We should follow the rules. But what set of rules, and who makes them?
We should do what’s best. But for whom and who decides what’s best?
We should help each other live a good life. But what is a good life?
The tension between what “should be” and what “is” permeates the very fabric of our human existence — a philosophical battleground that spurs introspection, motivates change, and fuels discontent.
The “should be” often finds its roots in our dreams, aspirations, and the morals and ethics we uphold. It’s the world we envision: a place of equality, fairness, and boundless opportunity. The realm where dreams materialize, and justice prevails. But who’s dreams? And justice for who?
In stark contrast, “what is” represents the ground realities, the imperfections, the challenges, and the systemic structures already in place. It’s the world we live in, warts and all. It’s the pragmatic acknowledgment of the present that for sure falls short of our vision of the ideal.
This chasm can be a source of frustration, igniting passion, driving innovation, and spur movements. But there is always tension because of who decides and to what standards.
There is beauty in the tension. You think about what should be. I think about what should be. We both struggle with what is. Together we move us forward.
