<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%2F0.52485430586477431631036480229%2F4ec66f95-1f32-48ae-b199-3932d03a2afd.webp?alt=media&token=e0c4b6a0-2fec-46ae-9505-ffff84cfb689" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> People have always equated romantic relationships to monogamy. They consider love as a feeling that occurs between no more than two people. When a person argues to be in love with more than one person, we tend to brush these feelings off as a crush or an infatuation. But this is not always true. What if you love more than one person equally and passionately? If love is a choice, why can't we choose to love two people equally? Also, is loving your partners equally possible or even necessary? Love is a complicated emotion. A person typically loves more than one person in their lifetime, including their parents, siblings, pets, and friends among others. You are also attracted to more than one person at a time. But to understand whether you can love more than one person, the key is to distinguish love from attraction. When you are attracted to someone, your body goes through a series of chemical reactions that result in a powerful yet temporary sense of connection. Love is different because it takes time to develop and lasts longer. Upon understanding the difference between genuine love and attraction, we look at the idea of being in love with two people simultaneously. Falling in love with two people is not easy; it requires immense patience and investment. However, several experienced individuals have stated that it is certainly possible. You can fall in love with two people for entirely different reasons, and both these reasons could be equally valid. You fall in love with one person for the way you get adventurous with them, and you love another person for the way you feel safe around them. With both of them, your brain releases hormones that make you fall in love. Ultimately, love is a choice at some point. For the same reason, you will have to choose the next step by considering the various factors at play.&nbsp; Assume you are in a polyamorous relationship. It is commendable if one does manage an arrangement that allows a happy polyamorous relationship. But is it possible to love both/all partners equally? More importantly, is it necessary? Let us look at a polyamorous relationship where a person has two partners. The person can surely love both partners equally. If love is a choice, we can choose how to love our partners. But if you examine the emotions involved while falling in love, this statement may not hold because, well, emotions are uncontrollable.. But why is it necessary to love both partners equally? It isn't. Loving two people in an equal sense would mean offering the same things to both partners or doing everything twice. Doing this is not only impractical but also unnecessary. Equity is what matters in such relationships. Both the partners may need entirely different things from you.&nbsp; One partner may require a lot of alone time, while the other would love to spend most of their spare time with you. In such a case, spending more time with the latter does not mean you love them more, but you provide both the partners with what they need. One partner may want to trek with you, while the other prefers spending time indoors. Having a stay-cation with the former and a long trek with the latter would only result in two overwhelmed and annoyed partners. Thus, equity needs to be established in such relationships, and not equality. Every relationship is distinct and this is true even with polyamorous relationships. You will deal with two distinct people with various needs and preferences. Take the example of your parents; you loved them both equally, but they both had different expectations from you. Applying numbers to relationships may not be the wisest choice in polyamory. "Equity, not equality" is the way to go with these relationships to keep everyone happy.&nbsp;

