What Is the Difference Between Morality and Ethics?
By Gordon E Newman

What is the question?

Both ethics and morality assist is in answering the question: What should I do?

We are faced with this question all the time. Too often we make important decisions without giving enough time or process to reaching the best answer. Why not? Often we simply don't know how to make such decisions. Sometimes we ignore them and hope they will go away, sometimes we follow the advice of others, sometimes we just guess.

If we wish to be responsible for our own future and our own decisions we should spend a little time thinking and trying to make a good decision, a better decision than simply choosing the easiest answer.

So, ethics and morality assist us in answering the question: What should I do?

Do they provide the same answer? No.

Which is the better approach and why?

What is the difference between morality and ethics?

Many of us confuse ethics and morality, many people use them interchangeably. But they are very, very different, related but different. The difference is crucial when making important decisions, even deciding whether you are facing a moral dilemma or an ethical dilemma. Important when discussing such popular topics as religion, sexuality, good and bad, right or wrong. So, take a few minutes now to better understand the difference between morality and ethics.

Please, don't refer to the dictionary. Dictionaries attempt to capture popular usage and much of popular usage of ethics and morality is very blurred. Here I can show you how to use each word precisely, and make these words as sharp tools to cut through some pretty complicated ideas.

Morality

Morality is a set of rules or guidelines by which we behave. Simple? Yes, very simple but the implications are very important.

Morals answer problems we face in life. Morals are written down; they're defined answers to defined problems. Examples that come to mind are: Stealing is immoral. Adultery is immoral. Killing another person is immoral. Abortion is immoral. Homosexuality is immoral. Burning the Christian Bible is immoral.

Now you must appreciate that someone must decide upon these rules or guidelines. In the case of the Bible's Ten Commandments that were handed down from the Mount thousands of years ago, these rules were spoken and written by the Christian God and then possibly transcribed and interpreted by Moses. As a general rule, morality is determined by others and followed by people who share certain values.

The Ten Commandments were a set of ten rules which defined the behaviour of a group of people many years ago. The rules were effective in that they devolved the Ten Commandments into practical laws and a social structure which defined a people. They provided stability and provided the basis for an ongoing identity and development.

The fact that morality provides stability is a very important and powerful aspect of morality. When the environment changes, when the old leaders and mentors die, morality enables their values, their rules to continue. So people have stability. A change in leadership does not mean everyone must start again. People feel and are more secure when things are stable. Change and uncertainty are somewhat scary. Morality provides a basis for a comforting stability.

"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife" is my recall of (part of) one of the Ten Commandments. Most people would agree that it is not good to try to seduce your neighbour's wife (which may be the result if you desire her enough). Even today it would result in some pretty nasty outcomes if everyone went around seducing each other's wife right, left and centre. It could damage the society substantially. So that is a pretty useful rule to apply within most societies then and today.

In summary, morality is a set of common values that provide stability for societies and differentiate between societies.

Ethics

Ethics is an approach, a method of making decisions. Ethics is about deciding to the best of our ability, without fear or favour. It is about being aware of the many aspects of each issue and trying to include them into the decision making process. It is about being aware of the outcome of our decisions, good and bad.

Ethics is about making a well-considered decision and having the moral courage to accept the responsibility of our decision.

Ethics is more a way of approaching decisions, ethics is not a set of values but a way of developing values for a certain situation as it is understood.

Do you see how it differs from morality? Morality is a set of values that are applied, ethics is a way to solve something at we understand it. Ethics can develop morals and as the situation changes ethics can evolve morals.

Let us just return to ethics for now and I shall say more about the strengths and weaknesses of each in more detail further on.

Ethics is a way of reaching an answer in any situation. The aim is to reach the best answer. But all problems are complicated. The more we learn about a problem, the more complicated it becomes.

Let us take a simple example. Common morality states "Thou shall not kill another person." A drug-crazed killer has shot a dozen students in a classroom and is systematically shooting more students, one every ten seconds. You are situated behind him ten meters away. You have a gun and a clear shot at him. Do you shoot and kill him?

