vessel of selfishness disguised as trustable and selfless. And, that&rsquo;s the tragedy.<img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.95060762475388861635087782163%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=113cc53f-a3ff-4289-9bb6-abb63a0de5f7" >&ldquo;The problem with unselfishness is that you cannot be unselfish and yet attached.&rdquo;The core necessity of unselfishness is absolute detachment from the worldly world. Unselfishness is a side-effect. To cultivate it as if it exists externally means you are trying to create a side-effect without having the source that spurts the side-effect.Let&rsquo;s take love as an example. Only unselfish love can be everlasting, and it&rsquo;s a fact, not a perception. The relationship issues that have become so ridiculously common are a result of selfish love. Two people uniting and using each other as a means to their selfish ends. They&rsquo;ve concealed their selfishness so profoundly in an unselfish appearance that even they do not realize that it is their selfish interests that govern their actions. They&rsquo;re so tremendously selfish because they&rsquo;re desperately attached to the transitory and ephemeral pleasures of the world. And hence, they cannot cultivate unselfishness any more than its tentative appearance.Only a man who is detached is unselfish. I don&rsquo;t have to explain any further. You can see it for yourself.Visualize a state of mind where you are totally detached from the world - a world that caters to your pleasures and keeps you trapped in its chase perpetually. In that very visualization, you&rsquo;ll find unselfishness, the true form of it, and in that, you&rsquo;ll discover absolute freedom. Unselfishness for the sake of unselfishness. And it is only through detachment that you can ever attach to the world and its people truly. Because until then, you&rsquo;re nothing but a slave to your own pool of endless needs. So, the problem with the kind of unselfishness you&rsquo;re trying to cultivate and what the motivational speakers, gurus, or social workers preach - is selfishness itself.

