Alexander Borodin - Non vowel resources of some good mood

Courage, strength, conviction: if it’s hard for you, then you climb the mountain, if it’s easy for you, then you fall into the abyss – do not forget that science has not yet reached the point where everything is good for everyone? The more you succeed in visiting large social strata and social institutions (army, prison, civil service, construction site, elsewhere), the more realistic approaches to life, the more you will understand how to behave in a particular situation, the better analysis and forecasting of situations? Some were neither in the army, nor in the prison, nor in the civil service, nor at the construction site, did they have realistic approaches to life even without these institutions, and in order to reach their level of psychological development, some needed to go to both the prison and the army? What is a pragmatic approach, and each comes to him at a different time? In the modern world, what is considered adulthood comes only at 30 or even at 40, and sometimes does not come at all – what is what is called infantilism? Earlier, in earlier periods of history, people grew up quickly – is that the whole problem? What is growing up – is it the understanding that everything around is empty, except for money?

What does it mean if it’s hard for you, then you climb the mountain, and if it’s easy for you, then you fly into the abyss – it’s something objective or simply complacency when things are worse than ever, because sometimes it’s not true that is felt in some expressions, and some kind of calming self-psychotherapy, although there is some truth, probably in some sayings, for example, such as «there would be no happiness, but unhappiness helped»,so you need to analyze each situation and not look for only one minuses, but pluses, and vice versa.

In fact, judging by the actions of some professional politicians, if we take their behavior model as an example, we should strive to create the possibility of realizing emotional decisions, but so far there is no such possibility, emotions have to be restrained to varying degrees depending on the situation. In modern conditions of life, one has to use intelligence to satisfy emotional needs and get a little closer to one’s emotional goal, many do so, they would be ready to come to what they want by any means, but are forced to restrain themselves within certain limits due to prevailing circumstances caused by the realities of modernity, and realize your emotion a little bit, use the intellect, which is aimed at finding a way to realize emotion in full, and not a little bit, for example, how any businessman wants to multiply the number of people of the opposite sex that he has, for this he must think about where to get resources for this – money.

It turns out that in most cases, intelligence is needed for most people just to find ways to realize their emotions (to throw out, for example, their hidden aggression on the offender not by physical impact, but by writing a denunciation (anonym)) and physical needs, with the exception of probably, there can only be the same scientists and astronauts and similar people – pick up a laptop or satellite tuner and say to yourself: «This (computer) was invented by someone who has no emotions, otherwise he would not be able to concentrate on anything».

Let’s digress again: as you know, politics implies a balance of power between states and continents, and this is correct, since the world should be multipolar (higher forces probably want to see competition in everything), and there is nothing wrong with someone striving for power, most importantly, to like it, and if you like it, then the person is in his place. Indeed, if only one state rules the whole world, then there will not be what they call and consider freedom, and freedom is the realization of what the higher forces put into a person, starting from instincts, ending with the implementation of intellectual activity, higher forces, judging by the fact that there is such a profession as a politician, and the presence of different languages that people speak, see the existence of multipolarity, that is, the presence of competition, as appropriate? The role of a politician in society to save the state from chaos, to build civilization, only for some it is better, but for others worse?

A person, at least one who is engaged in science, should not and cannot, according to his psychological constitution, think about everyday things – is this an axiom? Who is Yusu Yundur, and did he speak the truth?

Scientists and astronauts were mentioned for a reason – it’s a layer of people that, if not completely, then more than the average person, has left the instincts and emotions that are common to all biological organisms, so if someone is not a scientist, then he lives in a world where he is either in a sense in certain situations a hunter or a victim, and he must reckon with this in order to survive, although in connection with the achievement of civilization this is not so pronounced in some places.

Caught at a bus stop with a friend, turned his and his attention to a lying drunk person, the approximate response of a friend to my attention to a drunk was the following: «You are above him, do not pay attention to him.» Moreover, the acquaintance was not a supporter of any ideologies in the political sense – there are people who live by what they want to be better than others, in connection with this, some have some kind of political ideology regardless of whether they realize it or if they want it or no, and also some begin to cultivate some thoughts, turning them into political trends? We discover a new type of man-hated theory, present in some: those who seek spiritual purity in other people and hate those who do not have it – an aggressive person, and not so white and fluffy, did anyone think about this? It’s interesting how they become good and how they become evil: if someone lived in a rich place, received a large unemployment benefit, and suddenly everything changed – he needs to get up early in the morning to go to work and not to somewhere in the office, but to the construction site, and to engage in physical labor, will he remain kind? A simple test of kindness – you live in a rich place, you don’t work all your life sitting on benefits, and at some point they tell you that there is no more money in the budget in order to maintain your standard of living and people like you, and you need to go to work at a construction site or factory, but there is a way out, you can send troops to the same rich place and take wealth, naturally, there will be human casualties – whatever you choose, hard physical work or send troops and take everything else and further, due to this, to live without working? Can people’s relations be built on trust, as K. Marx dreamed, or is there always and will be hidden motivation behind the official one? Some figures must justify each step, and do not always these justifications reflect true motives?

The children’s film «Auburn, honest, in love» (USSR, 1984, directed by Leonid Nechaev), which tells about the decency of someone who cannot be a priori decent by nature in the usual sense of the word – since he is a fox predator.

It is generally accepted that those who are called dishonest, greedy, cunning, deceitful people (they need these qualities to achieve their goals and, perhaps, not some ambitious ones, but just so as not to starve to death), this is something bad, because everyone considers bad those who did not do good to them or did what they call filth (apparently, people are programmed).

Gospel of John 8:32. … and know the truth, the truth will set you free. And you will meet when you are not waiting, and you will find it not where you are looking…