Morality says no.

Ethics tells us we should consider the potential outcome of our decision, how it will affect others and how it affects the world we live in. Ethics tells us to make a decision based upon what we think is right for everything and everyone.

My own take is:

• Don't decide for your own benefit, decide for the benefit of others.
• Do the right thing, the nicest thing.
• Be aware of the consequences. In part they are our responsibility.

Do we kill him? There is no perfect right or wrong answer here We each must make our own decision and live with the outcomes. If we have done so, then the decision was ethical.

Based upon my understanding of the situation, I would shoot to kill because it is in the best interest of the remaining students. It may have a bad outcome for me, but I am less important than the students. I would judge more good would result from my killing him.

This is making an ethical decision.

However, maybe there is something I didn't know. Maybe it was a movie being shot and I for whatever reason, was unaware that everyone was acting. Sounds pretty stupid, but such things happen.

The Problems of Morality and Ethics

Morality provides answers. Morality provides solutions. Morals are right, absolute and certain. We can be confident that if we decide based upon morality, it is a solution and correct based upon the morality. Morals are convenient and easy. Few questions are required, thinking is limited, and we follow the rules. This is a great strength and a weakness. Morality provides good answers to many day to day decisions.

There are so many decisions we need to make each day, we cannot spend hours on each of them. This is where morality is strong. We can follow our morals with a fair degree of confidence because in the past they have provided a good outcome. Morals are convenient and easy.

But things change. How do the Ten Commandments handle the internet? Genetic engineering? Pollution? Nuclear power? Global warming? The Ten Commandments do not have an answer for these questions because the questions did not exist or were not asked at that time.

Clearly decision making must evolve to adapt to current circumstances. But morality is characterised by stability, by absolute rules. What about ethics? Ethics is the domain of changed circumstance. Ethics is fluid and adaptable.

Ethics can show us how to evolve our morals, how to make decisions in new situations.

Ethics is better for the tricky decisions, morality is more efficient for the regular problems we face day to day. But be aware, do not get complacent, morality does not question and we often need to understand and question the reasons behind even simple looking problems before making a decision. Take care using morality, ask yourself is the answer obvious or do I need to understand a little more?

Let us use a simple example. The morality "Thou shall not kill another person" seems straightforward.

Hitler was exterminating the Jews in 1939. Was it ethical to declare war on Germany? Is war moral? See above... which is right, correct or best?

Take a more complex example within the context of war. Imagine aircraft pilots shooting civilians because they looked like so called dangerous insurgents. Such decisions were made ethically in their view, they were making a decision for the best interest of other parties at some risk to themselves. In hindsight they may have been wrong, but the decision can well be called ethical. It could equally be called moral because the pilots were following the rules.

Morality is applying predetermined values (usually developed by others) and designed for different problems, different dilemmas at a different time and then not accepting the responsibility of that decision. "I did it because the rule said so." This in my view is taking the easy option, abrogating responsibility in many cases.

Ethics is applying your values to a problem now and making the best decision possible based upon the available information. Such decisions become your decision and you are responsible for the decision and outcome in part. Ethics is characterised by doubt, unanswered questions and knowing that we can only make our best decisions and that such decisions are not the best for everyone. Every decision has costs and costs are not shared equally. So ethics does not answer the question what is right or wrong, but what is possibly better or worse based upon what is known.

Moral decisions provide certainty, an amount of righteousness. But of course because each society has different morality, each society will make differing moral decisions in some cases. Sometimes this is enough to generate major conflicts despite seemingly almost insignificant differences. The fact that religion is a major factor in conflict demonstrates this. The morality of each religion is different and absolute. Absolute differences are irreconcilable, and generate intolerance.

Ethical decisions provide uncertainty and doubt. Even if societies have differing values, taking an ethical approach permits different solutions and an acceptance that perhaps my decision is not the best for all. This engenders an accepting culture, one which takes a more "live and let live" approach. Doubt is good in that is encourages tolerance.

