I think the theory is contingent on coming from a place where everyone is well intentioned and good at the core of their person. As Robert Deniro says "I don't play bad guys. I play people who make choices that are different from other people's". So coming from a premise of good we must work to understand why each person in their unique combination of circumstances makes the decisions they do. And if we can't understand at least we have respect that that was right for that person at that time in that circumstance.
From there we theorised that, with so much available to stimulate us and so much expectation of a benefit on every experience, perhaps the answer to happiness is to build an eco-system where each experience or enagament is balanced or balances an element of another. And in this way create create an equilibrium for ourselves which is happiness. As such we should make decisions and choose to engage with people and experiences who positively contribute to balancing and maintaining our own personal eco-system. For example when I bought a new puppy recently my nephew said to me that he wasn't sure if he could love Mimi because he loved his cat, we discussed that there is no quota for love, we don't run out and it can be shared with out loosing any of its power. Do we forget this along the way? Do we apply it to all parts of our lives?
What might this approach do for the way you love, relate, play, work, travel?
No comments:
Post a Comment