Can we define numeric variables to demonstrate the sum whole of civic ethos such as principles, manors, ethics and moral standards on a mathematical scale for the purpose of larger scaled derivatives of nature and behavior? If so, do they draw pattern with or is there a parallel scale of comparable variables that overlay with cultural sums?
For instance, is it possible to apply mathematical analysis to a layer of the very fabric of our being by quantifying the sum of ethos as comprised by its components?
As humans, we demonstrate these traits outwardly with variable degree in our actions. Our scale of measure then becomes recognized as our character. The persona, the avatar or the spirit, which we create of our own volition, exhibits in our character and is exemplified in our behavior by exercising variable degrees of the elements of ethos.
When next in a dialogue concerning topics that are capable of affecting the emotions and attitudes of others, and someone says in a rhetorically inquisitive tone, with subjective phraseology, implying the nature of principled civic ethos has somehow vanished into the ethereal mist of reality, my reply will be a calculated predication. That is because most often one will reply in accepting agreeance with a similarly disconcerted demeanor and then rhetorically reply with an “all is lost” shake of the head and a sigh. My unobserved instinctual behavior is pronounceably similar most often.
Therefore, I will attempt to modify my thinking and monitor my behavioral responses with greater acuity in an effort to cultivate my behavior. This thinking is a change towards an end of the perpetuation of false cultural and lassie faire norms for the purpose of correctness as they exist in my lexicon of belief. The acceptance of the non-predominance of the ethos memorialized in our immediate conversation in such a way that expresses the substance of the ethos no longer existing in the realm of reality is just not true.
All men knowingly or otherwise exercise ethos in their actions and thus reflect the same in their character. A person that can identify and filter their actions with disciplined self-observation will over time accommodate a more refined filter that will weave the screen used to formulate belief of thoughts and ideas. If done in this manner you will find that there is a way to allow for the identification of transitory and instinctual behavior to increase the granularity of reality as it applies to ethos.
That is not to say that the nature of ethos does not exist in practice as implied by the rhetorical interrogative. The implication is that there has to be an end to the acceptance of the same lack of ethos before a return to the same can dominate. We have to rekindle the fact that principled ethos does exist; it is just not being practiced or is diminished within the group.
The substance of ethos is only capable of civic (group) predominance when exercised individually, on a collective basis for the whole, the group. Therefore, if one perceives that principled ethos is missing from any of societies many realms, it should indicate the whole of those that comprise the realm of topic, each then are individually responsible for the practice and exercise of the same. The perceptible value of their combined actions is what will culminate in a severity of causality as it relates to the groups ethos. The outcome of causal action by either exercising principled ethos, or not, among a group, is predicated upon the individuals choice when combined collectively.
If at this point my conversational companion, who is part of the group, is prepared for another rhetorical shrug and sigh, well, guess what! If the nature of the ethos is lacking, and I agree, then from now on I am going to suggest then that those, the ones who know principled ethos are the problem if they continue to accept the lack of determinable ethos in the group. Negative or unprincipled ethos in a group only flourishes when allowed. For good men to sit by in passive allowance for others behavior is what will then allow the lack of principled ethos to come to dominate.
The converse then is that when those that practice principled ethos in the group do so without apprehension others notice it in the group. It then makes it safer for the individual that turns a blind eye or perceives that they are beaten down to realize they are not alone and they too are able to do the same.
It is when good men sit idle and fear the darkness that darkness is given allowance to flourish. Each of us must be of their own self, the light, to afford others to see and combine their light of self in an effort to eradicate the darkness and reestablish positive ethos.
Even in the most deprecating environments, one that knows principled ethos has a truer nature and or spirit that is drawn to light over darkness. Darkness may be foist on us but light will always overcome the darkness. When our light is unashamed and founded in bedrock it will act as beacon to bring others to the light. This allows each individual to bring with them more light to increase the perimeter of principled civic ethos. They individually produce a mathematic power of sum total to dominate the darkness and bolster principled ethos within a culture.
“What can one person really do anyway?” One person can act contrary to the acceptance of the fact that a positive ethos is gone. One person, practicing civic ethos and rebuking its lack, will by their nature, inspire others and bring a larger perimeter to the circle that collects them.
As a human, we perform more completely in environments where we are accepted. When a group that exercise principled ethos individually as a collective whole it precludes the rapid infection of weakened ethos. When however, a turn of the head here and a turn of the head there attitude takes over, the light of the ethos begins to fade and the darkness draws closer to the interior perimeter. Once acceptance of behavior that lacks principled ethos is tolerated, it will become the new normal. With an unchecked balance of resistance, the group may be overcome with darkness and the end of the group is incurred.
This is why we must reward those around us with the respect of personally performing in a manner that is equaled in principled ethos. We do so to create a strong light. We do so to nourish the group. We do so for self-preservation with the least defense required.
If we would simply begin by practicing our ethos in a way that we would want others to practice it when dealing with us then we will be off to a good start.
So what can one person do? One can do more than a million when one does, and then another as well, then there are two doing and the number has doubled. So that when two see two and do the same another doubling. Change by example is contagious. It begins with you.
~ Eric D. Miller – 2020