<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.85930122539580591638794813595%2Fimage1.webp?alt=media&token=25aedc9b-6f84-45e3-95b9-2c8588e7c44d" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> What is common between every human that has ever lived and those yet to come? Faith, consciousness, or even religion? But the first two we cannot prove, and religion brings people together as much as it pushes them apart. Okay, let me put it this way: What is the one trait turned commodity ingrained in all of us? Trade and commerce. And these gave birth to what we today recognize and love as Money. This article will explore the origins of money and what it means for you today. No matter where you are in this world today, people around you trade in some form of currency, maybe more than one of them at a time. Government-backed national currencies, digital wallet currencies or even crypto, if that is your thing. But where did it all come from, and why do we even need money in the first place? <h3>The History</h3> Suppose you are a wheat farmer from 5000 years ago. The predominant occupation was agriculture, but it was not as efficient as it is today. You specialise only in cultivating wheat. But it does not suffice, and you need vegetables to feed your family. So you go to the farmer next door who cultivates vegetables. You convince them to exchange one bag of your wheat for one bag of their vegetables. Simple. No money was involved. This is how civilisation traded for a long, long time. You know this as the Barter system. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.85930122539580591638794813595%2Fimage2.webp?alt=media&token=93a83d19-6335-4cdf-8944-27d8e8891f17" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> Let&rsquo;s come back to the story. What if the farmer does not want wheat but wants rice instead? So you go to the next farmer who cultivates rice, exchange your wheat for their rice. You save some for your family and trade the rest of the rice for vegetables. Still not too difficult to follow. Right? But what happens if there are hundreds of people in your village doing thousands of such transactions a day. Now things start to get complicated. And this is only considering that the value of your wheat bag is equivalent to one pack of vegetables or one bag of rice. What if the rice farmer asks for two bags of wheat for one bag of rice? What if you cannot get anyone in your village to exchange your wheat for something else? This is where the barter system broke down. It was too complicated to keep track of, and people often found themselves at the short end of the stick. The villagers were getting tired of the fact that they had to make so many exchanges a day. So they sought out an alternative.&nbsp;(Be mindful, what plays out here in a few hundred words, took place over centuries. No one person got irritated one day and invented the idea of money the next. Onto the alternative now.) Metals like Gold and Silver started to come into play. People from around the world began discovering Gold and were immediately lured by its appeal. Through extensive trial and error, they came up with a system of exchange that all merchants and traders locally accepted. People started trading their goods and services for something with no inherent value, but they chose to place some value on it, Gold. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.85930122539580591638794813595%2Fimage3.webp?alt=media&token=df53059c-3eb7-430c-b027-fedef28e2508" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> This was one of the oldest forms of money. People could exchange this shiny commodity for rice, vegetables, cotton, or anything else their family needs. Things seem to be getting comfortable. Now you want to buy some spices from the neighbouring village. You ask the merchant for a bag of spices and present them with a Gold coin. The merchant is confused. It turns out this village is trading in Silver, and you cannot exchange your Gold for spices. This is central to the understanding of money. &ldquo;Money is not the exchange of notes, coins, bonds or numbers on a screen.&rdquo; Instead, money is the exchange of mutual trust placed in these commodities. You value the Indian Rupee because everyone in India values the Indian Rupee, and the state validates it. Likewise with every other national currency. You trust that you can exchange your notes for goods and services anywhere in the country. Trust. That is the name of the game. When any new currency or form of exchange develops, it takes time for people to adopt it because they do not trust that they would be able to exchange this currency. Think Paytm (India). When Paytm launched its digital wallets and currency in India, people had a hard time accepting it. They were not sure that they could encash the balance in their wallets for tangible goods or services. But when people steadily started accepting payments through Paytm, the masses picked up on the convenience of one-click payments and Paytm took off. Money is more social and than financial. Psychology and philosophy drive how much importance we place on money. These factors cross all religious, social, political and geographical boundaries. &ldquo;Money is the most universal and most efficient system of mutual trust ever devised.&rdquo; - Yuval Noah Harari. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.85930122539580591638794813595%2Fimage4.webp?alt=media&token=f71ab56c-e8c6-4966-954a-69ea36f80b12" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" /> <h3> Money, Trust and 2016 Demonetisation of India </h3> In India, people loved their old 500 and 1000 rupee notes. Some had stacks of them lying around houses and offices. There was a trust that when the need arose, people would encash this most liquid form of money for the goods, services, power, and prestige that people wanted. You trusted that you would get equivalent value for your money when you pay someone a 1000 rupee note. But one fine evening, the Govt. of India, invalidated the notes. Overnight the notes went from holding a value of 1000 Rupees to literally &quot;Paper-weight&quot;. Suddenly you could not exchange your old notes anywhere in the country. The trust in the note was lifted after the authorities did not back the money. This event gives us the understanding that money itself has no inherent value. It is a system of trust. Tomorrow if your e-wallet stops getting accepted anywhere in the market, your money is suddenly worthless. Money is a tool to quantify value. When the value is lost, money becomes worthless, literally.