The Why's and How's of Loving Two People Equally

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/article_images%2FLove%20and%20Let%20go_1.jpg?alt=media&amp;token=f2e91140-46c7-419c-bf2d-3fc16ef99a63" alt="File preview" width="740" height="490" />&nbsp; Someone asks you, what is love? And if you start humming in your mind‼ Oh, baby, don&rsquo;t hurt me, don&rsquo;t hurt me, no more‼; then you are born in the 80s or the 90s. The song &ldquo;What is love?&rdquo; recorded by Trinidadian-German Eurodance artist Haddaway from 1993, was a massive hit in at least 13 countries. The catchy lyrics and the nostalgic music of this song are still discussed when a question arises about love. We look at love in terms of happiness. We do not think that love can be risky. Our intentions and expectations are, &ldquo;To love and to be loved&rdquo; - yet in a relationship, we might not be loved back or receive all the love we want, but the relationship would have turned sour. So, what next? <h4>&ldquo;If you love something so much, let it go. If it comes back it was meant to be; if it, doesn&rsquo;t it never was&rdquo; &ndash; Albert Schweitzer</h4> Letting go is an abrupt answer but is it that easy? Considering the time invested in the relationship and the bond developed over the years, letting a relationship go when it turns sour causes extreme distress. Sometimes, giving it a chance does work. The difficult decision is when to give the relationship another chance and when to let it go. Love is a matter of the heart, not the mind. When a relationship goes south, it is time to use our intelligence instead of relying on emotions. Let us first learn about relationships based on the types of love. There are three: 1.One-Sided Love Love is blind; maybe this is why some fall in love mindlessly with someone who will not reciprocate. You may fall in love with a person and never express your feelings. Or you express but face rejection. In both cases, you continue to love the person. The reason for refusal could be plenty &ndash; another lover, not the right type, commitment issues, etc. nonetheless, the love does not recede once it catches on. We need to understand that this love is real, and so is the suffering of rejection in one-sided love. 2.Mutual Love A dream relationship is one where the love is mutual, an understanding based on the bond you develop, and respect for the other&rsquo;s personal - time and goals. Though it sounds so simple and easy, it is difficult in practice. The word &ldquo;personal&rdquo; does not go well with people who think they own their partners. This type of relationship requires the sacrifice of ego, possessiveness, and expectations. Nevertheless, this is the type of love for a long-living relationship. &nbsp;<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/article_images%2FLove%20and%20Let%20go_2.jpg?alt=media&amp;token=3bcf9885-5e58-4873-911d-1c90afcf4071" alt="File preview" width="400" height="508" /> 3.Toxic Love It takes two people to make a toxic relationship work. One partner will be selfless and will give everything to make the relationship work. The other is selfish to satisfy their insecure needs. In this love, the toxic person feels that only their needs are important. The other partner deeply cares and silently suffers without letting them go. <h2>When to let go?</h2> <h4>&ldquo;Some of us think holding on makes us strong, but sometimes it is letting go&rdquo; &ndash; Hermann Hesse</h4> &nbsp;In one-sided love, there is no such thing as letting go, right? There is nobody to let go of. So, what should you let go of? &nbsp;You expressed your feelings, and they rejected them, dreams shattered, despite that your love remains intact. You enjoy the melancholy of rejection and become an amateur poet; with the hope that someday that person will realise your love. You start seeing life differently - a life of nothingness; that nothingness can be seen in your behaviour &ndash; uninterested, unimpressed. Not healthy. &nbsp;You need to let go of the emotions of love and stubborn feelings. Forgetting is not easy, but the future awaits you. Living in the past does not help. Get over your hangover of rejected love and make an effort to move forward. &nbsp;Letting go in a mutual relationship. Why? Sometimes even a perfect relationship can turn bitter. It could be due to lack of time, misunderstanding, or loss of intimacy (all due to too much time and focus on personal goals). Couples get divorced even after more than ten years of marriage. Look at the recent divorces between the Bezos&rsquo; and the Gates&rsquo;. &nbsp;In this case, letting go is not the only option, but giving another chance will help revive the relationship. It may take years to fix the relationship, but it is an excellent option to give several chances as mutual love existed in the past, and the external factors causing problems can be fixed. Letting go should only be taken as a last resort. <h4>&ldquo;It is better to be healthy alone than sick with someone else&rdquo; &ndash; Phil McGraw.</h4> &nbsp;<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/article_images%2FLove%20and%20Let%20go_3.jpg?alt=media&amp;token=3efe483d-673e-444d-83b4-cb8304af65a7" alt="File preview" width="400" height="599" /> Awareness is foremost. A toxic person carefully chooses a partner who can tolerate the toxic relationship. That person confuses you with a strange behaviour - being toxic at times and then covering it with expressions of love. Their expressions sound so true that you tend to ignore the abuse and dishonesty (signs of toxic relationship) initially. You believe that the toxic person is the victim in this relationship, questioning your integrity.&nbsp; When the toxicity takes a toll on you, you decide to let go, but you cannot. You give several chances for the toxic person to set the relationship right. Nothing changes. It becomes unbearable, and the relationship turns into a nightmare.&nbsp; It is a predator and prey relationship. Giving another chance is not an option. They cannot change. They chose you for a reason, to use you as an emotional punch bag. Toxic people do not know if they are harmful, as they will never feel that their actions are wrong&mdash;no use in waiting for the person to change. If there were love, there would be no toxicity at any point in time.&nbsp;&nbsp; This understanding will help you push yourself to let go of the relationship. Remember, your happiness also matters and is the most important only for you. Relationships are complicated, and it all depends on the love and bond you develop over the years. Knowing when to hold on and when to let go makes all the difference in a successful relationship. Identify what type of relationship that you want and take action accordingly.&nbsp;

