@The Dilemma of 'The Calling In Life'@

Is there a thing called passion or rather what we say 'the calling in life' and if there is then for someone who died cleaning toilets and gutters , are we ready to accept this as his calling or do we believe that only the chosen few in this world get that privilege . The existentialists would of course deny the possibility of such a calling for they believe in the freedom and choice of each individual therefore each one's calling is a matter of his or her own choice . If that be the case how is anyone to decide his or her calling. Death is supposedly the best thing that could have happened to man. In the face of immortality would you and I have been able to prioritize and make choices and thereby decide upon the calling of life. The fact that we all have a limited time here on this earth to choose and enjoy, to choose and suffer accordingly is perhaps what helps each one of us to prioritize. As per existentialists if we go believing that essence is a matter of choice which follows existence with no prior given nature , how is man to decide his calling. The very fact that a person makes a choice , chooses one over the rest , implies he has a guiding principle which in turn emphasizes that he has a certain nature in accordance with which he made the choice . I also agree to the fact that often this principle is a matter of choice , but even then, the fact that man makes a choice in terms of his principles, again implies that there lies a given nature which overrides the principle and thus helps man to choose. The choices that we make are all towards the same end( seek pleasure and avoid pain) and so it is akin to saying that a multitude of roads start and end at common points. The choices that we make are perhaps then an illusion we tend to indulge ourselves to achieve the common end. In such a scheme of things the choices are all significant or insignificant . Their worth depends solely on the amount of importance we attach to it and also by its coherence with the given nature . This nature of man is the pursuit of pleasure or satisfaction and the abstinence from pain or discontent.

Can Faith Be Blind ???

Man's ability to rationally relate the causes and consequences and thereby further integrate his knowledge on its basis is perhaps one of the most important factors to which we owe the overall process of evolution. How far is it correct (on a moral and ethical basis) to snatch away from him a right such as this. Rationality is perhaps in the nature of man. Do we not take away from him a tool , a means and render him handicapped and at the mercy of others who still wield this power of rationality and logic. Can we ever explain 'Blind Faith' logically? Can faith be blind? Let us see the issue from a logical perspective . Considering that a person X says he has blind faith in another person Y. Now the fact that he could choose between this 'Blind Faith' and some other or between a 'Blind Faith' and 'No Blind Faith' implies that he has a certain principle which he considers the basis for having made this choice . This indicates that the 'Blind Faith' is based on some principle which overrides it and his blind faith shall continue only as long as the 'Blind Faith' and his principle are coherent. In the event of a conflict between the choice taken and the underlying principle a person will have to disregard either the choice or mould his principle accordingly to finally make them coherent. What can be concluded , is that even when one makes a choice unconsciously there lies an underlying principle of which he might be oblivious . But the fact that there lies such a principle negates the notion of a 'Blind Faith'.

The Paradox of Freedom Of Choice

"To think is to Realize the Ignorance that Deludes the Sense of Freedom"

"When you start thinking you realize you have stepped on the road to freedom, by the time the realization sinks in completely you have traded your one form of subjugation for the other, feeling contented that now you are free.May be we were all born to look for the corners in a circle."

Make people feel that they think and they will love you, make them think and they will hate you. I don't remember who put this intelligent notion to words but he was right for a major part of the herd, leaving of course those who could be clubbed as 'extremistan'. The above quote beautifully points out the irony and the resentment that goes along with freedom. I believe that once you have satisfied your basic needs which are the ones needed for survival everything that you do thereafter is a choice and thus a manifestation of your freedom. To make choice is to assert freedom is what I believe. But do you really wanna make it , Yes you think so, NO you don't want to, why? Coz with freedom comes a responsibility , a feeling which opens up each time you retrospect your decisions , you are encompassed in guilt feeling responsible for your failure , a feeling which rises each time you judge yourself no matter on the basis of whose standards your own or those you believe to be your own.

The principles that guide you now may not be the ones you followed when you committed the act currently in retrospection. These principles are your standards the lenses you use to look at the world around, the yardstick you use to judge yourself and those around These principles are your chains of freedom.

The freedom we so often talk about and believe to be each one's right is something probably very few of us understand in its true sense and its true implications. As Oscar Wilde put it "When God wants to punish man he simply answers his prayers"

The freedom we desire is one from responsibility, freedom from our own nature, freedom from our own self, freedom to not answer, freedom to do wrong consciously, freedom from guilt. But are these possible , can i run away from who i am , can i be perfectly logical and ideally selfish, an epitome of free dom.
I believe the answer is no. We all live with some form of principle guiding our lives consciously or unconsciously , chosen or imposed, rejoiced or suffered, This guiding gleam in our lives is both the support and the handicap of our lives.The fact that there is a principle which guides our lives means that there is an idea we believe which overrides our existence thereby crumbling the sense of freedom so far developed. To say I am free is to say I follow no rules , no principles. No principle overrides the choices[I make these choices coz me and others here on this earth are not immortal and i have a limited amount of time ,thus to choose and do what i like the most ] I make , but each of your choice has to be guided by a motive which in turn has to be guided by some form of principle thereby absolute freedom in life is a contradiction unto itself.

But the form of imposition laid on us is something we can undoubtedly choose. For instance you could choose to be a slave of your own impulses or the long drawn traditions , you could agree to submit before what others desire of you or submit before those same desires considering them to be your own, The choice we have now is not between freedom and 'no_freedom' but rather between the form of 'no_freedom'.

Choose your form of subjugation, the principle you would like to live by is the chain you have chosen to restrict yourself.