The Psychology of Money: Where Did Money Come From?

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

The History of Art

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.065927279545930921628072884125%2FScience%20Behind%20The%20Smile_IgnjatMilinkovic_1.webp?alt=media&token=d4862162-8ba2-4dfa-ab5b-2c7a24b4b3e4" alt="" width="764" height="509" /> Before you start reading this article, take a moment and ask yourself: &ldquo;How do I feel now?&rdquo; Is it happy, joyful, excited or sad, sorrowful, helpless, pessimistic? Whatever is the answer, you should give yourself another moment to recall all the situations that eventually triggered your actual feelings. Tap your back and know that mostly those feelings are transitory and that they are just visitors of your previous actions and reactions to certain situations that you were in. Happiness is becoming mainstream and a norm that all of us are reaching for. Society is expecting us to feel happy, to feel free. It&rsquo;s pushing us towards positive thinking, constantly burying down the true specter of feelings that we have in use and which we are sensing consciously or unconsciously. <h2>But what does science says about happiness?</h2> Psychologists define happiness as a subjective state of satisfaction with a current life situation, related to the feeling of self-fulfillment and enjoyment. An absence of negative emotions and stress. It is important to unpack this concept.&nbsp; We should know one basic thing, we could not feel happy if we don&rsquo;t feel sad. We could not feel joy if we don&rsquo;t feel despair. All of those are just extremes of a continuum. A dimension with two poles. The negative and positive sides. They are driving life as most humans know it. As aware beings, we have the luxury of consciously experiencing feelings. To think about them, recall them, learn how to overcome them or how to enjoy feeling them. <h2>Pleasure vs. Happiness</h2> Have you ever thought about the distinction between pleasure and happiness? Let&rsquo;s take a look what are the differences because the majority of people are misusing these concepts. First of all, pleasure is connected to our sensory level. According to a time dimension, it&rsquo;s short-lived, while happiness is long-lived.&nbsp;&nbsp; How to achieve it? Well, mostly by taking consumables (ex. food). On the other side, happiness is attained by giving and sharing (ex. human interactions, altruism). How it&rsquo;s experienced? Pleasure could be experienced even when we are alone, but happiness is shared in a group setting. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.065927279545930921628072884125%2FScience%20Behind%20The%20Smile_IgnjatMilinkovic_2.webp?alt=media&token=6fe16e36-5f13-4bcd-a0f6-225896234534" alt="" /> <h2>Neuroscience and Happiness</h2> On a physiological scale, a neurotransmitter in charge of pleasure is Dopamine. The one responsible for happiness is Serotonin.&nbsp; When taken to extremes, too much pleasure could lead to an addiction. You can&rsquo;t be addicted to happiness, right? Still, it&rsquo;s very hard to measure happiness because of its subjectiveness. But neuroscientists have discovered the brain parts and neurotransmitters, they have found the &ldquo;neuroanatomy of pleasure&rdquo;. They&rsquo;ve divided it into three major substrates: motivation, pleasure or &ldquo;liking&rdquo; and learning. From a thing that motivates or encourages someone to do something (it defines what we want), through conscious pleasure and hedonic impact, to cognitive processing and associative learning. All three of these have their own structures and areas in the brain which are duty-bound for different actions. Those areas are interconnected, they have functional connectivity between the anterior cingulate cortex and orbitofrontal cortex, hypothalamus, amygdala, and hippocampus. Affective neuroscience research on sensory pleasure has revealed many networks of brain regions and neurotransmitters activated by pleasant events and states. Serotonin is a neurotransmitter that mediated satisfaction, happiness, and optimism. For example, Serotonin levels are reduced in depression, and most modern anti-depressant drugs, known as serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), act by increasing the amount of serotonin available to brain cells. <h2>Common sense&nbsp;</h2> After all, we should know that happiness is a process, not a destination.&nbsp; To achieve it, we need to go through the pitfalls, we need to feel the burden of negative emotions, we need to let all of those feelings come through us, to analyze them, see where our blind spot is, and overcome them. We need to be proactive in our search for happiness because only then we can rip our chains and feel free again. Research shows that much of the happiness is under personal control. Regularly indulging in small pleasures, getting absorbed in challenging activities, setting and meeting goals, maintaining close social relationships, and finding meaning beyond oneself all increase life satisfaction. It isn&rsquo;t happiness per se that promotes well-being, it&rsquo;s an actual pursuit that&rsquo;s a key.