Love and Let Go

<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%2F0.392732045901529551628072884675%2FTOXIC%20POSITIVITY_ShilpaSivadas_1.webp?alt=media&token=85238d46-123a-40e8-9e40-2d1d9ec879d5" alt="" width="764" height="509" />The wise Mark Twain once said, "Too much of anything is bad, but too much good whiskey is barely enough&rdquo;. We all say that until we've had a wild night of too much whiskey to drink and wake up the next day with a vile hangover, only to realize that it&nbsp;really&nbsp;was&nbsp;too much&nbsp;whiskey. I like to compare positivity to Mark Twain's whiskey. They both sound like things that could never go wrong, but they can go wrong in so many ways in actuality.&nbsp;It is a common misconception that being constantly and excessively positive is excellent for your mental health. However, the truth is far from it, and people don't always realize that it is crucial to experience the complete range of emotions, both positive and negative. Positive thinking is immensely helpful in coping with stress, and it can enhance resilience, but dismissing all negative emotions and overgeneralizing positivity is where it gets toxic. Toxic positivity or forced happiness is the expectation of being zestful and happy, even in the face of adversities. It comes with myriad repercussions; repressing emotions can cause anxiety, depression, sleeplessness, and a general deterioration of mental health. Your unsightly optimism can lead to failures that could have been avoided.&nbsp;Most importantly, negative emotions make you human. As humans, it is nearly impossible to feel no negative emotions, and these serve as coping mechanisms in various life events. No fight in life comes with only positive vibes, and your obsession with positivity could stop you from working towards social justice due to negative emotions such as anger and fear. That is not what we woke folks want now, right?So how does one distinguish good positivity from toxic positivity? Here are some ways to recognize that your positivity has turned toxic:1) You avoid and run away from negative emotions - If you feel awkward whenever you feel sad, angry, scared, or jealous, and if you prefer to simply replace them with positive thoughts instead of "feeling it out", you need to watch out. In the wise words of my therapist, avoidance works, but only temporarily. Imagine shoving a ton of things into a tiny drawer to clean up a messy room. You can overstuff the drawer and shut it tight, but it will only be a while before the drawer bursts open and makes a bigger mess than before. Similarly, these emotions may go away temporarily through avoidance, but they can come back stronger or may even last longer.&nbsp;2) You try hard to find positives in every bad situation - Every cloud may not have a silver lining. Still, if you are persistent in finding one for the sake of staying optimistic, you're getting close to toxic positivity. Everybody goes through tough times, and it is only realistic to say that you cannot always find immediate positives.&nbsp;3) You guilt yourself and others for feeling negative emotions - Everyone has heard phrases like "just move on" or "don't be such a baby" or "be a man" (toxic masculinity alert!). These phrases not only dismiss negative emotions but also lack empathy and compassion. Humans often bond over negative emotions, experiences, and trauma and avoiding these can stop you from connecting with others.&nbsp;4) Overgeneralizing "it is what it is" - People often simplify the idea of stoicism and accept everything without feeling the right emotions for it. Maybe what you are going through is immutable, but that does not mean you don't acknowledge the emotions that come with it. Genuine acceptance can only come after you go through the tsunami of emotions caused by the trauma.&nbsp;5) Frequently minimizing your and other people's experiences - Saying things like "it could be a lot worse" or offering overly positive affirmations at a time of crisis is a telltale sign of toxic positivity. Everyone goes through unique experiences in life, and you cannot measure these emotions on a scale.<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.392732045901529551628072884675%2FTOXIC%20POSITIVITY_ShilpaSivadas_2.webp?alt=media&token=7093ff6c-567c-4276-9e5e-d4f173804cde" alt="" width="765" height="510" />It may almost sound like a lot of our supposedly positive habits are toxic, right? Does that make you a toxic person? Not if you are willing to acknowledge and change these habits. The key to changing these is simple - do not chase the emotions away. Make it a habit to feel every emotion, even the negative ones. Try to get through the feelings rather than getting over them. It is easier said than done, but it is worth the effort. You will notice that your negative emotions are short-lived, and you will feel liberated and recharged, just like you do after a good cry. When you genuinely experience every emotion, you will have a whole new perspective of real, unforced, and unfettered positivity.&nbsp;