Ethicists are wracked with doubt. Moralists are absolute in their convictions. Find a smug politician and you have found a moral politician. Find a tormented politician and you have found a more ethical politician.

I will close with another example of where today's society has a moral value which is at odds with ethical decision making.

Euthanasia. Under the same moral code that states we shall not kill, society today demands we maintain the life of aged damaged people who no longer have any desire to live. Our morality demands we keep their hearts beating, their lungs pumping, using all that modern medicine can offer. Ethics asks the question why we should maintain the life in this failing body propped up by technology. What is the good that comes from locking out the grim reaper a little longer? No one wishes to suffer and finally die ever so slowly, causing grief to their loved ones. Yet society forces this morality onto us all.

I ask you the question who gains from this? Look deep into your heart and think for a moment, think ethically. I suspect that some people gain by saying "We did all we could to keep him alive." This is a way of justifying an unethical decision. A way of avoiding criticism and blame. Being ethical is accepting the consequences for making the best decisions.

Remember morality is about abrogating responsibility? The dying person makes their decision and wishes to die. For our own selfish reasons, not for their benefit, someone else decides they must continue to suffer and others must suffer so they can be moral.

Euthanasia is ethical in the vast majority of cases, but it is immoral in most societies today. Politicians are largely being unethical by allowing this to continue. They are acting in their self interest - their ego removes their ethical component from their actions.

So, I hope you now understand the difference between morals and ethics. It won't change the world tomorrow, nor should it, but if perhaps you can just take a little more time to consider important decisions in ethical terms in future then your world will be a better, more tolerant place.

If you want to practice straight away, ask yourself what are the ethical questions associated with smoking, with parenting and junk food, computer games or boxing. What about walking across the road safely on a Don't Walk sign, forcing children to attend classes where they are disruptive in class, smoking a cigarette, working for an alcohol or uranium mining company. What are the ethics of working for a lobby group, being a politician or a vegetarian?

And recall again, there is no absolutely right or wrong answer. There are better or worse answers, yes. But not right or wrong. The best you can do is better understand the issues, the consequences, and who and what is affected before deciding. You cannot make a truly ethically decision until you are on the spot. And each ethical decision will not be perfect nor please everyone, nor will it be valid forever, the answer may change tomorrow, but such decisions will be yours and the best you can make at the time with the information you have.

Remember:

• Don't decide for your own benefit, decide for the benefit of others.
• Do the right thing, the nicest thing.
• Be aware of the consequences. In part they are our responsibility.

Being ethical is tough, very tough. But I know of no better way to make mydecisions. Do you know a better way to make your decisions?

written by Gordon E Newman

Do you want to de-stress your life? Do you believe that you hold the keys to do this?

If life has you wondering what you could improve, how you could live better, eat better, sleep better, improve your mind and more, then you should visit our website.

Make your inner light shine and visit http://innerbalm.com.au today.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Gordon_E_Newman/996161
http://EzineArticles.com/?What-Is-the-Difference-Between-Morality-and-Ethics?&id=6171320

The Withdrawal Effects of Alcoholism
By Stephanie Loebs

For somebody suffering from alcoholism, the decision to enter a rehabilitation program can be a difficult yet ultimately rewarding one. It takes courage and self-awareness to acknowledge there is a problem, and with the support of good physicians, a sound recovery program, and the love of family and friends can an addict learn to overcome this illness.

Recovery from alcoholism may differ from patient to patient. While a reputable drug rehab center will work to offer the most painless detox process possible, there remains the possibility of withdrawal symptoms. Sudden abstinence from a substance frequently used can effect the body in various ways, as the dependence on alcohol has caused the body to react a certain way for a long time. Change, while eventually will work for the better, can be painful for some.

