Moraali käy yli sairaiden yms hoitamisen oikeuden * Moralis more important than nursing

Minua ihmetyttää tuo, onko hoitoalojen ammattilaisille, poliisille ym ihmisille selvä tuo, että mitä moraali sanoo siitä, kuka saa hoitaa ketä ja että mitä saa määrätä ja mitä ei. Yleensä kai hoitoalan ihminen haluaisi mielellään hoitaa jotakin presidentin tapaista esim. henkilöä, jolla on jokin virka, taito tai vaikutusvalta, ja ajattelisi siitä saavansa etua itselleen, lähinnä vaikutusvaltaa ja rahallista hyötyä kai ja pelottelumahdollisuuden. Mutta moraalin näkövinkkelistä on niin, että kullakin ihmisellä on vastuuntuntonsa määrä, miten laajalti kantaa asioista ja ihmisistä vastuuta, ja mikä taas jää tuon yksilön vastuuntuntoisuuden ulkopuolelle, huolehtimatta, sekä lisäksi on taitojen määrä, esim. ymmärrys ja taidot kullakin elämänalueella sekä havaintokyky ja havaintovarmuus sen osana. Hoitohenkilökunta ei saisi päättää mistään laajemmasta kuin mistä kantaa vastuuta, siis esim. vain hoitotyöstä vastuuta kantava ei saisi päättää presidentin tai muunkaan itseään laajemmalti vastuuta kantavan asioista mitään, vaan vastuuntuntoisen olisi itse saatav päättää kaikki, jottei vaikutuksia mihinkään laajempiin kysymyksiin tulisi ties miten pahaatekeviltä tai huolehdittavat asiat hunningolle jättäviltä. Yleensä se, joka ei ole kiinnostunut jostakin aiheesta, teloo sen kuin tökerö pahoipitelijä, jos siihen puuttuu, kuin mikä lie huonontyyppinen diktaattori, jonka käsissä maan asiat menevät huonosti. Sen sijaan henkilö, joka huolehtii jostakin alueesta hyvin, yleensä antaa sen ihmisten olla ihan vapaasti, järjestääpähän vain jonkin tervehenkisesti toiumivan kätevän avun johonkin yleisesti toivottuun hyväätekevään.

Se, että joku on hierargiassa korkealla ei merkitse, ettei hänen kanssaan noudatettaisi mitään pelisääntöjä, vaan heidänkin kanssaan on oltava moraalinen ja tervejärkinen sekä tervehenkinen.
Esim. jos joku on moraalisempi kuin mitä laki edellyttäisi ja hyvällä ymmärryksellä varustettu, niin ehkä joku sanoo hänen olevan lain yläpuolella mutta se siis merkitsee, että hänen kanssaan noudatetaan lakia täydesti paitsi ehkä joustetaan siitä moraalisempaan suuntaan.

* * *
engl. translation

I am puzzled about whether people working in medicine or in nursing kidn of work, and whether police and  other peoole have been made clear what moral says about who is allowed to nurse whom and what one is allowed to command and what not. Usually people in nursing type of work would like to nurse someone like a president, who has some job position, skill or influence, and they would think taht nursing such would give them benefit, mainly influence and money benefit and propably also the ability to scare people, threaten them. But moral says that each individual has one's own amount of carrying responsibility about people and things, and what is left outside that area, not taken care of, and in addition an amount of skills, for example understanding and skills on each area of life and perception ability and how sure it is. Those in nursing type of professions should not be allowed to decide anything larger, anything more important or wider than what they themselves carry responsibility over, so for example a person caring only about nursing should not decide anything about a president or anyone else carrying wider responsibility than she herself / he himself, instead those who carry responsibility should be allowed to decide everything so as to avoid influences from evil people and from irresponsible people. Usually a person who is not interested in some subject, breaks it like as if in a fight, if one interferes with it, like a poor dictator that ruins one's country. Instead a person who cares well for some area, usually lets those people live freely and just arranges some needed generally wanted moral thing in healthy well working ways.

Someone being high in a hierargy does not mean that one should not follow any rules of game with him /her, instead with him/her one needs to behave morally and according to common sense with a picture of the whole and with healthy spirit. For example if someone is more moral than what law requires and with a good understanding, maybe someone says that he/she is above the law, but it means that with him/her one should also follow law fully but maybe be inclined to even more moral behaviour than the law is.

When there is some common sense lacking in the laws or some big problem needing correcting, correcting those may in common sense like ways like is fair go above the laws.
In Finland there is the saying "Emergency does not read the law." meaning that you can for example steal something not so important in order to help someone in an emergency.

"Live and let others live" also if there are lots of murders

The Finnish rule "Live and let others live!" means roughly that "it is ok to be selfish (in ways positive for happy life) but not to disturb the lives of others, not to cause unfairly harm to others".
So if there for example is a meadow full of insects and they eat lots of other insects and birds too eat them, one could still use this rule:
Just avoid things like torture and ruining the society and instead preferably make murders, possibly with cannibalism but with the consequences of each murder and especially of many murders and decisions to not to murder someone, taken into account morally, wishing for the good of the society and of the world in the long run..
That is just why we have armies and police, even education: to prevent worse, even if it means killing many. That is just how societies work well, protect good life by common effort. If some insect eats the corpse, I do not see how it would somehow be wrong in essence, it sounds like natural, but of course if one makes it a habit to kill without regard on whom one kills and why, just kill somebody when one is hungry, does one then kill the friendly morally ok society members while enemies of the society keep distance and that is wrong, just against the idea, against the right to kill someone, namely the enemies of good life should be killed and those creating good life in the society and in the world should be given well room to live in and safety & fair support.

