A Human by Any Other Name is Still Accountable
Do easy things come naturally? Are they things we notice immensely?
I ask because I thought about writing, "hatred is easy."
What I mean by easy isn't so much "easy to do," though that is certainly true depending on the environment you were raised in and considering society as a whole. But, rather, that hatred is easy to participate in without really noticing that you are doing it.
For starters, hate is an act/tion. It is something one does, not simply how someone feels. Thus, if you feel hate for someone or something you are doing something to (at the very least) yourself.
To hate—the acting out of hatred—means to be in sorrow, to be in grief or calamity; fascinatingly it means to care in Greek, but also to be troubled, to be sorrowful. (Side Bar: is this where the idea that feelings were bad and should be avoided came from?) And, finally, to be in pain and anger.
Arguably, at least in this dimension of our Earth, all of these root meanings are not only easily engaged in, they are globally present. Sorrow, Grief, Calamity, Caring, Trouble, Pain and Anger. Are these not the things that were in Pandora's Box by other names?
So is it easy to hate? Easy to hate our individual selves and—concordantly—easy to hate the world?
If your perspective is rooted in hatred and what hatred really embodies, how could you not hate life, things, people, circumstances by default? Your basest instruction to yourself is that things are discordant; our basest instruction to ourselves is that things are discordant.
So how could they not be? Discord comes from Latin for "disagreement," which, in turn, comes from the Proto-Indo-European for "heart." If that isn't interesting I don't know what is. To begin with, that discord comes from the sentiment that things are in disagreement. "You can't be the way you are because it's wrong/the lord/I said" etc. I think that very easily creates a disagreement of the heart. Which, for all intents and purposes here, could also mean one's nature.
Clearly humans think something is wrong with being alive. Fundamentally. Something "beyond us" and "out of our control." Or we would take more accountability for our actions, our hearts, our natures and what we decide. If we knew it was all up to us why wouldn't we be accountable?
It's easier to blame something for what we hold inside of ourselves than to face the concepts and constructs that we allow to become our natures. Which brings me to my next point.
Ideas are thought-forms. That is, thoughts that have been turned into things outside of any one individual's head. One might even say ideas are consideration(s), as there are things we humans have no hand in creating that we must recognize and make sense of.
The look of a thing, how we perceive that look and then what we make that perception into are all within the purview of "Ideadom."
It is our perception that distinguishes "kind, sort, nature, mode and fashion." Not in the sense that things do not actually have different appearances—we aren't making everything up out of our thoughts indepdently—but in that with our consideration we make (mostly arbitrary) decisions about the meaning of differences as a determinant of morality, humanity, consciousness and worthiness.
It makes sense that our Proto-Indo-European speaking ancestors had to make wide-sweeping determinations based on what they were able "to see." But we are not those ancestors with the wild animals, the blunted tools and lack of shelter who were just beginning to understand how to articulate things. We are not in the beginning of human understanding, we—in the present—are at the crux of understanding.
Our (people in the present) understanding and what it is to us and means to us is inherited by our descendants; but the quality of that inheritance is on those of us who are currently mature, adults and here.
The fixation on ideas is an adherence to a lesser way of being. Not lesser because it is worse, but lesser because it is not as informed. Thereby rendering our perception through a purview that ultimately lacks the comprehension needed for the current circumstances of being alive and human.
We no longer have to rely so heavily upon our eyes. We of the present have more to perceive with. We of the present have more time and more knowledge of experience with which to engage in this world. We have inherited more, we are capable of more and there are more of us, so for all intents and purposes, we should be doing better overall.
And by doing better I mean more individuals should be content and feel at peace with the world at large and their nature on an individual level. Societies should beget less anxious, more aware, more considerate and wiser people. Not simply because there are more humans on Earth, but because there are more settings that provide for such cultivation of personhood.
So what are we lacking?
A new beginning isn't just some saccharine concept begotten from addiction meetings and yoga retreats taken by people of the Me 1st world. It is an everyday occurrence. You are not the same second to second, let alone moment to moment.
Change is constant. People just pretend that things aren't different.
Of course, there is more to having principles than this. To have principles is to "commence" looking at where something started, "the first part." To observe that which begat something else. It is a looking backwards to support going forward. Not a looking backwards to live in the past.
Further, where ideas focus on form, principles focus on functionality. The origins of what begat forms. To consider that, you must acknowledge RiT, ancestry, what went on and the hows and whys of those happenings.
Function begets form. Principles should beget ideas. It should only work the other way around if the form and idea seek to serve overall functionality and principles. Meaning, only if the form or idea seeks to serve everyone's well-being; by, at the very least, not taking away from some to give to others. Particularly without consent, regard or agreement.
Function may be used by everyone. It is a sensation. Principles should follow in that order and serve everyone present and coming. Ideas at their best are states—temporary and potentially useful structures that we create to support our everyday and overall existences. Ideas at their worst are constructed places and they are used to create ghettos between people.
Hatred should not be given priority over either, but as a constructed place it can still be used to inform both ideas and principles by way of teaching what one should not be engaging in.
Principles are not opinions. They are long-form considerations that can assist people in gestating and creating grander, more intentional and widespread ideas than even those we live with. I see no way that someone can have principles without also eventually having ideas. Yet RiT has shown us the many ways people can have ideas without ever gaining principles beyond starting something they will never finish.
Ideas make a better servant than principles because when made ruler ideas can easily become tyrannical by way of arbitrarily ordering things, thereby losing sight of the larger work of accounting for and caring for others. Principles make a better ruler than a servant because when made servant principles are always considering the greater order and deeper nature of what is happening, which is what a ruler does.
Not recognizing this means you miss the "forest for the trees." You see our planet, but not the Universe. You see the form of things, but you miss out on their functionality. You only see a small fraction of the picture.
Looking to the beginnings of things, their origins, what caused them to commence and their first stages/parts is what people should use to guide their ongoing actions. Not out of nostalgia and wanting to live from those beginnings, but through informing us in the present so we can make changes that better our ongoing natures and circumstances (ours and the ones our descendants learn to take on from us).
With hindsight as our guide no idea should be able to tempt us into creating ghettos of hatred because we imagine "that is the way of things" even as we don't account for our part in those imaginings and how they form into ways of life.
Socially, individuals are the origin of their actions. We commence all societal doings. Our inhabitance of our individuality becomes our principles. Our ideas about that individuality become "the self" and how we come to view our character(s). Willpower is not a force that bends people. People are the forces that determine the look and nature of their will.