For the recovering alcoholic, various withdrawal symptoms may include:

• Nervousness or skittish behavior
• Anxiety and/or irritability
• Depression and/or fatigue
• Insomnia and/or nightmares
• Nausea and/or vomiting
• Headaches and/or heart palpitations
• Loss of appetite
• Fever and/sweating
• Hallucinations

If you or somebody you love suffers from a dependency on alcoholic, it is important to consult with a physician or counselor with regards to treatment. While some may believe swift abstinence, or going "cold turkey," is the answer, this may actually affect the addict for the worse and inhibit proper treatment. Safe, effective detoxification in a drug treatment center, supervised by professionals in the field, can offer a more dedicated opportunity of recovery. What is important is that you do not wait to seek treatment, but act as soon as possible to prevent further damage to the mind and body.

Stephanie Loebs is the executive director of Williamsburg Place, one of the top drug rehab clinics in the nation. Williamsburg Place aids those who suffer from drug and/or alcohol addiction, and specializes in caring for health care professionals. For over twenty years Williamsburg Place and its joint rehabilitation center, the William J. Farley Center, have helped thousands of people from all walks of life take back their lives and overcome substance abuse.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Stephanie_Loebs/71530
http://EzineArticles.com/?The-Withdrawal-Effects-of-Alcoholism&id=551892

Wake Up, America!: This Isn't Normal

By Richard Brody

Whether one agrees, or disagrees, with the politics, perspectives, opinions, point - of - view, or rhetoric, we are witnessing today, there should be, agreement, we're observing conditions, etc, which, we have not observed, in America, in recent memory! It may be world - conditions, the threat of terrorism, hatred, bigotry, prejudice, or other factors (including greed, and personal/ political agendas, and self - interest), but, there appears to be, little, to no attempt, to seek any common ground, meeting - of - the - minds, or bipartisan efforts! Our present President, often seems, to focus on slogans, and being popular with his base, core supporters, rather than all Americans. Several months ago, President Barack Obama, during a partisan, political speech, said, This isn't normal, and to this writer, that analysis seemed, not only accurate, but indicates, the potential threat, to our way of life!

1. The late comedian, George Carlin, after the atrocities, which occurred on September 11, 2001, warned of the potential dangers, of going too far, in reacting to these terrorist attacks, and, thus, abandoning, our commitment to protecting all our American freedoms. He proclaimed, if we do that, then, The terrorists win, because they would have achieved one of their primary objectives, of disrupting, and changing our mindsets. We must avoid taking the populist, simplistic, approaches, and pursue, well - considered, relevant, sustainable solutions, which simultaneously, make us safe, while being careful, to also, protect, all our freedoms, to all our citizens.

2. Regardless of one's opinion of President Donald J Trump, one should, and must recognize, he is a master at inspiring and motivating, those who feel, either neglected, oppressed, or resentful, by using rhetoric, which often, goes further, than merely, bordering on, vitriol! If we don't protect all of our freedoms, including those stated in the Constitution, or which, have become an essential component and expectation, we will eventually, begin to become unrecognizable, etc. What ever happened, to civility, and any attempt at compromise, bipartisan cooperation, and serving/ protecting all freedoms, instead of merely those, which are self - serving, etc?

3. The United States appears to be, more divided, than at any time, in recent memory. It seems to be, far beyond policy and/ or political differences, but, rather, an essential battle for the core, vision, and what America will stand for, and represent!

4. Traditionally, we have been the leaders of the free world, defending freedoms, etc, and human rights. Mr. Trump has referred to himself, as a Nationalist, which brings negative connotations, to many. He has often contradicted himself, and made it, more about dollars, and cents, than common sense, ethics and morality!

This isn't normal, because we are the United States of America, and we are being divided and polarized, rather than unified! Wake up, America, before it's too late! We've seen this before!

