It probably happens when a person doesn't debate or argue, but rather almost tries to shove their opinions down the other's throat. But I'm not here to criticise that person, but just my take on their views.
Indians should be more selfish, and think about their own priorities more.
Well, that is the topic for debate today!
Let me state the arguments:
Indians give priority to most things except themselves, they should be more like the westerners and be a little selfish and think about themselves more and others less.
But let me point out my objection to this.
Forget the fact about Indian or Western, forget whether it is a man or woman, or anyother restrictions you could impose. Just think about each individual, with their own unique thoughts, personality, vision, mindset and so on.
If each of these individuals inhabiting this earth were to think and act out of completely selfish reasons, for their own personal gain, would it not affect at least one other individual that had nothing to do with this person?
We each donot live in a bubble of our own, each and everything we do has some repurcussion on the lives of somebody else, intentionally or unintentionally.
If each one were to act in their own 'selfish' way, and never consider anything or anybody else, how would we survive as a society? What is that which makes us different because we as humans can think? The fact that we need to think of such things! Otherwise we could just be like animals and only the survival of the fittest would continue.
But the very fact that we have established a society, where many different individuals co-exist proves that we have the insight to look to the future, think where our actions may take us, and make the necesary adjusments, or compromises to live together.
More arguments! That we pander too much to others, and at every point of our lives there is someone we try to please, appease, impress, or satisfy, be it parents, family, friends, peers, collegues, teachers, or even society.
This may be true. I am not saying that it is completely right to subject oneself to the constraints imposed by all other factors all the time. But there is also that immeasurable quantity, emotion.
Do we not love our family? So if it means coming home a little early, or making a phone call once in a while, does it not justify the pleasure of seeing them happy? Does a parent not love their child? Is it not that emotion which makes them give up so much of their happiness for their offspring? The compromises my own paretns have made for my brother and me make this clear to me, and if it were me, I hope I would have been strong enough to take the same decisions.
If you profess to love someone, would you not take their feelings into consideration? If that person say, does not share your feelings, would you still try to change their mind? Of course yes! But at the risk of losing them entirely? Does their opinion not count for anything? Do their values stand for nothing? How much of yourself can you impose on them? The last factor to consider.. what if they are completely opposite to you in every way? would you go to the extent of trying to change the person they are to be with them? Then in my opinion, that is not love or even affection, but some mindless desire to be with that person because of your perception of them being somehtign they are not.
So many questions.. none that can be answered with a single statement, none that will be accepted by everyone. That itself shows us the difference in each and every person in society, and the fact that we should at least accept that there are other opinions out there which matter, other than your own, and that we all may or may not be right.
I may meet a person tomorrow who may share completely opposite views to my own, and I accept, I may not be right at all, and all my theories may be thrown out of the window, but they still exist, as much as your do.