Science Behind the Smile

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.9327426980005721628072884736%2FHRM%20and%20Happiness_IgnjatMilinkovic_1.webp?alt=media&token=33329d4c-41ad-4382-95bb-fc985dde9228" alt="" width="765" height="510" /> Capitalism as an economic system is pulling strings all around the world. The world is becoming increasingly interconnected as an outcome of massively enlarged trade and cultural exchange. Corporations are spreading their business and manufacturers to other countries in search for nominal costs and expenses. Acquisitions are more frequent today than ever before.&nbsp; The world is much faster, stumbling and rushing towards higher revenues, no matter what. CEOs have only one aim- higher income, with lower expenses. In that rat race, we all forget the primary resource, without which we couldn&rsquo;t accomplish any of these. Hands, minds, and motivations of all of those who are making teams and personnel of the big and small corporations have become secondary objectives. They are taken for granted, exploiting every pair of hands they can. Of course, not every company is alike. Some of those are trying to refocus on people, understanding that only those people, which we call employees, are the only ones relevant and capable of building up the quality and quantity of products and reputation to the organizations and institutions. Research is still trying to find out how to motivate, encourage and increase the happiness of the workers to fulfil their self-accomplishment and employee satisfaction. Many of the theorists from different backgrounds share their views, which are applicable and relevant for today&rsquo;s business problems. Let&rsquo;s peek at the most suitable ones. <h2>The hierarchy of needs</h2> First, conceptualizations of motivation and general happiness, which we will reveal, explain motivation from satisfaction with basic human needs. The study of organizations is streaming their attention to the idea that people are motivated to use their job to satisfy their own needs. The most famous theory of human needs in organizations is possibly the one according to Maslow. His thesis was that if people grow in an environment and collective which does not meet their necessities and demand, they will not function as healthy, happy, and well-adjusted individuals. If people don&rsquo;t have their needs met on the job, they will not be efficient. Consequentially, the product on which they are working will not satisfy the needs of corporations or users. According to this theory, people have five types of needs: physiological, safety, belongingness or love needs, and esteem needs which lead to self-actualization, and self-fulfilment, which is equal to happiness in the widest possible sense. On the other side, Alderfer&rsquo;s ERG theory of needs is correspondent to Maslow&rsquo;s five needs theory, and he is choosing: Existential, Relatedness, and Growth. In both cases, happiness is a concept that could be equivalent to higher accomplishments in a working environment. <h2>How are managers applying these theories?</h2> Since self-actualized and happy workers will use their maximum creative potential, it is reasonable to reach this state by allowing them to meet their essentials. Some companies allow their employees to meet physiological needs with various incentives to support their health (physical activity, team sports). To meet the social needs of their employees, some corporations are organizing a family outing near the office, hiking, or different types of team building. An essential way of meeting the needs of respect and esteem is to recognize employee achievements. Some companies reward their employees who have found a way to improve customer service or improve company performance. <h2>What the numbers tell us</h2> As we can see, the human resource factor is relevant for the companies outcomes on the market. Employee happiness is the most important value if you want your business to flourish. Actively engaged employees are emotionally connected to and invested in creating value for their organizations. <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.9327426980005721628072884736%2FHRM%20and%20Happiness_IgnjatMilinkovic_2.webp?alt=media&token=6b9501e0-a4bf-4ddb-8972-4238b60d1790" alt="" width="764" height="574" /> According to Gallup&rsquo;s research, only 13% of people worldwide actively engage at work. This number might or might not be correct, but certainly, it tells us that the vast majority of workers are not giving even their 70% of energy and skills while they are on the job from the beginning to the end of the workday. That means that companies are doing a poor job of creating an emotional bond between employees and the organization. Although many companies may be doing their best to address this problem, that number has barely budged since 2015. Maybe you may never have thought about it, but you are in the business of creating happiness. If you do it well, you will not only be highly profitable, but there&rsquo;s a good chance you&rsquo;ll be a bit happier yourself.

