Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

I've realized that I'm becoming exactly the kind of person I didn't know I was capable of becoming


Experience has taught me to let go a little of principles and being overly attached to being a good person. It's just the way the world works. I am every bit and perhaps even more scheming, immoral and devoid of empathy than the people who made me this way.

Perhaps I shouldn't give them so much credit. Maybe I was this underneath, all along.

I don't necessarily feel bad about who I am or what I'm becoming. It's all about adapting. Humanity is overrated.

There's much to be learned from the worst people who have ever lived. They're completely devoid of morals, lack empathy and will do anything and everything to forward their own agenda. And they tend to win. That's what really matters in the end.

Religion and morality makes people weak, ignoring reality and forcing them to devote their lives to some fictitious, moralistic ideals, promising a reward in "heaven"- like some fairy tale. But it makes them suffer here

We often tell ourselves we're too nice, or too soft, to get ahead in life. But every civilisation, every glorious empire, every flourishing nation is built on the blood and skeletons of those whom it was necessary to eliminate- those, whose continued existence would make it impossible for that empire to exist.

In the end, it's all subjective. And the wicked tend to win. We should learn the most from those who we temporarily most despise- our enemies. For they have something to teach us.
MasterofNone · 26-30, M
We are responsible for much more than what we confine ourselves to
I am not scheming, immoral and devoid of empathy but I am equally responsible for it to exist on the planet because I don't always call out people when they do that. So there's always that.

Morals of Killing
I don't think killing people for a greater good means you are immoral. There's Assassin's Creed (a fictional reality, I know!) which shows us how after each assassination they sent off the deceased with respect no matter what bad they had done. Same thing seen in Ramayana and Mahabharata and countless other stories. Humans mostly kill out of greed or anger or jealousy but my point is that it is possible to kill for righteousness. Who decides what's right ? That's subjective, of course lol.

The reason why I emphasize on righteousness is because all other things (greed, jealousy, anger) are never fulfilled and they keep haunting a person even after they have achieved their goals.

The only point at where I differ is the notion (I may have interpreted wrongly) that "we need to change in order to fit the world's ways" You didn't say it directly but I thought this was implied. I want it to be the case otherwise.

What I have to say about that is it is a personal choice to :-

1) be authentic, happy but have the possibility of dying by treachery and never "succeeeding". Must clarify here that being authentic does NOT mean being a moral person. It's about being who you are at the deepest of your core rather than becoming what the world turns you into. So even the nice and moralistic people can be as less authentic as are the scheming people.

2) become completely superficial and unnatural to "achieve success"

The first has a possibility of 100% success. It has no requirements, only a decision. Yet, is harder in reality.

The second has a possibility of relatively lower success. I believe it follows Pareto's Law. Few would succeed, most would perish.

There's a reason why people like Jesus, Buddha, Newton, Einstein (who did nothing much at a larger scale) are considered more influential today than people like Rockefeller and Genghis Khan. (not categorizing them as together in terms of morals). Even in India, it is Gandhi who is more influential than Nehru. Why ? Because these people have the wisdom to be authentic first, then go for whatever that'll influence the rest of the world. Even if you don't you'll be satisfied.

 
Post Comment