Toxic Positivity – The Bad Side of “Being Too Positive”

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.84000070748493851631036143223%2FCAN%20BUYING%20THINGS%20REALLY%20MAKE%20YOU%20HAPPY_1.webp?alt=media&token=5bafadf1-5db3-4bc5-b2f6-2e6a7c364b21" alt="File preview" width="701" height="408" />Try this brief experiment the next time you watch TV. Look at the advertisements when they appear, and notice how almost every ad tries to convince you that buying and using those products would make you happier instantly. Be it the ad for your regular toothpaste, a bar of candy, or even a high-end SUV, it all revolves around making consumers happy. Of course, this is not a very surprising or new fact; capitalism has almost always revolved around selling the idea of happiness, and we cannot blame these brands. Humans have, after all, been obsessed with the concept of happiness since time immemorial. But here is the real question- does buying these products truly make you happy?&nbsp;It is a widespread notion that being materialistic and buying things will not make one happy, and even if it did, it would only be temporary. However, studies have proven that experiences make you more content than purchasing goods. Renowned psychologists Leaf Van Boven and Thomas Gilovich established in 2010 that they suffer from buyer's remorse when people buy things. During or after purchasing, individuals gravitate towards comparing their possessions to those of others. People get used to their products and lose their enthusiasm eventually, only to move on to whatever else makes them happy. The study participants also claimed that experiences made them feel content, as their effects last longer and are harder to compare to those of others. Think about it; even when you buy things, it is often the entire experience of possession that makes you feel elated rather than simply owning the object.&nbsp;<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.84000070748493851631036143223%2FCAN%20BUYING%20THINGS%20REALLY%20MAKE%20YOU%20HAPPY_2.webp?alt=media&token=65db495c-a3b2-4add-862b-3a6a9539070d" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" />But hold on before the minimalist in you exclaims, "money can't buy happiness". A recent contrasting study has proven that buying things that match your personality would indeed make you happy. Let me elaborate with a personal example. Few things excite me more than buying new clothes, whereas I care little about electronic gadgets. A tech geek would be thrilled to invest in a new gadget, but buying new clothes means nothing to him. We would not just enjoy owning these products but would also enjoy the experience of purchasing them.&nbsp;So which of these studies is, in fact, correct? Well, we won't know for sure, but there is a middle-ground for those who wish to have both objects and experiences. A study published in 2014 explained that "experiential purchases'' or products that offer consumers an experience were just as good as gaining contentment from life experiences. These could also be products that help you express yourself freely or facilitate creativity. I enjoy buying items such as paints, sketchbooks, and tools that help me create art. But to me, these count as both experiences and purchases. In conclusion, whether you prefer buying products over enjoying experiences is contingent on your personality. Every individual values a particular type of happiness more than others, and there is no right or wrong in either of these.&nbsp;References-<ol> <li> Stigmatizing Materialism: On Stereotypes and Impressions of Materialistic and Experiential Pursuits, Leaf Van Boven, Margaret C. Campbell, Thomas Gilovich, First Published April 2, 2010</li> <li> Money Buys Happiness When Spending Fits Our Personality, Sandra C. Matz, Joe J. Gladstone, and David Stillwell, Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, and Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge</li> <li> To have in order to do: Exploring the effects of consuming experiential products on well-being, Darwin A. Guevarra, Ryan T. Howell, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA b Department of Psychology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, USA</li></ol>

Can Buying Things Really Make You Happy?

