A promise is like a contract, and adherence to a specific condition in a point in the future within one’s influence. So, a promise is a future forwarded decision.
Decisions are in essence given the available conditions, and interestingly available conditions are hard to predict, so how could someone, in everyday life give out promises which entail immense foresight and power? In its essence, and its function, a promise is an arrogant claim. So why are they used, in the context of many interactions?
It is perhaps its function, that acknowledges someone’s immediate needs, and even if not logically possible, in todays or since the beginning of its usage, is what makes It functional.
People change, conditions change, but promises do not. Because they are given, at the past where future’s present has no influence.
Ethically, not keeping up to a promise, is that a wrong thing given the changed conditions? What is the context, that a promise is good to be broken?
Promises are strong things, without strong foundations. Life changes, possibilities changes and ultimately the promise conditions change. So why would someone try to keep up to any promise? More importantly, is it the same in value of keeping the promises out of habits or pure will the same?
While trying to answer such a question, an implicit context must be made explicit. And that is, the nature of subjects that the promises is exchanged.
Every person has unquestionable and eternal right to pursue the excellent. That pursuit is the base goal of every human being. Its methods, span and appearance vary from culture to culture and era to era, but the constant is pursuing the excellent. Since excellence is not a state but a process, excellence is unknown.
Thus, any condition that inhibits this pursuit must be dealt with, any promises that threatens such a pursuit is “evil”.
A promise is known. So, there are conditions when the pursuit of excellence coincide with a promise. Hence, are promises structurally corrupt?
There are two cases, where such a clash is handled well.
The claim is that, promises incorporate the pursuit principle, thus in its nature they are given as condition-less i.e., they are the guiding stars, but the stars are not the destination themselves.
The other is that, a promise is something so natural to both parties that, there are some aspects within the influence of subjects such that nothing can change them. Thus, a promise, a real promise, is a promise.
Inferring from the previous two cases, it is hard to predict whether a promise will be held or not. The day of judgement will tell that.
Ironically, for both cases, every day that is not the judgement day, is the actual judgement day/s.
Kommentare