Even though we no longer live in Turkey, we inevitably follow the agenda. Whenever an injustice even if it happens, and it happens very often nowadays, it troubles us, it bothers us.
I once watched a YouTube video on the theme of justice experimented with monkeys. To summarize briefly, in the experiment There are two monkeys, both are given the same job. The first one is given a banana as a prize. The second one sees this, the same he's doing the work, he's given a cucumber. The monkey looks at the cucumber, looks at the researcher, takes the cucumber and throws it, he's banging on the cage, he's going crazy with rage. This is the video if you want to watch it:
When I first watched it, I thought it was a funny video and even thought how much it resembled human behavior. And then I started to think of this video every time I faced injustice.
We couldn't not explore this familiar feeling, could we?
Frans de Waal's research on primates reveals that the sense of justice is not unique to humans. Evolutionary an instinct. There is an area in our brain that is activated when unfairness is perceived, the anterior insula. The monkey has it, the human has it. also. Anger at injustice is not a weakness, it's a biological fact. (1*)
So what does this tell us?
And is there anything we can learn from this?
In Dutch there is a word called levensbeschouwing, I like it very much. Literally translated as "life view" but it encompasses something much broader. A way of understanding life, the idea of life. In short, we can call it a philosophy of life.
I think everybody already has their own philosophy of life. But some people create it consciously, some people and shapes it involuntarily in repetitive patterns without realizing it.
How do we recognize the unconscious? By looking at how we react in difficult situations. What do we do when we face injustice? Where do we go when something goes wrong? Those patterns reveal our philosophy of life.
So where should we start if we want to establish a conscious philosophy of life? I think from the most basic...
Philosophical and Scientific Background
Philosophical perspective:
What I mean by basic is that nobody wants to be treated unfairly. Not only humans, but monkeys even. This is something so universal that in almost every culture, in every age, the same principle has been expressed in different words.
Confucius
"Do not do to others what you do not want done to you." (2*)
Kant's words, although not word for word similar to this, have the same meaning: human beings as instruments. not as an end, but as a goal. Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Stoicism all have a version of this principle.
Something so universal cannot be a coincidence. Somewhere it touches a very basic truth.
John Rawls explains this with a very interesting experiment. If we want to establish a just order, we need to ask he says: what kind of order would you have if you didn't know who you would be when you set the rules of society? Rich or poor without knowing whether you'll be strong or weak. (3*)
If we bring this into our relationships, the question becomes: if I were on the other side, would I find this behavior fair?
Scientific perspective:
Adam Grant has spent many years researching giving and receiving. As a result of this research, three types of people profile emerges: givers, takers and equal exchangers. The happiest and healthiest relationships in the long run those who build are givers, but not unlimited givers. Those who give in consideration of their own rights. (4*)
This is a critical distinction. A person who constantly gives and does not expect anything in return, at some point either runs out or accumulates inside. A mutually agreeable balance makes giving sustainable.
Putting all this together, I arrive at the following principle:
I do not eat right. I will not allow myself to be defeated. (Let me give a salute to Ekrem İmamoğlu from here).
It sounds simple. But when you get into it, it covers everything: our relationships, our decisions, the way we treat ourselves and others. how we behave.
And I see that someone who really embraces this principle is both more peaceful and builds stronger relationships. Because neither exploiting nor being exploited. And this balance is one of the most solid grounds for peace.
To apply this principle, it is essential to look at where it is most tested.
My observation is that the more time we spend with whom we spend the most time, the more likely we are to take advantage of them, and vice versa. the more likely it is that our rights will be eaten by them. If we are married, with our spouse, with our children. Then with our friends, with our colleagues, with everyone we deal with.
It is easy to say "I do not do injustice" in the abstract. But who prepares breakfast in the morning, who cooks dinner, who takes out the garbage? and who does the laundry becomes concrete when it comes to everyday questions such as.
In our house, for example, there is a balance: I take out the garbage, I go to the grocery store, I usually prepare breakfast. My wife does the laundry, she usually does the cooking, but I also help out sometimes. We do the laundry together Sometimes I do the washing up, sometimes he does it, sometimes I do it, and we share setting the table and tidying up in a similar way.
We are not counting who scored how many points. Such a balance is not possible anyway. But from time to time we say, "This is still our is it good for us, are we both fair to each other?" And we update it as life changes.
This conversation is the epitome of a relationship that respects rights.
Again, I would like to share with you these practices that I prepared for myself:
Write down your philosophy of life.
We can put the question "What do I believe in life?" on paper. Not abstract, but concrete. "I do no injustice. I don't allow injustice. I do not give. I take as much as I give, I give as much as I take." Writing these things makes the unconscious conscious. Things that were blurry before writing become clear after writing.
Talking about the Give - Take balance with the people we are in a relationship with.
In our intimate relationships, first of all, with our partner or the person we spend the most time with, we ask ourselves, "How does this balance work for us?" we can have a conversation.
What is important in this conversation is that it is a conversation in which no one denigrates the other side, no one glorifies themselves, no one passes judgment. should not be. The aim of both sides should be to observe and find a balance together, not to complain. Who does what not to count what you have done, but to confirm that both parties are in agreement. Having this conversation is a protective one of the simplest steps.
Periodically update the balance.
Our lives are changing, our roles are changing. We may be the only one going to work for a period, our spouse for a period. At one time we can have a child, everything can be reshaped. Equilibrium is not a fixed thing, it is a living thing. A few times a year once is enough to ask "is he still OK?".
It is not right to accumulate small injustices. It is wrong to accumulate a small imbalance instead of talking about it in the moment. one of your silent enemies. It's hard to say when you're little. It is much more difficult when you grow up. Speaking up early protects both our right and the relationship.
Taking care of yourself first.
Before saying "I do not eat rights", it is necessary to ask: do I really take care of the other person's rights? Do I take care of my own We are usually good at protecting our rights. But how much do we see the other person's rights? To ask that question honestly, the beginning of truly embracing the principle.
The philosophy of life seems to be something big and abstract. But at its most basic it is based on something very simple: everyone, to act fairly, including ourselves.
When that monkey was throwing the cucumber, he was actually defending something very basic. We do the same thing every day, in every relationship. we defend. We just don't realize it most of the time.
Maybe this is exactly what it means to build a conscious philosophy of life: knowing what we do without realizing it, by becoming aware of it, to start doing it willingly.
Speaking of asking, I would like to leave you a question:
Is the give-and-take balance really good in your closest relationship? And when was the last time you talked about it?
See you in the next article. Until then, stay in love.
(1*) Frans de Waal, The Age of Empathy
(2*) Confucius, Analects
(3*) John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
(4*) Adam Grant, Give and Take