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

The Non-Pursuit of Happiness

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

The History of Art

<img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.150594998139294671635529193347%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=f2e57aac-6cb0-4f55-b205-423f95260c5e" > What makes your life different from the others? &lsquo;Circumstance&rsquo;- you might say. Yes, I do agree that circumstances shape lives. Your circumstances based on your life events are different from the others that make your life different. But, if you observe life as a concept, it is the same for everyone. It has a beginning and an end. It is filled with emotions, both joy and sorrow. There is the battle for the state of mind that switches between happiness and sadness. If you observe further, you will realize that your emotions are dependent on external circumstances and these circumstances are the same for everyone. This dependency on the circumstances controls your life, which is due to the lack of understanding of life. <h1 class="c4" id="h.oemslknv886t">Meaning of Life</h1> A plethora of definitions of life can be found in books or on the web if you do not read books. For centuries, many saints, monks, philosophers, poets have defined life in their way. Their divergent views may make sense or may not, yet it gives an insight into their perception of life. Perception matters the most in life as the circumstances are created by perception, not reality. Let&rsquo;s take &#39;the difference between the rich and the poor as an example to prove this. If you ask a rich person, how do they view this world? &ndash; &ldquo;I see opportunities everywhere&rdquo; would be the answer that you will receive. Ask the same question to a poor person - &ldquo;I do not get any opportunities, it is all taken by the rich&rdquo;, is the complaint that you will receive as an answer. Rich people see abundance in the world and work towards their dream, but poor people see scarcity and become indolent; living is a nightmare. Though they have the same eyesight, their perception differs; hence they have a different meaning of life Perception is important in finding the meaning of your life. <h1 class="c4" id="h.whil1l3owdt7">A look into Emerson&rsquo;s perception of life</h1> <h3 class="c0 c5" id="h.v3jv41sqdzj1">&quot;Life is a journey, not a destination&quot; &ndash; Ralph Waldo Emerson</h3> This cliched quote by Emerson has been making rounds on Facebook for the past five years, in the form of memes, posts, and cover photos. This profound quote was posted aimlessly by many netizens without giving credit to Emerson. The other netizens who have liked these posts have responded with awe. Nonetheless, the ones who posted and those who praised it did not give a concise meaning to the quote. Forwarding messages without knowing the inner meaning is a trend on social media. Let us discuss in detail if life is a journey or a destination. <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.150594998139294671635529193347%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=6fc72fb3-59b5-4aa4-b199-227d7ec2f0ae" > How can life be a journey? Humans are result-oriented. Everything you do in your life should have a meaning, and that meaning has to be manifested in the form of what you have achieved in life and what materials you have possessed. The material gain is a trophy of success. Inherently, life is measured by your achievements. Furthermore, to achieve anything, you must set goals that are time-bound and reach the target. Reaching your goal is nothing but a destination and, to some, destiny. Therefore, the destination or the destiny is clearly &lsquo;life&rsquo;, not the journey. But Emerson, the world-famous American philosopher, believed that life is a journey. He perceived life differently. So let us look at life from a different angle. <h3 class="c0 c5" id="h.ptuo6tsqn5xt">&quot;Death is not the greatest loss in life. The greatest loss is what dies inside us while we live&quot; &ndash; Norman Cousins</h3> <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.150594998139294671635529193347%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=6d2a81a6-31b9-49f0-8eda-5e4592c8c2b2" > I have taken another quote from an American author Norman Cousins which will give more insights into Emerson&#39;s beliefs. Humans live every day just to die someday. This is an inevitable truth. If you consider death, then the destination is death that makes life a &lsquo;journey&rsquo;. This substantiates Emerson&#39;s percept of life, giving a deep awareness and profound meaning. The word &lsquo;death&rsquo; makes everything else in this world seem trivial. The goals you have set, the people you do not speak to, the unnecessary anger and fear, and any other circumstances that may arise in the future, nothing will matter in the end. What matters is if your journey is filled with joyous moments. Be mindful of the fact that circumstances do not shape your life, but you do. You need to commit to living life to the fullest. After all, it is your life. Have you found the true meaning of your life? Please share your experience and thoughts on life.