Richard has owned businesses, been a COO, CEO, Director of Development, consultant, professionally run events, consulted to thousands, conducted personal development seminars, and worked on political campaigns, for 4 decades. Rich has written three books and thousands of articles. Website: http://plan2lead.net and LIKE the Facebook page for common sense: http://facebook.com/commonsense4all

Article Source: [http://EzineArticles.com/?Wake-Up,-America!:-This-Isnt-Normal&id=10035227] Wake Up, America!: This Isn't Normal

Why Do Some People Stay In Touch With Their Ex

By Oliver JR Cooper

If one's relationship has just come to an end, they could decide to cut their ties and to move on with their life. As a result of this, they are not going to want to stay in touch with their ex.

One Step Back

Doing so could be seen as something that will stop them from being able to put the past firmly behind them. And, if one didn't really get on with the other person or if they simply grew apart, this is going to make perfect sense.

In this case, staying in touch would be similar to keeping a car that no longer works - it wouldn't make sense. Their time with the other person has come to an end and it will be in their best interest to let go.

A New Beginning

Now that their relationship has come to end, they can focus more of their energy and attention on other areas of their life. They may decide that they want to spend some time in their own company.

Through doing this, it will give them the opportunity to get back in touch with who they are. Alternatively, one might not need to do this, as they might already be only too aware of what their needs are.

External Feedback

The people in their life could understand why they no longer want to speak to the person they were with. If one wasn't in a relationship that was very healthy, they might be relieved that one is taking this approach.

They would have seen the amount of damage that this was doing to them, and they might have even encouraged them to walk away before. But even if their relationship wasn't unhealthy, they could still support their decision.

A Pattern

If one was to look back on their life, they may find that this is how they have always behaved. So, no matter what their relationships were like in the past, their behaviour would have been the same.

Then again, one might have held on in the past and came to see that this was not doing them any favours. Their change in behaviour will be the result of an experience or a number of experiences that had a big impact on them.

A Different Approach

But for every person who behaves in this way, there are going to be plenty of others who don't. When one can relate to this, they are not be able to just walk away; they will need to stay in touch with their ex.

Therefore, once one is no longer in a relationship with someone, they will still be part of their life. One is then not going to want to be too close to them, but they won't want them to be too far away either.

Two Experiences

If one was in a relationship that wasn't dysfunctional, it could be said that this kind of behaviour makes sense. But if they didn't get on, it can be a lot harder to comprehend what is going on.

When it comes to the former, they will probably respect each other and there will be all the positive experiences that they had together, and they might have mutual friends. Yet, when it comes to the latter, there is unlikely to be any respect between them and there will be all the negative experiences that they have shared.

One Factor

What one could find is that staying in touch with their ex makes it easier for them to handle how they feel. This person, as well as their others exes, could provide them with the support that they need to make up for their inner instability.

If they were with someone who was abusive, being this way is going to make it harder for them to cut their ties with someone who is not good for them. Their inner instability will cause them to hold on and it would have been one of the reasons why they ended up with someone like this to begin with.

Another Factor

One's emotions are going to be out of control and this will make it harder for them to be able to control their behaviour. But while someone who stays in touch with their ex could be emotionally out of control, they could also be emotionally dead.

When this takes place, it is not going to be a way for them to settle themselves down; it will be a way for them to gain resources. Having their ex in their life can allow them to have sex, gain money and receive other benefits.

Two Extremes

The person in the first example probably won't find it hard to empathise; whereas the person in the second example probably will. Empathy is vital when it comes to being able to treat other people as separate human beings, as opposed to objects that are there to be used.

Ergo, when one sees another person as an object that exists to fulfil their needs, it is going to be a challenge for them to realise that this person also has feelings and needs. And, if they were to get to a point where they no longer need them, they could discard them.

Awareness

If someone does use people, it is unlikely that they would feel the need to change their behaviour. On the other hand, if one feels emotionally unstable, they might look into what they can do to settle themselves down.

With that said, if someone can see that they stay in touch with their ex (or ex's) for the wrong reason, it might be a good idea for them to reach out for external support. This can be provided by the assistance of a therapist or a healer.

Prolific writer, author, and coach, Oliver JR Cooper, hails from England. His insightful commentary and analysis covers all aspects of human transformation, including love, partnership, self-love, and inner awareness. With over one thousand six hundred in-depth articles highlighting human psychology and behaviour, Oliver offers hope along with his sound advice.

