Learning to think is a difficult process
Problems with thinking are that people believe, that they should not practice or learn thinking. In some cases, people think that thinking is a skill, which is stable during all life. But the thing is that our image of the world is changing, and also when we would become older, and get more life experience, we would find another aspect from the very well known things.
Also, the way to get information is changing, and that thing would change our way to think about things. Life experience and mass media like the internet are telling things, what we ever imagined to become public. That thing what the Internet has been bringing in our mind is that there could be false information, what would be used to reach political goals. But the thing is that the biggest problem with the human race is that we are reading texts and look at the new, which feels comfortable for us.
That means that we should find also other ways to see things than just what is supporting our way of think. And another problem is that we let other people think for us. If we don't use criticism that news, what is meant for supporting the political or some other agenda are more effective than they even should be. There is sometimes seen the phenomenon, that everything that is supporting our political agenda should allow, and other opinions should not even be written, because they are disturbing our visions or opinions. in the media and other discussions is one thing, what people have forgotten when they are writing stories about things like military power.
That thing is that every nation uses it's landscape as they or their leaders want. That is the thing in the law. It is made by somebody for protecting something. But even if the law justifies something, we might not like that thing. Like the law is a different thing than follow the law. We are following speed limits because the punishment would be harder than what we might get to follow the limits, and being at destiny a little bit later. This is the reason, why we are following the law.
Also writing and speaking against law and agitating people to act against the law is dangerous because we might get prosecutions about those opinions, and here I mean that the lawbook doesn't think for us. But still, we follow the law without excuses. Or at least we would not show those excuses in public by driving with very high speed against traffic rules, or I hope that nobody does those things.
That would seem a very unusual problem, because of the intelligent people are sometimes put on the stand, and people believe, that everything, what they say is always well thought and argument thing, what might be only the delusion. Even the persons, who have the highest grade of intelligence must think all sides of the things, what they are going to say.
And when we are comparing the everyday way to think about things to the philosophical way to think about things, the last one is the deeper and takes longer time than the regular way to think about things. This is the thing, what we always forget. If we would practice the philosophical or deeper way to think in supermarkets, we would become a little bit, arduous people. When we have invented things, we must realize that every single invention has two sides, and they can be used in good or bad things.
Learning of thinking consist of a neutral way to think. The neutral way to think means that there might be something, what we don't like or what is against our moral and ethic point of the view. But we must not always show great emotions for those things. If we think about rock music, we must realize that even if we would not like the fans way wear their clothes of even rock music, we don't need to show great emotions for that kind of things.
The thing that somebody listens to rock music doesn't mean that those people would give them votes in the election campaigns. And if we would be at that concert we have not had to get angry about things, what we cannot see. While thinking about this kind of questions, we are sometimes meet persons who are asking, should we think this way about things like pollution and human rights. Here I must repeat myself and say, that there is little difference between a rock concert and human rights.
One of the worst visions in people's mind is the state, what convicts the breaking the human right in the lawbook but allows those things in real life. That means that biting a person on a cell might be prohibited, but those things would not ever prosecute.
This means that authorities have the right to do what they want to do. The biggest problems with human rights are civil wars, which are caused because of the corrupted government, which breaks human rights. In those cases also guerrillas would act against human rights and international law. International law is problematic in those cases because there is no mention, what is the legal government?
The thing is that international law mentions that guerrilla is criminal, what can shot immediately after capturing. And the thing is that in international law is mentioned that every state has a right to use every kind of weapons in police actions. So in antiguerrilla operations is legal to use even chemical weapons what are inhumane weapons. And then another problem with international law is that it doesn't mention or determine, how the government should come to power. There is forgetting one thing, and that is that nations are confessing nations and states not governments.
And that legitimizes also use of guerrillas or military forces to take the rule in the nation. The thing that the leaders of the state must not even get a single vote in the elections is also one of the problems in international law. But the law is the law, and there is no determination even the length of the season of the presidency. That allows the president to sit on the office even all the life, and there is no determination either the age of the president. Those things are really interesting topics for discussions about thinking.