What is life? Is it a journey or destination? A look into Emerson’s percept

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.7928762051668031631036323697%2FLOVE%20A%20CAREFUL%20CHOICE%20OR%20AN%20UNCONTROLLABLE%20EMOTION_1.webp?alt=media&token=9d319240-a5ea-4f70-bb9c-1222231fb7f0" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" />Friedrich Nietzsche quoted once, "There is always madness in love. But there is also always some reason in madness." Love. Some call it a mere chemical reaction, while some prefer being more hearts-and-flowers with the definition. Others may even call it a daunting mission that sucks the life out of them. But I am not here to define love; as it is not as simple as people try to make it. What intrigued me was this question- is love a conscious choice or an uncontrollable feeling? Post hours of research and intense contemplation, here's what I discovered.Falling in love is easy; it happens almost so inadvertently that it requires little effort. New relationships are rosy and joyful, and people constantly think about their partners and wish to spend time with them. However, this "honeymoon phase" fades, leaving people questioning their relationships and chemistry. That is when the question of love being a choice or a feeling surfaces.&nbsp;First, let us look at love as a feeling. After all, you "feel" something from within during those first few interactions. The butterflies in your stomach, the daydreaming, and that rush when you see them- those are all beautiful feelings and seldom conscious choices. But feelings usually fade, and this stands true for relationships. Such sentiments are unreliable and transient, and their retreat causes doubts and distress. These feelings also leave people stuck in toxic relationships and prevent them from quitting damaging bonds. Ask any couple who has been together for a few decades, and they will confirm that it isn't just "feelings" that kept them together. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.7928762051668031631036323697%2FLOVE%20A%20CAREFUL%20CHOICE%20OR%20AN%20UNCONTROLLABLE%20EMOTION_2.webp?alt=media&token=056cec42-2e49-460f-8dc4-c0932224b59f" alt="File preview" width="701" height="468" />Then why do people believe that love is a choice? People choose to continue loving their partners. They are determined to look beyond or accept their partner's flaws. They make up their minds to love their better half every day, regardless of their feelings. But seeing love as a choice isn't always ideal. Humans need their choices and decisions to be right all the time. They think that their partners should also "choose" to be perfect, as everything is ultimately a choice. However, with matters of the heart, things aren't that simple. It is almost as unrealistic as telling someone to "chill" and them chilling instantly.&nbsp;Seeing love as merely a choice also invalidates the struggles of those stuck in toxic or abusive relationships. People look at an abusive relationship and question the victim for not ending things, as it is ultimately their choice. Individuals in such relationships are often trapped in a web of manipulation, lies, and fear. They also suffer from low self-esteem and loneliness. In some cultures, they may maintain such relationships because of the involvement of families. An influential psychological phenomenon to be considered in such relationships is intermittent reinforcement. A reward is offered by the abuser whenever the individual performs a desired activity, but only sometimes. The desire for this reward makes the person desperately repeat these activities, hoping to get rewarded with love, attention, or whatever they want. This action-reward system gets so hard-wired into the brain that people get addicted to the relationship, leaving them stuck in the circle of abuse. In such cases, it is rarely about love, let alone it being a feeling or a choice.&nbsp;So what exactly is love? Love is a skill. One that everyone can learn, and some can outclass. Being considerate, patient, kind, mindful, and supportive simultaneously requires expertise. We cannot grasp these effortlessly, like any other skill. It takes years of learning and experience to master this skill. This skill is crucial not only to continue loving someone but also to know when to stop loving someone. Knowing when to leave a relationship is an important element to this skill, one that could save you pain and trauma. When you perfect this art, you can better understand people and their circumstances to make smarter decisions. This understanding helps one differentiate a good relationship or feeling from a toxic one. Love is both a feeling and a choice at some point, but it has to be a skill for it to live long and be fruitful. Thus, the goal should be to gain expertise in this skill, not categorize it as a choice or feeling.

Love: A Careful Choice or an Uncontrollable Emotion?

