There was a nuclear explosion across the whole world and you, along with 9 other people, are the only survivors and you live in a bunker. If you were all to stay in the bunker, the supplies would only last for two years; but if you decide to sacrifice all but three of the people, those three people could live for many years. Most people would choose to sacrifice 7 people so that three could live longer. Why? Because they don’t necessarily consider that quality might just be better then quantity. But the decision may also be influenced by something more. Perhaps one of those people was an 80 year old woman, another was a drug addict, and someone else had no legs and didn’t have a wheelchair with them. Some people may think that since they hold no importance and probably have nothing important to offer, they would just be taking up space and using up the supplies. There is another thing that may influence the decision. A leader. In most times of crisis, someone steps forward and takes control and that person is usually the one who thinks that they have the most to offer. Since that person takes control, they then have some power over you and therefore can in some way influence your decision. How? Well because they have put him or herself in charge, the others feel like they should agree with or obey whatever they say. Let’s say the “leader” of the group say that the 7 people should be sacrificed and to figure out who will be sacrificed, everyone will have a chance to speak and afterwards there will be a vote. But what happens if you are the old lady, drug addict, or disabled person? How could you convince everyone else to save you instead of someone else? You can’t, it is next to impossible. Although if you were one of them, how would you feel? How would you then see the situation? Would you see the others as the people who deserve to live? Would you think it is fair and that you should sacrifice yourself for the others? Or would you think that just because you are old, disabled, an addict, or something else you shouldn’t be valued any different than anyone else. Personally I would think that everyone should be valued the same no matter who they are or I am. Just because someone may not have as much to offer as the person next to them, it does not mean that they should be valued differently and considered less important. So I guess what I am trying to say is that we shouldn’t value someone because of their age, looks, experience, job, health or anything else.
Have you ever had it where someone asks you to tell them more about yourself and you are just like, "Oh god.... Who am I?" You probably have, even if you didn't notice. But really, even if you think you know everything about yourself, it is more than likely that you don't. There is an expression that says "you learn something new every day", and that is very true especially when it comes to yourself. Today, I learned a few things about myself. I learned that I am more emotional than I thought I was, I am indulgent, impulsive, direct, spontaneous, analytical, sensitive, intuitive, a dreamer, a leader, and a pioneer. I also found out that while I am an open person, and am also a bit of an introvert. Most of these things I agree with but some I don't. For example, I don't really agree with the fact that I am indulgent because I do tend to put others' comfort before mine... well as long as I like them but still. Even though I do not agree with the fact that I am indulgent, I know that I got this result because whether I pay attention to it or not, I do put my comfort before others' unless they mean a LOT to me. Knowing what I now know about myself, I may approach some issues differently than I would have before. For example, now that I know that I am analytical, I will use this to further consider things going on around me rather than just letting it pass me by. Doing this might even open my mind to more possibilities as well as consider different perspectives more than I already do.