To find out more go to - http://www.oliverjrcooper.co.uk/

Feel free to join the Facebook Group -
   https://www.facebook.com/OliverJRCooper

Article Source: [http://EzineArticles.com/?Relationships:-Why-Do-Some-People-Stay-In-Touch-With-Their-Ex?&id=9874159] Relationships: Why Do Some People Stay In Touch With Their Ex?

Fighting the Incivility Virus

By Frank Pray

Civility may not open a mind, but incivility will close it. Most of our communication is goal oriented: We want something. That goal might be a vote, a kiss, a job, a better deal, admiration, or information to make a decision. Unless our message is received, it will not affect a change of mind or heart. So, there is a practical reason to be civil in a debate or argument: it means we will improve our chances of getting what we want.
Incivility also closes the mind of the one who is being uncivil. Incivility rests on the premise that the other party is too stupid, ignorant, evil, or thoughtless to grasp the truth. This extreme labeling closes your mind that the other person's view may have some have some valid points. Usually, neither party in a debate or argument has all the information, skill, wisdom, or good judgment to be 100% correct. An insult closes the door on any data that could correct an error in your understanding.
Incivility can also close the door to compromise. Incivility is a wrong long remembered. Anger with a person who has insulted you will mean that it is much less likely you will cooperate with that person to reach a "win-win" outcome in a negotiation.
Incivility also breeds an "us vs. them" mentality. We see ourselves in exaggerated self-esteem as good, but view the opponent as evil. Political, cultural, and religious polarization results.
Washington politics reflects the discord generally in the country. Incivility encourages distrust that any good resides in opposing views. One party in Congress goes forward with legislation with no input from the opposing party. After all, there can be no compromise with the devil.
But civility is not just being nice or conceding to an opposing view to keep the peace. Civility is flexible on minor or moderate differences but does not bend on core principles. Ethical advocates advance even core principles by compromise, knowing that not to negotiate may mean no gains at all, and maybe losses.
Here are some ideas for maintaining civility in the face of fierce disagreement on matters you care about:
1. Find some point in the debate on which you can agree. Look for common ground, and state the points of agreement first. Re-stating the other party's argument conveys you are listening, and able to take a different perspective.
2. Acknowledge in the discussion that you can understand how the opponent could view things as she does, but that you believe that viewpoint has some weaknesses. Unsurprisingly, this approach works better than calling the other person a blockhead.
3. Avoid words like "always," "never," "clearly," "undoubtedly," and "without question." Try fewer black and white characterizations, such as "sometimes," "often," "generally," "perhaps," "maybe," or "it seems," or "it appears."
4. Where possible and truthful, find a way to compliment your opponent about the way she has presented her case.
5. Before launching into a statement of the facts and argument, summarize to your opponent the key points you have heard him make, and ask if that is a fair summation. This exercise will reduce your opponent's anxiety or skepticism about whether you are listening.
6. Stick to the issues and evidence. Avoid attacks on the personality or underhanded tactics of the opponent. But, if there is an outright lie or breach of trust, call it out in clear but non-belligerent terms.
7. Turning the other cheek doesn't mean you become a punching bag. But pick which attacks merit counterattack. Often an opponent is baiting you, getting "inside your head" to get you emotionally reactive, and therefore off point. Being civil can convey you're not so easily distracted from the goal.
8. See that your opponent's incivility exposes a weakness. If the evidence and argument were convincing, there wouldn't be a need to attack you personally. Probe for gaps in reasoning or proof, and focus on those instead of vengeance. That weakness might be a lack of knowledge, an effort to cover up a past embarrassing history, a lack of confidence in himself or his case, or a warped conviction that hostility is the only way to win. You can use that weakness to your advantage if the opponent refuses to compromise.
9. If other approaches fail, confront the bully directly by declaring calmly but firmly: "enough." State the consequences of continued incivility. Report the bully, or if it is an option, refuse to further engage with the bully. Walk away from the deal.
10. Surround yourself with supportive friends and colleagues. Most people practice basic politeness and courtesy. Friends can bring balance and perspective. If possible, find a way to laugh at the some of your opponent's more outrageous incivilities
In conclusion, incivility is a corrosive practice that polarizes people. Incivility closes our minds to see the merits of an opposing viewpoint. Incivility also diverts focus from the issues and evidence. Incivility causes a breakdown in progress as people are unable to reach a compromise. However, the answer is to respond without counterattack. Stay focused on the issues and best factual arguments. The ultimate victory is the satisfaction of making the better case on the evidence.
Frank Pray is a Newport Beach California Employee Rights Attorney with over 40 years litigation experience. His work requires him to negotiate a variety of often emotional cases with strong opposing advocates. The issues involve charges of discrimination, whistleblower retaliation, wage violations, defamation, and harassment at work. If you are a California employee with questions about wrongful termination or hostile work environment or have questions about severance agreements, non-compete agreements, or trade secret agreements, you may contact Mr. Pray at 949-251-1006 or fpray@employee-rights-atty.com.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/expert/Frank_Pray/85039
http://EzineArticles.com/?Fighting-the-Incivility-Virus&id=9819654