The Problem With Unselfishness

<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%2F0.088762256553584831628072882401%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%2F0.161193954580007181633615317912%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%2F0.067500485203443981630900523657%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%2F0.048438063517993961630902440187%2FProcrastination_1.webp?alt=media&token=8f9134e8-755b-402a-b71f-653b2809f51f" alt="File preview" width="400" height="601" />There are times when staring at a blank wall is interesting. And mostly, these are times when your desk nearby with its papers, sticky notes, and laptop screams for your attention. As much as you want to sit staring at the wall, which is not even the part with the pictures on it, but just white paint, your desk won&rsquo;t let you grant its opponent all the attention you wish to. You keep denying your desk&rsquo;s call, but you also don&rsquo;t feel so good about your response. It drives you into a battle between the rebel in you not wanting to sit at the desk for work vs the work itself. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s okay. Everybody procrastinates&rdquo;, you would think as you turn your eyes back at the wall.&nbsp;The term procrastination has been so often used for any scenario where critical work is not given enough importance that it has become a metonym for laziness. We closely associate it with one&rsquo;s inability to manage time, lack of willpower, and the like. But is it the paucity of your time management skills that keeps you hanging indefinitely between responsibility and your action? Procrastination indeed looks like a regulation issue. But what if it isn&rsquo;t about the regulation of time but of your emotions instead?Tim Pychyl, an associate professor of psychology at Carleton University, believes that &ldquo;Procrastination is not a time-management problem, it&rsquo;s an emotion-management problem.&rdquo; In his book &lsquo;Solving the Procrastination Puzzle,&rsquo; he defines procrastination as &ldquo;a voluntary delay of an intended act despite the knowledge that this delay may harm us.&rdquo; As much clarity and truth it holds, this very definition is also one of something that is against human nature. We are inclined to seek satisfaction and happiness and perform deeds that bring us closer to these. Why would you sense danger and still choose to delay your tasks if ticking them off your list is what would make you happy? There could be times where even after allotting a specific slot of your day for a task, you do not find yourself doing it very efficiently.Though time management plays a crucial role in meeting deadlines, it is not the only reason someone slacks off. When properly looked into, procrastination doesn&rsquo;t look like a problem with your time management. Instead, it seems like an emotion-focused coping strategy, wherein your inner critic comes into play. Self-judgment naturally follows, but you should channel it tastefully such that you move forward, offering self-compassion rather than questioning your abilities and sinking in guilt.As Pychyl says, &ldquo;to the extent that I can deal with my emotions, I can stay on task,&rdquo; handling your emotions is essential for working, regardless of how petty it sounds.Gathering ideas to overcome procrastination often results in rumination and self-loathing, taking us further away from the solution. But what is &lsquo;the&rsquo; solution? It is unreasonable to expect to find a single solution to such a complex issue as procrastination. The cause and resolution are not the same for everyone. What could be possible reasons behind this issue that becomes a &lsquo;suffering&rsquo; in the long run?<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.048438063517993961630902440187%2FProcrastination_2.webp?alt=media&token=569ee435-64b8-4434-969a-19d1fe29692b" alt="File preview" width="739" height="492" />Another psychologist named Piers Steel from the University of Calgary wrote a paper called &lsquo;The Nature of Procrastination: A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review of Quintessential Self-Regulatory Failure&rsquo;, wherein he reported four major possible causes of procrastination:i) Low Self Confidence: Your willingness to do a task is likely to drop if you are not confident enough about the process and outcome. Being afraid of your inability to meet your expectations and those from others is a cue for your procrastination to rise. Reduce negative self-talk, as this will add layers to your anxiety. Forgive yourself if you make mistakes, but more importantly, appreciate yourself for every move you make.ii) Pleasure derived from the task: It's less probable that you&rsquo;ll delay a task if it's exciting or rewarding enough. The boredom associated with the task plays a higher role than its difficulty in foreseeing the level of procrastination. When you don&rsquo;t feel like working on something, try to find what could be holding you back. Face your negative thoughts related to the task at hand, don&rsquo;t try to run away.iii) Distractibility: Sometimes, it could be that you want to finish a task, but your environment hinders your focus and forces you to do otherwise. Putting away things that are likely to distract you and finding a new domain or modifying your present one to suit yourself will help you stay focused on completing the task.iv) Relaxed deadlines: It's pretty natural to want to take more leisure time before starting a task when you know there is enough time to do it. Doing so might be helpful to relax if carefully worked on, but procrastination usually takes over, dominates, and makes you haste in the last moment. To manage a distant deadline, break it down into smaller deadlines and tackle them every day. Train yourself to finish the work first, and enjoy the remaining time as leisurely as you want.Other factors like denial of consequences and rebelliousness do support these causes.Bringing in some math to his theory, Steel has put the above coworking factors in the form of an equation. The product of your self-confidence and the pleasure from the task, divided by the product of your distractibility and time till deadline, gives your chances of not procrastinating on your task. In simpler terms, the first two factors need to be increased, while the latter two need to be decreased to improve your productivity.People procrastinate differently. The key is to identify your vulnerability and work on it. Hence, this equation can only be used as a guide and not as the final solution to solve the issue. Keep tuning these factors and the others that support them until you are satisfied with the level of mental and situational comfort.Do not see procrastination as a personality problem. It is only an inner critic trying to talk to you. So listen, and communicate through actions!

Procrastination - What is it trying to tell you?

