I read in one of the books about the flexible personality. The writer presented it as an ideal model of successful personality, as if to say in his review of this human dynamic, that ethics and feelings, whether love or credibility or other multiple examples, are just criteria of feelings and emotions translated From one person to another, in order to be ideal people, we must firmly believe that there are different points of view from which to look at the quality of our social relations

This was done by many other ethics whose evaluation falls within the author's criteria to personal standards that vary in form and content from one person to another.

But here I wonder

Can we really acknowledge what the writer says in all frameworks that touch human values, if this theory succeeds on one side; can it be believed that they may be useful in different horizons? Can there be different forms of credibility and are there different types of love, and should we really adapt to all these meanings, even though they actually differ with our own standards, which we usually derive from lofty values ​​that did not come from a vacuum but were a life full of life and experience.

But the end result of any static emotion can not be changed, because if I assume that I love someone I must love for himself and his feelings towards me and his noble positions with me, and this in my view should apply to any of the goals of love, which is our human relations to touch transparency in dealing And the integration into pure and noble relations that are not subject to the events of the money and are not rife with immediate hatred

If one can conclude that feelings are a car that leads us to a beautiful end, they are ways to achieve one goal.