Happiness and Human Resource Management

<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%2F0.52485430586477431631036480229%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/images%2F0.38291449564924561628072884245%2FThe%20Philosophy%20of%20Love_IgnjatMilinkovic_1.webp?alt=media&token=d674f6c3-560e-41c3-809a-4caf2fb455aa" alt="" width="765" height="478" /> <h2>Mysticism and Illusion of love</h2> One of the essential topics that interested humans from the very beginning is Love. As social beings, people seek relationships. They write unfulfilled and even tragic love stories. Most of these stories become legends, and some remain myths.&nbsp; &ldquo;Like a waver of fine cloth, they spun the tales and legends of love into an amazing tapestry of the human psyche.&rdquo; From the story of Eros and Psyche, across the troubadours of the 12th century to Shakespeare&rsquo;s Romeo and Juliet, we can see that love is the impulse to live. Lovers are the greatest utopians, and their Love is the most wondrous utopia. In love, we feel more than we should, we ache more than we think, we dream more than we live, and we say the things in which we reasonably doubt. In love, there is nothing reasonable. Love is a state of mind without balance and without rethinking. That is why the ancient Greeks considered love to be sickness and those in love to be sick. Even the oath lovers took, had no judicial value.&nbsp; &ldquo;Take good care, my son, that you never sacrifice your reason for the love of a woman&rdquo;, Creon says in Antigone. While he speaks about Antonio and Cleopatra, Plutarch says: &ldquo; The soul of the one who is in love lives in the other one&rsquo;s body&rdquo;. Love cannot be spoken of wisely, for love is not a matter of the mind but the senses and feelings, and because love is true only when it is blind, it is not subject to any measure of reason. A man in love is a mystic who lives by illusion, who believes in miracles, but not the obvious, who invents fortunes and misfortunes, and finally, who builds plans without proportion and logic, quite contrary to everything he would have done if he had not been in love. In love, man seeks destiny in divination. He is encouraged by words, and he does not believe his eyes and ears. <h2>Love and religion</h2> <img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.38291449564924561628072884245%2FThe%20Philosophy%20of%20Love_IgnjatMilinkovic_2.webp?alt=media&token=9f7c992c-9752-4021-8978-2f1bdf4d95ac" alt="" /> In love, as in religion, it all starts with a feeling and believing in the unbelievable. Love is proof of intelligence because a man without ideas cannot love since love is the greatest wisdom and the finest spirituality. St. Teresa tells Lucifer that he is unhappy because he cannot love, and St. Francis made women out of snow. In the Christian world, the saints were in love, but in the pagan world, the gods were also in love. Even the goddess Rhea, the mother of Zeus, loved Phrygian young man, the handsome Attis. One of her sons, Pluto, was dying of love for Persephone, the daughter of Demeter, and the other son, Zeus, was sowing love through all the Greek roads through which he passed. &ldquo;Love to be loved. For God punishes according to justice&rdquo;- Here with the Greek lyricist, philanthropy and love are the same; and indisputably, those feelings are inseparable.