<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%2F0.249107734565167331633718379654%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=dfe820cc-c3d8-4a26-adb2-f6996634eca6" alt="File preview" width="700" /> A heartbreaking photo had taken over the internet a few years back, drawing attention to the sad life of refugees. It was of a kid as little as 3, lying on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, in a red t-shirt and blue jeans, water splashing against his little legs. He wasn&rsquo;t playing by the beaches like other kids of his age usually do. He was lying &ndash; dead. Aylan Kurdi&rsquo;s story is one of misery that has touched people across the globe. For once, the world seemed to have opened its eyes to see the plight of refugees, the betrayal and anguish they face. Refugees are people who have had to make the hard decision of leaving their homeland while still having a sensitive connection to it, for reasons like &ndash; persecution based on religion/gender, war, poverty, natural disasters, etc. The struggle they face in their native isn&rsquo;t only the one they live through. It continues during their flight from fear and even after reaching their destination. Very often, cases arise wherein refugees suffer from an inferior legal status, acute living conditions, harassment, and employment issues in their place of arrival. It takes a lot of courage to undertake a risk as significant as fleeing one&rsquo;s country to rebuild themselves. It&rsquo;s a grave and dangerous choice to leave everything in search of peace. Refugees expect empathy, support, and hope from the world as a validation for their struggles. They wish to experience the protection of human rights and accommodation of mutual respect since they come from places where people are attacked for being themselves. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.249107734565167331633718379654%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=434803bd-a3db-4b2b-8ff9-00d16e10d9a0" alt="File preview" width="700" /> When a crisis such as a refugee displacement issue arises, it is only fair that the responsibility is shared globally. It becomes a moral responsibility on other countries to safeguard and provide shelter and necessities to those who have faced so much violence and threats to life that they crossed oceans and skies just to find the will to live in solace &ndash; something that many of us are gifted with. It becomes our duty to accept, empower and protect them. The figures depicting the refugees are indeed scary &ndash; there are reports of about 30-35 Million refugees globally. But it is not the refugees that are to be feared. Instead, it is the cause that has made them take up the designation and the response of the superiorly fated people towards them that must be. The way the media portrays refugees has a considerable role to play in how people understand them. Displaying them negatively as a threat or burden could hamper the way communities welcome them and further their inclusion and interaction. When the receiving communities become skeptical about accepting refugees, it becomes hard for the latter group to find opportunities. Accepting refugees is not only a moral judgment but also a smart one. They have moved forward in life, past barriers and uncertainties of the worst kind, simply to claim their right to live. &nbsp;What is to be feared in them in aspects of determination or hard work? People ready to fight for life will also be prepared to do anything to keep the newfound freedom. It&rsquo;s important to grant them the right to work and health, living, and education so that they can bring forward their best productive selves. It is also essential to make them feel comfortable and included in society to integrate them better into the labor force. Refugees often have to pitch in double the efforts to prove their skills and build a livelihood in their host countries. We don&rsquo;t realize that they could serve as potential enhancers of our society&rsquo;s welfare when granted the right opportunity. While considering acceptance of refugees and migrants, something that&rsquo;s mainly feared is the loss of job opportunities for the local citizens. This fear attributed towards them by making them look like a potential economic and social threat is not entirely justified as: &middot;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Refugees bring a distinct set of skills that can play a crucial role in stimulating business networks and knowledge sharing. They help contribute to healthy competition in the job sector by working in different domains and helping out their co-workers. &middot;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Refugees often initiate their businesses, which helps others seeking a job to find an opportunity. In the U.S, such small firms contribute to about 1.5 million jobs annually. &middot;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Presence of refugees in the job sector makes International Trade and investments healthier and enhanced due to their commendable knowledge of the business environment, which will in turn allow local communities to thrive. &middot;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Refugees have the knack for fostering their native community in the global market. &middot;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Refugees take up challenges to adapt to the new place; work on improving the new language for a better communication experience at work and in public. Work hard to have their skills recognized, and for self-contentment by taking up responsibilities at work. &middot;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Refugees help the receiving community by making the setting more social, flexible, and diverse. It helps in the acceptance and well treatment of future refugees and migrants. &middot;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;There have been refugees who grew into prominent figures that changed the world for the better. E.g., Albert Einstein. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.249107734565167331633718379654%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=e2b99bf1-f91a-4784-afa7-46941fe71cb7" alt="File preview" width="700" /> Laws favoring the refugees have been passed universally, but it is to question if they are always followed. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 14) states that everyone has the right to seek protection in a foreign asylum to escape persecution. The 1951 UN Refugee Convention protects refugees from being sent back to the country where they have been persecuted. There&rsquo;s also the 1990 Migrant Workers Convention which protects migrants and their families. Despite such laws existing, refugees face many lows in their host countries; their rights continue to be violated. Governments around the world should honour their responsibility of uplifting humans in times of need and guard human rights to the best by eliminating any racism, torture, or discrimination that may follow the refugees&rsquo; arrival, making them feel a lack of support system. The word &lsquo;Refugee&rsquo; is only a tag on them brought on by an experience they encountered. A single tag, owing to a single experience, shouldn&rsquo;t be used to replace someone&rsquo;s identity. Refugees are people who carry over stories of survival and strength for generations to come. They are not the violence they faced, the trauma that shook them, or the fear they may still hold. They are beyond all these; they are human beings with potential, emotions and responsibilities, who have fought against situations you and I have only heard of. They are people who make laudable contributions to the society they live in, who have a strong belief in themselves. Refugees deserve inclusion, opportunities, and respect, regardless of what made them flee in the first place.

What do think about this idea?

Creed

Contact Us

Connect With Us