Is high praise received from a bad person really so remarkable and something to be joyful about? And what distinguishes a good person from a bad person: is a person categorised as bad if they act unjustly towards all or ar they spared from this definition if they act this way only towards a select few?

A bad action towards someone is still bad even if the outcome is good, following Kantian logic. 

In the scenario of choosing: are you willing to shoot someone and saving other two people, or do you not want to point any bullets and get all three killed? The trade-off is your conscience. But wouldn’t you have a clearer conscience if the outcome was as positive as possible, so the maximum number of people get spared?

But are you willing to live with your hands stained with blood is the real conundrum.

Which of the two options you choose is actually irrelevant, because lives are lost either way. And actually that’s the whole point: whether you be outright a villain or be righteous, someone gets always hurt. They say you’re always a villain in someone’s story. 

The feelings of everyone around you are always influenced by you and viceversa you get influenced by those around you. 

Humans are social animals. But animals are brutal and cunning. 

You can do everything right and try to silence your emotions and sicken yourself or you can loudly declare them to the point people start ignoring you since you’re always talking. 

Or also you can try to distance yourself from the negativity and simply cut people off.

But the distinctive factor is that humans crave to cause pain as much as they receive it, so they become scathing in both words and attitudes. 

In doing so they do right by themselves, which is of course commendable, but what are the limits: bullying, public shaming, fighting, etc..

At the end of the day you don’t know whether the one conversation you had with a person is the one conversation that that person had with anyone the whole day. And you don’t know how much they’ll weigh your words on a scale later on when they’re alone. 

You don’t know whether even their lashing out is maybe a way of asking for help for a situation they themselves don’t understand and aren’t able to navigate. 

Whether the waters they’re treading are closer to a storm at sea, hitting an iceberg, or touching land. 

But if you’re kind to everyone, who can you be unkind to? How can you evaluate if someone can take your allegedly deserved harsh words?

You never know. 

Modern life is full of inputs and societal expectations, and also because of the fastness of technology and it’s ever changing nature and, first and foremost it’s incredible speed, we feel left behind: because we can’t keep up with the super human speed of machinery and also witnessing the collapse of the whole system which works towards the somehow unreachable goal of “innovation”.

Simultaneously we are also privy to a constant window on the life of others, which yes can have some tinted glass installed, but what matters is the fact that the glass is see-through. Not the fact that it may be grainy and distorted by design. 

The thousand of windows allow us to spy on others and then commiserate on how much life left us behind: because there exists necessarily a perpetrator, and that’s hopefully not us, because then we would be the masters of our own failures. So yes it must be life’s fault.

But is it even a success or failure, failing at the rat race in which we are in against our peers? 

Isn’t it more important to be true to oneself and observe the weather?