I am always very afraid for 'Democrats' and other mono-theistic believers. Remember the #red tag of yesterday on Twitter for World AIDS Day? Still remember it or already lost it in a cloud of tweets? I considered the #red tag as stupid! It's fake and words only! I always get shivers for "movements" like this. It's too mono-theistic. Two weeks ago I wrote about 'Democray as a mono-theistic religion'. I'm not afraid for democrats - I consider myself as one too. I'm not afraid for discussions - I love to. I'm afraid for democrats who see their belief as the One and Only. What I'm most afraid of is the fact that they don't want to talk or discuss about their belief. They don't really want to discuss. For them it's not a belief. For them it's the One and Only way of life that does Right to all human beings. They simply can't imagine that not everyone shares their fair, honest, right, sincere, human and down to earth point of view.
To be more precise I'm afraid for democrats who see their belief as God = Democracy. I'm afraid for the stoic kind of democrats. The ones who say "All or Nothing". Read the quote below. After reading it you will find out that I'm an epicurean. I belief in the little and in small steps. The strange thing is I'm a mixture sometimes. Sometimes I'm in an "all or nothing" state of mind too. Well that must me the epicurean in me too. What about you? What is your amount of being a stoic (All or Nothing) or epicurean (step by step)? Did you test your future/ present partner on it?
P.s. If you can smile :) on this week's blog you are my friend. If you can't or feel like sending me hate mail -you will be my friend as well- than consider this blog as your mirror and please check your amount of being too stoic.
Quote:
"Some thoughts about the Stoics and the Epicurean
Who are nowadays the Stoics and the Epicurean? How can you recognize them? What do they look like? That isn’t hard at all. A stoic is an individual who obstinately beliefs in his moral mission: a mission he has to fulfil. He always is in need of a Great Plan that gives his life meaning, but in fear that it will actually be fulfilled, he chooses a very difficult, probably not fulfillable plan, that above all can not be fulfilled by normal human beings. What counts is to suffer in name of something that has moral meaning.
Everybody who believes in the one, eternal, indissolubable Great Love is a stoic. It is clear that they will never find that, but that doesn’t keeps them from furiously searching for it without compromising. There motto is: ‘Everything or Nothing’.
Christians, real christians are stoics. There final destination is Paradise and they will reach that by purification of the body and elevation of the soul. Their favourite slogans: ‘We are born to suffer’ and ‘The first will be the last’. Marxist are stoics: their destination is Justice for All, without any exception. They are also confronted with a destination that will not be fulfilled on short term: the Sun of the Future, the word tells it all, will be catched in Future. In expectation of it revolutions, dictatorship of the proletariat and other equally difficult phases are on the program.
Marco Panella is a stoic: he wants above all to solve the problem of Hunger in the World, in the whole World. If we would propose a less ambitious program, e.g. the hunger in the Napolitian quarter San Carlo all’Arena, he would refuse that immediately, probably because the target could be reachable. And because he lives in a country where tortures hardly exist, he is forced to torture himself and that is the reason why he fasts, he ties himself and suffers.
The epicurean is made of other stuff: because he is aware of the fleeting of life, he is targeting for goals who are reachable on short term.
An epicurean is an employer who will ask for raise of salary to solve a problem within a year.
An epicurean is someone who prefers to vote on a party who doesn’t promise him Justice, Freedom and Happiness, but a gradual improvement of his life, through a policy of step by step.
An epicurean is someone who will continue his relationship with his partner although he is no longer really in love, but who arranged living with his partner in which they agree to differ.
The advantages and disadvantages are equally divived between the two worlds of thought. On the whole epicurean are more serene, more in peace with the world, almost always cheerful. On the other hand stoic work hard: when they play cards they will do that with much dedication. Epicurean do hold politics in contempt and they will almost never succeed as big industrial: he cares more about his private-life than about society. To become Pirelli, Pirelli must have been a stoic: an epicurean would have been satisfied with a little tire-store.
It would not be a bad idea when partners, before they get married, instead watching the stars and there constellations, they would measure the amount of being a stoic or epicurean of their future man or wife."
Quote. Source: Luciano de Crescenzo, ‘Storia della filosofia greca, da Socrate in poi’. Translation by @JeanD99 from dutch into english.
To be more precise I'm afraid for democrats who see their belief as God = Democracy. I'm afraid for the stoic kind of democrats. The ones who say "All or Nothing". Read the quote below. After reading it you will find out that I'm an epicurean. I belief in the little and in small steps. The strange thing is I'm a mixture sometimes. Sometimes I'm in an "all or nothing" state of mind too. Well that must me the epicurean in me too. What about you? What is your amount of being a stoic (All or Nothing) or epicurean (step by step)? Did you test your future/ present partner on it?
P.s. If you can smile :) on this week's blog you are my friend. If you can't or feel like sending me hate mail -you will be my friend as well- than consider this blog as your mirror and please check your amount of being too stoic.
Quote:
"Some thoughts about the Stoics and the Epicurean
Who are nowadays the Stoics and the Epicurean? How can you recognize them? What do they look like? That isn’t hard at all. A stoic is an individual who obstinately beliefs in his moral mission: a mission he has to fulfil. He always is in need of a Great Plan that gives his life meaning, but in fear that it will actually be fulfilled, he chooses a very difficult, probably not fulfillable plan, that above all can not be fulfilled by normal human beings. What counts is to suffer in name of something that has moral meaning.
Everybody who believes in the one, eternal, indissolubable Great Love is a stoic. It is clear that they will never find that, but that doesn’t keeps them from furiously searching for it without compromising. There motto is: ‘Everything or Nothing’.
Christians, real christians are stoics. There final destination is Paradise and they will reach that by purification of the body and elevation of the soul. Their favourite slogans: ‘We are born to suffer’ and ‘The first will be the last’. Marxist are stoics: their destination is Justice for All, without any exception. They are also confronted with a destination that will not be fulfilled on short term: the Sun of the Future, the word tells it all, will be catched in Future. In expectation of it revolutions, dictatorship of the proletariat and other equally difficult phases are on the program.
Marco Panella is a stoic: he wants above all to solve the problem of Hunger in the World, in the whole World. If we would propose a less ambitious program, e.g. the hunger in the Napolitian quarter San Carlo all’Arena, he would refuse that immediately, probably because the target could be reachable. And because he lives in a country where tortures hardly exist, he is forced to torture himself and that is the reason why he fasts, he ties himself and suffers.
The epicurean is made of other stuff: because he is aware of the fleeting of life, he is targeting for goals who are reachable on short term.
An epicurean is an employer who will ask for raise of salary to solve a problem within a year.
An epicurean is someone who prefers to vote on a party who doesn’t promise him Justice, Freedom and Happiness, but a gradual improvement of his life, through a policy of step by step.
An epicurean is someone who will continue his relationship with his partner although he is no longer really in love, but who arranged living with his partner in which they agree to differ.
The advantages and disadvantages are equally divived between the two worlds of thought. On the whole epicurean are more serene, more in peace with the world, almost always cheerful. On the other hand stoic work hard: when they play cards they will do that with much dedication. Epicurean do hold politics in contempt and they will almost never succeed as big industrial: he cares more about his private-life than about society. To become Pirelli, Pirelli must have been a stoic: an epicurean would have been satisfied with a little tire-store.
It would not be a bad idea when partners, before they get married, instead watching the stars and there constellations, they would measure the amount of being a stoic or epicurean of their future man or wife."
Quote. Source: Luciano de Crescenzo, ‘Storia della filosofia greca, da Socrate in poi’. Translation by @JeanD99 from dutch into english.
No comments:
Post a Comment