There is a way in which everything seems to transfer; not only processes, the way in which is dealt with things or the way people deal with eachother.
Also the way in which one views upon himself and the way this brings you in relation to the outside, the way you view upon the outside and the way the outside seems to respond to you. How is it possible in these kinds of dynamics, often disturbed by emotional whims, to respond in a way ruled by principles? Or even to have principles; as they also are possible to be established by youreself, though being in a context. Is it really possible to stear opinion?
Who would I be, born in a radically diffrent context. Would I be fighting for ideas which are alien or even opposing what I become? What is the relation of you're being (undefined and diffuse) to you're principles and the way those relate to you're actions?
When do you forgive someone, as it it the same as giving up hope, a defence almost against disappointment.
When do you forgive you'reself for 'who you are' and what you think? When can you be satisfied with what you become? Why is there such a pressing need to become and such a neglect on being?
What is the distance between thought and action when it comes to being? How can you judge someone, moreover, how can you judge youreself?
Abonneren op:
Reacties posten (Atom)
1 opmerking:
With the way in which civil principles and measurements have lost their strength, I started to wonder where these principles should be found. There is no absolute, no lecturer, no rule. In these three seconds of thought I would say maybe the strength of a person is that of the ability to redefine himself along a set of mechanisms which are able to separate the reason from the non sence with the motivation of changing ones actions along the way.
Een reactie posten