Why emperors maybe stayed in power

From my blog http://aboutmytexts.blogspot.fi/2015/08/my-birthday.html
"(7. March 2016
As a child I had the last name Hari, so my name Kaisa Hari bought the associations "keisari" = emperor and "tsaari" = Russian tsar (emperor). So I took it to my task to cultivate some of the good sides that people need to have to be good or at least worthy emperors, but I did not connect that to the emperor of China but to rulers of vast areas in general. At the same time I valued grass roots democracy in the Finnish way and not kingdoms as forms of government, much less empires.)
(24. August 2016
I did not have some role or ways of behaviour emperor like, not even sometimes. Instead I thought of emperors as persons who arrange things that people in wide areas need, who find solutions to difficult problems on wide areas of the nation and do that via thinking, discussing, understanding the world, cultures, different types of people, how they interact, what they need and how to arrange such, etc. So I thought of the position of an emperor like an ordinary citizen who in some task deserves well such a high position, negotiating about the affairs of the state. But emperor managing to do that more often, solve problems, negotiate, discuss, find solutions, support good causes, know things and workings of the nation and it's neighbours well - kind of like a relative for an ordinary person, taking part in discussion about something because one has often something valuable to offer, worthy of that role and partly because he/she is often around. So I thought that emperor needs support, needs to show his/her skilledness again and again and again.)"


13. April 2019   In high position generally it is important that such jobs are done with good quality for the good of the country and the world and the people, animals etc affecvted. So high position isn't usually given very high rights to decide about things in the country and the world. Instead in important questions like whether a country enters a war, many groups of the country, possibly all, are listened to, all wise views are listened to and facts taken into account wisely and a synthesis build and that wise view formed by all wise together and by the interests of the different groups affected, decides the important things instead of someone commanding. Sometimes it is somehow good to say that someone decided the thing, but that is just figurehead like or like a journalist explaining. It is important that the best options ought to be chosen in important matters of the country, and so all wise ought to have the possibility of affecting things responsibly and with good quality, and so it is unlikely that empires would have worked well with dictator like rights of ruler, democracy is much more likely among the wise, just discussions etc and common views about what to do and those are just mentioned as if the emperor had decided building a railroad or the like infrastructure etc.
On the other hand, people in high positions or handling important questions ought to carry responsibility about those things and their effects at large, but in their personal lives they have the same freedom that so responsible, fair, wise, healthily living people with so healthy spirit as they have in these things generally have the right to. If they choose, especially if they choose extansively, something that does not fit together with such tasks, for example if they like some country that does not fit with the important tasks, then they cannot take part in the important tasks, since they have that fault, and so they are more marginal and lower in hierarchy, but on the other hand by being responsible and wise enough, they have earned personal freedom, inside civilized ways, just like others too have on the same conditions the right to.

A sense of different areas of life as interests

From my blog http://parantamisesta.blogspot.fi

A translation from Finnish:

"A282. Evil and as cures "live and let others live, sefishness, healthy spirit, pictures of wholes and a sense of different areas of life as interests
If the human nature is the same as healthy natural ages old ways of living, it is quite neutral in questions of good and evil: both tough in the hard world and also taking care of the common future to a good state. If onbe makes divisions right, one could see human action as consisting of parts of healthy ways of living with healthy spirit, and in that sense as morally ok. But if one makes large thought errors or estimates areas affected wrng, then the end result can be evil. In estimating right areas to affect the rule "Live and letr others live" is a good rule, which also leaves the individuals so much room to live in that their need to do evil things to get space to live in gets small. Healthy common sense and pictures of wholes are needed as helping aids in that.
If somebody influences all wrong, he or she is typically in a different area of life than what he or she is really interested in  and often in other size class too. It is usual that he/she claimed to be fine in every way and good enough for just about anything, but those things have been parts of the dream way of life of others and not his/her own things, which could have been found by specializing into them, but others would not have considered such fine, interesting or even valued but which for the individual would have been his/her dream life.
It is easiest to get everything right if one is with healthy spirit. That is teh ages old right answer to everything. And selfishness is a part of that but demands getting the areas affected right.

http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2015/11/healthy-ways-of-living.html"

Finding safety

"generally one can
find safety if one is in accord with the wishes of a very wide
majority of the surrounding people. And there are many ways to that.
Three ways that I consider among the best are following the rule "Live
and let others live!" (See Learn the skills of Finns
http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/), selfishness-based moral in the
same blog and more widely moral at large (See
http://healthilymoral.blogspot.fi) and then my own social skill from
my twenties, see World is of love (a mechanical model)
http://healthilymoral.blogspot.fi/2011/08/world-is-of-love.html .
Common sense and a picture of the whole are also needed, see the first
mentioned blog."