there's a whole romantic/bohemian notion about the only true link to happiness is to be yourself. accept yourself for what you are - and all will be good.
i s'pose the other maxim that conflicts with that would be, "not to settle for 2nd best".
what if being yourself is merely settling? some people suffer their whole lives because they refuse to 'settle' and keep trying to change themselves - and in the same vein, they just end denying themselves.
but i guess it's about changing yourself till you find 'yourself'. but some people just don't realise that they've found themselves. *there's a thought.
however, doesn't that bring us back to the 1st question? ie what if being yourself is not enough?
2nd question, 'not enough' for who? yourself or somebody else? if its the latter - as italian mobsters say - 'fogget about it...' but if its the former, then there's a serious problem.
the apparent answer is supposed to be that, it'll eventually work out in the end. the fatalist would say 'what if it never works out?'
it's pointless to carry on a conversation with a fatalist.
call me the bohemian / romantic type of person, cause if i became a fatalist - life would be way too long...
'nuff said.
1 comment:
a fatalist is someone who believes in fate. a person who believes in romantics would fall within that definition.
Post a Comment