The Philosophy of Love

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

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

<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/article_images%2FIs%20happiness%20a%20Universal%20concept_1.png?alt=media&token=f3a8047b-814e-4ce8-b44b-d0f776449f90" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" />To question the nature of happiness would be too clich&eacute; of an opener, but I am sorry to announce that we&rsquo;re going to have to start like this for the sake of time. If by happiness you mean positive emotions, this piece is not for you. Positive emotions can be good, but if that&rsquo;s the only thing you&rsquo;re chasing, you might just be in a constant state of mania. Trust me, I&rsquo;ve chased them for a long time and can say that with confidence. I still like to do so from time to time because&nbsp;what is life without a little bit of forbidden fruit salad? &nbsp; I like to look at happiness resulting from&nbsp;efforts we have put into ourselves and our lives, resulting&nbsp;in a minimum amount of needless agony. We cannot find ourselves in life without suffering, but we can create a small heaven for ourselves as we slowly head towards death. After which we may land in hell, in which even if you don&rsquo;t believe in it through a religious lens . As one of my favorite&nbsp;quotes lays out, &ldquo;Hell is other people&rdquo;. You&nbsp;might be encouraged to lose a little faith in humanity if you are a cynic. Still, this quote&rsquo;s teaching is based on&nbsp;the idea that other people&rsquo;s judgment&nbsp;will always&nbsp;hold a piece of your identity and subsequently how you evaluate yourself. This is one of the many reasons why social cohesion and cooperation&nbsp;is so important and vital to our survival. It is not a mere superficial modern illusion of ego and looks based approach or a primitive need for tribalism and tribal associations. Social status is important because our existence is heavily connected to our coexistence. Through the individual manifestation of our responsibilities, we can enjoy our rights. Think of it like Karma, do good and get good. And, if Karma does not convince you, do some reading on the &ldquo;Shopping Cart Theory&#39;&#39;, and you might&nbsp;get lost in the rabbit hole of the domino effect in which we all abandon our moral grounds, all starting just with a shopping cart. &nbsp; Now, let&rsquo;s look at heaven and how&nbsp;to lay the foundations of this heaven. Although this can vary amongst people, ages, religions, and cultures, &nbsp;thankfully, certain universals make&nbsp;us all human. We&nbsp;can find common ground about what brings&nbsp;quality into our lives. This can be anything, from a meal with a loved one to a long-overdue&nbsp;phone call with a friend, to doing what you love as a job or having a &nbsp;family that you feel at home with, or even something as simple as taking a walk . &nbsp;The list goes on and on, but you get the gist. It&rsquo;s the little things in life. &nbsp; But how do you get to appreciate those little things as the foundations of life when it is all too human to get consumed by the infamous existential void? &nbsp; The answers to this question are many and plausibly too complex to fit into a book or an article. But let&rsquo;s try and dip our toes into this complex pool for a little bit. A few things&nbsp;have fascinated me more than the overlap between spirituality and the process of growing through the pain that is&nbsp;the unplanned, unforeseen, unlucky and flat out bad experiences in life. I&nbsp;believe that certain human universals constitute&nbsp;the standard for a decent human life with enough happy moments to die satisfied. If you are still intrigued enough to be reading this, try to think of this as a big question mark. So, is happiness based on&nbsp;spirituality, psychoanalysis, or merely the universe and the rules that govern it? And no, I am not a quantum physicist, so I won&rsquo;t be talking about how&nbsp;the universe works. But since we all have the universe inside of us, if&nbsp;we look deep enough, we can find a bit of wisdom hidden through a little piece of the universe, or God, or whatever it is that governs the greater reality that we live in. &nbsp; Suppose&nbsp;we were to look at happiness through the lens of psychology and psychoanalysis. In that case,&nbsp;we can see a bottom line of working through your issues, getting to know, accepting and integrating your shadow and growing into the person that embodies your potential to the fullest extent. Successfully, this results in a life that balances out good relationships with family and loved ones, an acceptable social status to pass on to the next generation (in evolutionary terms), a roof over your head, minimal anxiety for basic survival needs and a feeling of being content with the life you have. &nbsp; If you take a look at spiritual teachings, you will come across the idea of content-ness almost immediately; mindfulness teaches, among many things, the idea that the present moment is all that there is. It is what it is. You&nbsp;can&rsquo;t be happy all the time as that is too unrealistic. You just have to be content, there, in the moment with anything it might bring with it. Unless in a life threatening situation, of course! &nbsp; In the psychological journey, you develop the skills and personality traits to deal with the adversities in your life to&nbsp;take the reigns of your life and structure it so&nbsp;that it is meaningful enough to carry on. Allow&nbsp;me to quote Buddha: &ldquo;Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional&rdquo; . This&nbsp;resonates enough with humans to be attributed to Buddha for some reason. Comparatively, the most popular clinical psychologist and intellectual of our time, Jordan Peterson - whether you like him or not- resonates with an increasingly large audience through a similar message. It is a&nbsp;message that is deeply rooted in the idea of growing and taking responsibility for the things in your control, rather than losing yourself in nihilism and meaningless pursuits. Why do these ideas resonate with people cross-culturally, whether through an ancient philosophy like Buddhism or a clinical psychologist? Is there an overlap between these two? And if yes, does this mean there is a universal truth to what makes a good, happy life? Are we about to discover the key to happiness by the end of this? &nbsp; Probably not, but we can at least hope that we might continue the pursuit of happiness until the end of time, not because we have not obtained it, but to keep it. Survival is not the only reason for living, but after survival comes thriving. If you manage to survive, simple things &nbsp;matter and if you appreciate the little things, greater things will come; you will thrive. Whether you look at this through a spiritual, religious or psychological perspective, life is nothing but a constant pursuit of that little moment of happiness through growth resulting from inevitable challenges&nbsp;included in life.

