When I decided to become a teacher, my choice caused a lot of raised eyebrows. To say that my parents and friends were surprised means to put it in a very mild way. The matter is that I have always been a very apt student with a huge learning potential, but with a significant complication: I was considered by my teachers to be bad-tempered, noisy and difficult to deal with, while I considered them to be boring, mediocre and very often unprofessional. So, my career path choice seemed really very strange. When my father asked me about the reasons, I simply explained that I wanted to be a good teacher.
History is an odd thing. When many centuries ago Germanic tribes of Angles, Saxons and Jutes, who were speaking a number of different dialects, invaded Britain, there were very few chances that their language would survive and become one of the most widely spoken languages on the planet and definitely the most important one for the international communication. However, this unbelievable thing happened and now each day more and more people want to learn the English language.
As early as I could remember myself, my memories have been colored with melancholy. Yes, I admit it: I am a person who loves being sad. As a child, I loved sad fairy tales, as a teenager I loved sad novels and films, which made my parents worry a lot. I realized that I did not meet their expectations: in their ideal world a happy person must irradiate joy all the time. In my view, this state of constant life enjoyment looked slightly idiotic. And I kept asking myself if sadness is really so bad.
I have always been fascinated by dreams, mysterious images that come at night taking us to the world of our subconsciousness. Why is it that some dreams are black and white and some are colored? Why do we sometimes see prophetic dreams and can predict the events before they really happen? Why do we sometimes remember the dreams in a very detailed way, but sometimes do not remember them at all?
The world today is definitely a better place to live than it was one hundred years ago. Work today is not so physically demanding as it used to be, people seem to have more free time (at least, it is supposed to be so if they spend less time at work), manual house work was replaced by washing machines, dish washers and microwave ovens, communication systems made it easy to keep in touch with our relatives and friends, new technologies supplied us with a number of entertainment activities which our grandparents could not even think of. “The brave new world” of the twenty first century is definitely worth living in.
Do you have huge plans each day, but never complete even a third of them? Do you promise yourself every evening that you will go jogging in the morning, but when the morning comes you simply cannot make yourself do it? Can you always find ten reasons why your desire to get or achieve something will never come true? Then these simple guidelines on how to fight your laziness are for you:
At the first glance, the old and universally known principle “an eye for an eye” seems to be perfectly logical. You have harmed someone? You will receive the same amount of harm as a punishment. But being looked upon closer, the principle leaves much to be desired.
Some people tend to say that morality isn’t necessary to achieve anything in life, because every day we see people who are immoral and yet seem to be quite happy with their lives. But the one important thing that is overseen in this viewpoint is that they are immoral from the point of view of the speaker and not their own. With the exception of some fundamentals, the image of morality for one person may considerably differ from what this image is for someone else.
To kill a person is the ultimate evil one man can cause to another, because it is not reversible and, in fact, brings the existence of a man as we know him to an end. Can such act be ever justified?
There are different opinions in what concerns this issue. Some think that killing people is inconsistent with the status of human. Some say that it is alright in any circumstances when it may be useful. Between these two extremes there is a whole philosophy of opinions, tinges of opinions, schools of thought and ideologies.
But what if we look at the question from the point of view of logic?
Throughout the history of mankind there always were people, ideologies and organizations that used the phrase “The end justifies the means” as their motto or the leading principle. Its immediate meaning is as follows – if you have high, noble, important goal, you are free to resort to anything, however immoral it seems even to yourself. It may sound logical to some people – wouldn’t a just cause, usually restrained by its own moral limitations, be more effective if it borrows something from the repertoire of its enemies?