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

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

<img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.106371827230216321636142948157%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=f22dfe36-43eb-49d8-b681-1257a100da82" > A Happy Meal&nbsp;&ndash; A hamburger, a portion of nuggets, regular-sized french fries and a tall glass of an aerated drink. What can be happier than this? One of my friends asked on Instagram after uploading a picture of the happy meal. Her foodstagramming immediately gave me a surge of hunger, and to satisfy my impulsive craving, I felt like I needed to order a happy meal. However, something caught my eye. Her other comment said, &ldquo;A happy tummy makes the mind happy&rdquo;. It made me think. Is your tummy really happy? <h2 class="c2" id="h.9v9nfepbyzst">Effects - Short and Long</h2> A happy meal is a concoction of saturated or trans fats, sugar and salt. Its immediate effects are on your digestive system due to high amounts of fat, sucrose and sodium. Stomach discomfort and lethargy are the short-term effects that some of you might experience after having such a humongous meal. According to Medical News Today, constipation, obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart diseases are the long-term effects. They also suggest that a &quot;happy meal&quot; diet may also raise the risk of Alzheimer&rsquo;s disease and Parkinson&rsquo;s disease. Obesity seems to top the list of long-term effects. World Health Organisation (WHO) has also stated on their website that 1.9 billion adults were overweight in 2016, and 650 million obese. Another staggering study conducted on 100 adolescents by the European Journal of Molecular &amp; Clinical Medicine showed that 90% of them consume fast food. Furthermore, out of all the effects of fast food consumption, 37% of the participants had trouble sleeping, 24% had worrying nature or fatigue, 17% had undergone depression, 14% had emotional distress, and 8% showed violent behaviour. In conclusion, a study made by European Journal of Molecular &amp; Clinical Medicine concludes that impact of fast food leads to depression. Therefore, in the long run, fast food affects not only your body but also your mind. <h3 class="c1 c10" id="h.1gsg56sjbdd5">Did you know WHO had challenged food industries in a report on diet and health?</h3> As per a journal from the National Center for Biotechnology Information, WHO had called on the food industry to reduce amounts of certain types of fats as well as salt and sugar in snacks and processed foods. They had also criticized the food and drinks industry for &ldquo;heavy marketing practices of energy-dense, micronutrient-poor foods.&rdquo; The last statement made me question the marketing tactics used by the food industries and I started digging deeper. <h2 class="c2" id="h.v9l2o3oz42d2">How Food Marketing Works</h2> Take the example of a happy meal. The word &ldquo;happy&rdquo; used in the advertisements is quite misleading as it does not necessarily keep your stomach healthy. Still, your mind looking for temporary joy will make you buy the happy meal without a moment&rsquo;s thought. Furthermore, the fast-food companies&rsquo; advertisements typically show a family eating at their chain and a kid enjoying a burger with a smile on his face. They also offer a bunch of toys with the meal making the kid excited and wanting to visit again soon. Happiness is the key focus in these advertisements. These companies make you believe that families are enjoying their time at the fast-food joints without regard for what harm it can cause you? But we know the truth now. It made me question the ethics of the advertising world. <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.106371827230216321636142948157%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=d0412453-fc06-488a-8d24-a9054e8d5d27" > <h2 class="c2" id="h.l5b9y6jinmwk">Ethical vs Unethical Advertising</h2> <h4 class="c1 c10" id="h.dglgg7npd0ks">&ldquo;What is the difference between unethical and ethical advertising? Unethical advertising uses falsehoods to deceive the public; ethical advertising uses the truth to deceive the public.&rdquo; &ndash; Vilhjalmur Stefansson</h4> Yes, it is a confusing quote. I had never thought that truth could be used to deceive, yet this quote made sense. Take the happy meal advertisement as an example again. The truth is that the consumers are happy after having a meal. Families do enjoy their time dining at the fast-food joints, and it cannot be denied. Hence, it is ethical advertising as it shows the truth. But what makes our mind happy is not necessarily the same for our tummy. So, the deceiving here is, not mentioning in the advertisements - the high amount of fats, sucrose and sodium levels that fast food contains and the side effects and long-term effects of the food on our body. <h2 class="c2" id="h.hc31krrseuk8">So, do we just switch to healthy food?</h2> Though you know the ill effects of fast food and how the food industry advertisements are wired to your mind, it is still not easy to stay away from unhealthy food. Your mind wants instant gratification, and so it depends on material things like food to be happy. Marketing professionals are shrewdly aware of this concept, and the advertisements are always there to get you. To deal with this, you need to make a conscious effort to fight the urge to make your mind happy with the food. Ask yourself these questions the next time you want to have a happy meal: <ol class="c15 lst-kix_i3v6b4gmn81l-0 start" start="1"> <li class="c1 c6 li-bullet-0">Will a happy meal make me and my stomach happy?</li> <li class="c1 c6 li-bullet-0">Should I invest in food that is going to make me unhealthy?</li> <li class="c1 c6 li-bullet-0">Is the temporary joy of fast food greater than the long-term illness caused by it?</li> </ol> These questions will make you focus on the larger consequence and help you curb the need for instant gratification through food. Eating healthy is a dire need not only for your body but also for your mind. <img alt="" src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.106371827230216321636142948157%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=01a851e7-7ce2-4fbb-8ffe-dc653d3d38a0" > Don&#39;t forget that what makes you happy does not necessarily make you healthy. So, how do you avoid unhealthy food? Share your experience with us.

What do think about this idea?

Creed

Contact Us

Connect With Us