Is happiness a Universal concept?

<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%2F0.038609244985196911630871191338%2FThe%20Distance%20Embracing%20Model%20Of%20Art_2.webp?alt=media&token=85b20cb9-8d38-4ad6-afbb-327842803a74" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" />Human beings have an inborn desire to express themselves. We as a species are curious, and one way to expand our need for curiosity is through the arts. Art reinforces our imagination and creativity. It enables us to dive deeper into the human consciousness. Art acts as a medium to express our desires and conflicts with a sense of wonder and fascination. It is a mechanism to negotiate with reality. An artist picks up a brush to make peace with their past and hope for a better future.Art makes our reality less ugly, for the colors fill our hearts and mind with a temporary sense of awe. Art keeps us afloat and acts as an emotional compass. Artworks serve as pieces of the puzzle for human existence.&nbsp;Art is a beautiful way of documenting reality, paired with creativity. Through art, we can travel through time and better understand the complexity of our past. Art creates a space where we can communicate with the artist, the creator, through expressions, in any form.&nbsp;Negative emotions are an essential resource for the arts. Negative emotions bring about intense involvement, high memorability and are influential in gripping our attention. Thus, they hold a special place in the memory of events in our life. A fine piece of art attempts to achieve the given characteristics. Thus, art that leads to negative emotions etches a saga in our memory.&nbsp;<img src="https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/creed-community.appspot.com/o/images%2F0.038609244985196911630871191338%2FThe%20Distance%20Embracing%20Model%20Of%20Art_1.webp?alt=media&token=659d27f1-b221-4763-858d-1691751f8957" alt="File preview" width="700" height="466" />The theory of tragedy proposed by Aristotle states that the main aim of tragedy is to bring about a catharsis of spectators &mdash; to give rise to emotions of pity, fear, and hope. So that the spectators leave the theatre feeling cleansed and uplifted. Art is therapeutic. However, the theory of tragedy sounds like a profound contradiction because we want to be happy, right? We seek happiness in art. So why do art forms which lead to negative emotions move us? Since Greek and Latin antiquity, treatises on rhetoric and poetics widely assume that artworks compete for attention, intense emotional involvement, and high memorability (Lausberg 1998; Quintilian 1920). Recent psychological research has provided evidence that many negative emotions have a powerful grip on attention, are intensely felt, are less prone to fade or return to baseline level than positive emotions, and often have access to privileged storage in memory (Cacioppo &amp; Gardner 1999; Frijda 1988; Larsen &amp; Prizmic 2008; Musch &amp; Klauer 2003; Rozin &amp; Royzman 2001; Vaish et al. 2008). The formula "bad is stronger than good" (Baumeister et al. 2001) provocatively summarizes this line of research.&nbsp;The psychologist Winfried Menninghuas has offered the 'distance - embracing' model to explain why we love and appreciate art that brings about negative feelings. Art invites us to embrace our negative emotions. Through art, we learn to sit with the uncomfortable feelings which were unexpressed. Art unearths the feelings that reside in the hidden corners of our minds. Research into different types of pleasure has shown that intellectual and emotional pleasures (including those of art reception) routinely "encompass negative emotions like sadness &hellip; and positive emotions that entail complex appraisal" (Dub&eacute;&amp;LeBel2003,p.291; see also Berenbaum 2002). In contrast, physical pleasures tend to be least affected by concomitant negative emotions (Dub&eacute; &amp; Le Bel 2003).&nbsp;However, when we experience negative emotions while seeing any art form, we distance ourselves from these negative emotions and control them. Thus, through this process, we better understand ourselves and our unexpressed hidden self. Importantly, recent research has shown that chills and goosebumps in art contexts are physiological correlates of states of being emotionally moved (Benedek &amp; Kaernbach 2011; Wassiliwizky et al. 2015).Therefore, we can conclude that art is a way of stumbling on a truth. The fact that life consists of ingrained suffering. Yet, art preserves the pieces of humanity by acting as a mirror for humans. We resort to the idea of art when we experience sorrow. No matter how broken one is, art can mend and comfort even the torn souls.Art is mood, an emotion, a behavior because, through art, one discovers a medium of expression. It helps us connect with our deeper self and realize that true beauty exists in tragedy. Humans are an elegant tragedy, and art molds us into beings of higher consciousness.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The Distance Embracing Model Of Art

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

What do think about this idea?

Creed

Contact Us

Connect With Us