Letting Go Of Doubts In A Relationship By Looking Deep Within Yourself

Letting Go Of Doubts In A Relationship By Looking Deep Within Yourself
By James Nussbaumer

The world likes to teach us that having doubts is a signal that something is not right with this situation. Or, if it is relationship doubts then you should be cautious and not rush to falling in love or getting married.

Even on television news or movie drama, we see that having doubts should mean that possibly someone is "up to no good" and doesn't deserve our attention.

Hardly do we see that having doubts is a sign pointing us to look deeper within ourselves.

In a set of previous articles (which I've linked to one another) I discussed the woman from Croatia, named Nakita, writing to me in an Ohio prison inviting me to participate in a worldwide mindfulness meditation for world peace, to be held on December 22, 2010, at 9:30 PM.

I would participate from my bunk in the often violent din of the cell block. I must say I was certainly having doubts about the validity of this event, a scam or a sort of prank, I 'd think.

I tossed around the idea of my relationship doubts with this woman, since I 'd never even met her ever before, she writes me out of the blue, and "I'm supposed to trust her," were more haunting thoughts.

I wondered, "Was it really the new relationship with Nakita I was having doubts over?"

Or was it something else?

That was until I heard some words in a conversation from other inmates that I 'd taken as a signal from the universe, or, we may say the Holy Spirit, that this indeed must be a real live event.

Why was I making judgments and having my doubts?

Even with these good-minded thoughts and the alert signal from the Holy Spirit, or, Karma, as I 'd mentioned in a previous article, I again regressed to vigilant questioning in my mind and having doubts.

This time it was over the time zones around the world.

Why had Nakita scheduled this "meeting of minds" for 9:30 PM Eastern time, which was very convenient for me?

Again, positive right-minded thinking entered my mind, suggesting that maybe Nakita was not the organizer of this event. It was very possible it could have been arranged by, say, an individual or group in the Far East, or even Australia.

She never said she was the originator, so why was I hanging onto that notion?

My having doubts turned more toward trust when it dawned on me like bright rays of sunlight bursting through cloud cover: Why should I be so concerned about all of this anyway? It really didn't matter who the organizer was, or what time it occurred.

Feelings of inner peace

With that one lasting peaceful thought I remembered a lesson from A Course in Miracles teaching that, "Time was only real in the Holy Spirit's use of it," and He was using it for this event.

I was urged by myself to simply let go of having doubts and any negative-minded attempts to intrude on my thought process about this mindfulness meditation event, and I proceeded to set my sights on the inner peace I was feeling in general about the whole idea.

Any wrong-minded thoughts or having doubts from the ego would only block the extension of the thoughts from others, regardless of how many minds were involved in this mindfulness meditation.

