Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Correcting if some part of the society is opposite of what is the idea in having it

Sometimes rigid rules are difficult to follow and difficult to put to practise. And so some parts of the society may in practise be quite opposite to what they ought to be, for example the police for crimes instead of opposing them. This is often at least partly a question of the skill level of the people in that profession and of the environment. Very basic things are easier to understand, at least if one has studied them, and so they more often et right. On the other hand more complex advanced things may be so full of dependencies on this and that, that poeple do not get right what is the idea in the goal, and so the task has become impossible or goes in practise wrong. Like for exampe if the police is too rule like, just about all forces in the society pulling to other directions, it is then much more difficult to put to practise than just going through the grounds for basic arrangements in common sense objective conversations that understand about life. But very basic isn't the same as very stupid, since with more skill one can find more common sense like answers.
Another thing to take into account is the motivcation of the workers: what kind of jobs would they be suited to? And what country they long for, which country's ways and values they seek to follow and advance in the environment?

Sunday, March 4, 2018

An actor is not in safety

Usually in a society things run quite ordinary routes and if something goes wrong, the people around try to correct things back to normal, back to well. But that demands that they can notice the situation. Often problems are caused by criminals, and so it matters a lot that wehn you are deep in trouble no-one manages to make you look perfectly fine. That is so for roughly honest people without much acting skills, but for actors with high skill the safety net is lacking since they can be pressured to acting that all is well, and so the ordinary safety nets and emergency helps of the society do not come to question, and so an actor can be very miserable, for example a dug addict in addition to other problems. Yet one could always comform to well behaving ways and good will, kind of follow the ways of the rest of the society, if one is an ordinary person and does not want to reveal everything about oneself, but so one would be protected somewhat like one maybe supposes that an actor would be - well, but an actor isn't, since mostly there are quite many criminally inclined and foreign intersts around.

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Protecting press

Since the beginning of November last year, has our local countryside town's newspaper's journalists disappeared and replaced by actors who are not interested in the subjects they write about but who are very interested in being in sight and maybe messing how the society is run. As far as I know, such usually does not happen in Finland but maybe happens abroad. I got the idea that the main motivation is being in sight, in important places, replacing valued people. Such seems to happen when ordinary people are not sincere but kind of pretending or acting, so that they are kind of like actors deeds, and so an actor thinks that that is all that the position is about. So it is likely to happen in places where people tend to act a lot. And especially if the contents, the idea in that kind of work and it's motivation are not emphasized. Whoever makes the newspaper ought to be skilled in the things they write about and not a young unexperienced person. They also should have those things in their liuves, be sincerely intewrested in them and not in entirely differemt things in that context. Being famous or in sight is a work to be done with skill, not some position in which to do something else. People value the person in the position for what they learn from him or her. Only mistakes in communication, not real position, come from person without teaching skills being in such position.

