Deleting your loved ones 02/08/19
It is suggested that shopping makes us happy and to shop is to have an income like working for a wage. But the trouble is, more and more developments are established for shopping while less developments made to earn an income.
Immediately, one can see a flaw in the system that we are likely to be overdeveloped in supply that may lead to static developments.
Likewise, if happiness is the goal and shopping makes us happy; wouldn't we end up in debts because we cannot afford to shop? In any case, debt would make us unhappy and the whole development is an economic flop.
That is why the social development is just as important as material infrastructure. Planning involves education and vocation suitable to a time and place. That is the popular paradigm of young people in the era of Technology. The social development of technology is a good idea.
In the absence of social and cognitive developments, we are forever overdeveloped in the cycle of linear materialism at the expense of social consequences.
Anyway, deleting your loved ones is a more humane term for wiping out our loved ones as elimination may refer to wiping out data from your memory. But when the process is reversed, that is; eliminating our loved one, it means when our feelings and emotions are wiped out of our memory, our loved ones are deleted. In other words, we determined the fate of our loved ones by how we feel.
It's the debate of Euthanasia and I am left speechless about some of the absurdities. For instance, how can you help anyone by ending their lives is a bit like a grown up claim.
Life is the beginning and end of all things including human. It is the anchor for moral and logical reasoning. If life no longer validates reason, would that also be the end of meaning?
The question asks, the very things that make us happy happen to also make us sad. To remove these things, are we then left without happiness and sadness? It is removing the reason that validates the meaning of our existence. These things; feelings and emotions are fundamental to our humanity.
We have explored beauty in the eyes of the beholder, but then if you see a sick person, is your experience the same as his/hers or shall we say that too is in the eyes of the beholder?
To attempt at reasoning the adult oxymoronic claim, we feel sympathetic and or empathetic when we see someone suffering. The trouble is, we only feel this way when the person suffering is closed to us, or a relative, a friend or an animal.
We know for some don't feel the same if the person is non-white male huh?
To relieve the sufferer from his/her pain, we refer to Euthanasia. But how can we justify that reasoning by merely trusting how we are feeling? It is absurd because a non white male sufferer does not offset sympathy or empathy for us, therefore we don't approve of Euthanasia.
And now we begin to make sense that Euthanasia is deleting only our loved ones among friends sand animals. It doesn't refer to others like non-white male.
This doesn't make life any clearly as we spend most of our living life executing non-white males, but in the end we delete our loved ones.
You know, feelings and emotions are the very things that make us human. We then constructed things as means of expressing our feelings and emotions, including using other humans. Our loved ones make us happy or sad, those other ones don't.
We live in structures of feelings and emotions compartments. So the brain is divided into spheres, and each sphere maintains certain feelings and emotions. What could happen if a compartment is full of like feelings and emotions of a class of humans distinguished by their race, gender, age etc?
Are we likely to leave others outside or start deleting and eliminating them? Armed with fashion of feelings and emotions, we become the ultimate dictator of our world.
Our structure is not compatible with both happiness and sadness at the same time. You see, the things that make us sad also make us happy does not suggest that we are confused. Rather, we express happiness at happy occasions and sadness at sad occasions.
It is when we apply compartments of our structure that the world is a happy place therefore we comply by deleting things and eliminate data that make us sad.
Now, to complete the contradictory adult claim, the things that make us sad has value to also make us happy. Our loved ones among friends and animals are more valuable than those other non-white ones, but in here we delete our loved ones and eliminate our memories of them.
Its probably fair to say you don't know happiness unless you have been sad; you don't know what light is unless you have been in the dark. In here, those who haven't been anywhere are forcing the structure of static compartments in our world.
The danger is, we cannot survive without feelings and emotions. At the same time, things have no power over our feelings and emotions. Because we hear so much bad news that we tend to be sad people, but that's allowing things to dictate our behaviour.
Feelings and emotions can be extreme, allow it to be dictated by external things, and we become dictators of life. But if we rule our feelings and emotions, we can be happy in happy occasions or otherwise.
If happiness is the goal, then it is probably unachievable because you haven't experienced sadness. But happiness is just another feeling like sadness. The difference is, one is more likely to be more wiser from the experience of sadness than would from the experience of happiness.