It would block my joy as well, which was really most important here for me to consider. Another thought hit me that if my own joy were to be blocked, then I would perceive myself as being unfulfilled.

I went on to perceive this to be a necessary excitement for myself, there, deep in the rabbit hole of prison, one that would give me a sense of accomplishment and completion, and most of all, wholeness.

What accomplishment do I mean?

I'll let you answer that for yourself, while you contemplate the following passage from A Course in Miracles:

" Spirit knows that the awareness of all its brothers is included in its own, as it is included in God. The power of the whole Sonship and Its Creator is therefore spirit's own fullness, rendering its creations equally whole, and equal in perfection. The ego can not prevail against a totality that includes God, and any totality must include God."

We all seem to be cautious when having fears and doubts, but the most wonderful associations we have with one another are in being honest enough to share our feelings.

To peace and love in your relationships

http://jamesnussbaumer.com/self-help-library/ Hi, I'm James Nussbaumer, I'd like to introduce myself through my thought provoking self-improvement and inspirational books, articles, and other content which are reflections of A Course in Miracles. I'm also offering you a Free version of my EVERYDAY MIRACLES newsletter, where you'll get updates on my webinars, videos, livestreams, other events and so much more, helping everyday people live life on their own terms. This is for folks who are interested in letting go of the past and attaining Real Abundance, Purpose, and Wellness in their lives. http://jamesnussbaumer.com/my-blog/

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/expert/James_Nussbaumer/2379033
http://EzineArticles.com/?Letting-Go-Of-Doubts-In-A-Relationship-By-Looking-Deep-Within-Yourself&id=9752673

How Do We Know If We Can Trust Someone?

By Kathleen Dwyer Blair

Many of us trust too easily only to discover that we were betrayed. Others of us don't trust at all. Trusting too quickly, or not trusting at all, usually says more about us than about the other person. Trust is not something that we want to automatically do when we meet someone. We also don't want to automatically mistrust someone either. Some of us experience an involuntary response to trust, or not to trust, and neither one of these extremes serve us well.

Trust is something that takes time. It's a process.

Trust is a process

When I say, trust is a process, it means that it takes time to get to know someone. If we enter a relationship at a slow and steady pace, we will discover more about who the other person's true self. We can then determine whether they can be trusted with our feelings, and our shared personal information, because our trust is the greatest gift we can give someone.

Finding the Balance

Some of us were betrayed early in life, and we don't trust easily because of that. Others so desperately want to be in a relationship, or a friendship, that we rush to trust someone to make that happen. We don't give ourselves the opportunity, and time, to get to know that person to determine if they are trustworthy, or not.

In adulthood, often not being able to trust a friend, or a potential romantic partner, may be because we have been betrayed in our childhood, adolescence, or at some time as an adult. The person desiring our trust may very well be trustworthy, however we may not be able to recognize this due to our history.

Our Past Relationships Reflected in The Present

One of the first big tasks of our lives is establishing trust versus mistrust. As a child, we develop a sense that our needs will be met, versus a sense that they won't. Our view of the world is often determined by how secure we feel that we can rely on others for our expectations to be met. If we have had good, consistent relationships in the past, we may assume as much from our current and future relationships, and trust too easily based upon this experience.

If our parents, or our experiences in past relationships, were inconsistent in meeting our needs, we may fear current and future relationships will respond the same way. We make ourselves vulnerable when we trust. Withholding our trust may be used as self-preservation to protect us from being hurt again. How can I trust myself from past mistakes?

It's Not You, It's Me

Sometimes it is challenging to differentiate to determine if we are not feeling trustworthy of someone else. Is it about them? Or is it about our own history? So many times, I have heard during psychotherapy sessions that, "My friend is talking about other people and I'm uncomfortable. I don't know if I ought to trust them or not."

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/expert/Kathleen_Dwyer_Blair/112478
http://EzineArticles.com/?How-Do-We-Know-If-We-Can-Trust-Someone?&id=9676221