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

Politics, rigid thought forms, hierargies, skill and democracy

I do not know so much of politics, but it seems that in the old times when Finladn was young, there were more thoughts and ideals leading and nowadays some tv shows with lied looks, not so much sincere facts. his seems to connect with foreigners wanting to learn about Finland arranging things peacefully, and so foreign errors made visible in the media, ruining Finnish ways. And it seems to connect with too rigid forms overruling the freedomof individuals of so the freedom of the people. Politics seeks to be accessible for an as wide audience of Finnish adults as possible, partly for kids too. That means that some normal, often repeated thought and values of the parties are simple and simple in form and try to apply to many things at once. Because they are simple, some good speakers for them are not at all intelligent, more like discussing social people taking opart in everyday life, seeing this and that point as they are told about them and repeating them later. This simplicity is needed in speaking for crowds and media. But it shoudl be also outspokenness in grounds for values, in the pictures of the world used, and not just empty words repeated. For the situations where there aren't so many lsiteners at the same time or when oneassociates with one group only like with some association and it's members, one can then use a more intelligent approach, discuss thing more at lenght, yet not making it a separate endeavour like a mindless idiot would do.
Poltics is also influenced by the need of running a demicracy in the middle of foreign influencies, which may be disguised as the influencues of big companies etc. Foreign countries lack Finnish ground for Finnish decisions, so one task of polityics is to go through the different ground for political decisions in the media and also in smaller circles, to teach them. So politics is a discussion also in thsi sense. Often foreigners are interested in economical benefit. To create economical benefit the wholes in the society which create that benefit ought to be well kept, i.e. whole, well arranged, well working, not exhausting the gorund for such benefit in the future, the society running smoothly at that place, getting support from the other parts of the society and from the workers, using a good understanding in these and so giving the workers and their families also a good life, a good society to live in. This kind of arrangements are a good cultural influence from Finland to abroad, but they should not be copied detailedly but instead their basci grounds understood and new arrangements made in each country by thinking these things through in their country, climate, culture, national character, values of people about what life shoudl be like, what they bother about in their society, what isgood for them, how is a good wuise future quaranteed for the soceity etc. This is not so difficult to think through as it might appear. Just think of one individual or type of individuals in time:why are they wuilling to go to work, what kind of benefits they want, what kind of job they like and how well would they take care of it, what is it's value in the society, how much wage ought they get to get a good life and what other arrangements and possibilities in the society they need, want, which things are good for them and which unwise and ought to be avoided. And so what a good society be like in that climate. What would it bother about, what would it follow, how skilled would it be, what is know about the long time endurancy of such cultural features and benefits, what should they avoid and how they keep way from ruining such things, which areas of life would they specialize into, besatisfied with and who would be eager,s killed and responsible enough to care for the rest and how would the society follow such arrangements, their needs and their need for distance.

Basics of a well working society

A well working society is build on what the people are like, not on the goverment etc. Kind of what the people in their laziness do, that they continue on their old tracks that they are comfortable with, that they learn new things in areas of interest to them and do not bother about everything. So an African does not get a well working African society by travelling to Europe to learn from the European societies well functioning ways and problem solving skills. Insteadan African village has a well working well kept water well, if that is a central value for all the people in that area, if they value a good well highly enough, and if they have the sufficient skills for that in that place and culture. If they do not have the motivation, the well is likely to get spoiled. If most have a high motivation but some want to spoil the well, thoise with a high motivation kill the sabotagers, and so they still have a well working well for drinking water. Also if they traditionally did not have a good well but with extra skill they nowadays could have it and they npwadays and in the future have a high motivation for the well, they are likely to invest in things and skills that make it possible for them to learn the skills for making and maintaining well the well.

Saturday, November 4, 2017

Comparing the position sof different professions

In siciences there is a clear hierarchy of who has npticed how much. The technocal, engineering oriented notice the least. The natural sciences have objective thinking skills but largely memorized. Philosophy adds a wider view and more individual skills in objective thinking. Arts and religion seem to rise aboeve them but their position isn'ty as onefold but more likely a different position for each individual, since some individuals have basic skills lacking.

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Of women's and men's clishee like position and their clishee like rights

Especially in school age many have misunderstandings and misestimates about women's and men's rights and obligations. Women and men are usually different but not all women alike each other. So women and men have typical rights and obligations which many take as given, but which in fact have grounds on how they behave and what they wish for. So each right is conditional, even if it is a typical right of that gender. Women's rights often are like using well cultivated things in the society, meant for good life, but they are on the condition that you yourself cultivate such thinsg faurly. Men's rights are often of the type that the less able ought to be helped, i.e. adviced by the older ones, professionals etc and given help. They are on teh condition that he does not misuse such differencies in power, skill,position etc, and that he fairly does his share of the obligations. Men and boys often have rights based on being soldier like or in doing healthy good quality, but such rights demand that they use soldier like characteristics in defence of the good of the society, and not against it, and that they really do things in healthy spirit. Women have often rights to influence the lives of others, but those presuppose that one ought to influence with wisdom, wosdom of life, morally and with good will.