...ng what not, though in difficult situations the good thing is translated as what is less bad for us, this one is the case about which we must decide between(among) two alternatives which none is convenient(agrees) for us, situations that they present because we cannot choose what happens to us, but what we will do if it(he,she) happens to us.
The decisions for the author are based on motives, motives that can be orders, caprices or customs, " the orders and the customs it(he,she) has a thing jointly: it seems that they come of out, that impose you without asking for permission you. On the other hand, the caprices go out for you of inside, appear spontaneously without nobody orders them not anybody at first(in principle) be thinking about imitating them " (pag. 45)
Now well the ethics and the morality are concepts that often get confused and for it Savater in the page 59 us defines mulberry tree(morality) as " the set of behavior and procedure that you, I and some of whom surround us we are in the habit of agreeing like valid " and to the ethics as " the reflection on why we consider them to be valid and the comparison with other that different persons have "
I agree totally with Fernando Savater when it(he,she) exposes that " the first and indispensable ethical condition is it of being determined not to live anyhow: to be sure that not everything is all the same though before or later we are going to die " that sad would be that the persons believed that if anyhow we are going to die less than can be done by it(him,her) in this world is to waste the life in pleasures, in doing " what one him(her) plazca in desire ". It(he,she) is very important thinks that many other persons exist in this world that also as we they have freedom of decision and all the decisions are valid, that they all are free and this freedom ends where it(he,she) starts aggravating to the freedoms of the others.
One of many points that was called me the attention is in the one that is said " every free act that I do limits my possibilities of choosing and realizing one of them " (pag. 113) so(then,since) with every decision that I take necessarily there come some of them (many(many people) as it is the case) consequences that earlier that it(he,she) is late will take me to a new decision determined to the first one.
If it is true that exists the freedom, also it is true that can be influenced her(it), that is to say the freedom of deciding such-and-such thing, I do not agree with the author when he(she) says that the irresistible things do not exist, equal and yes we decide to agree to do such-and-such thing, but it(he,she) is because we are being determined to deciding between(among) certain options, the same customs and orders can determine us to believing that certain things are irresistible, all our acts are decisions, but decisions determined of that it(he,she) does not finish of he(she) never learns, so(then) to every taken decision it(he,she) should follow(continue) an analysis of consequences, that is to say, I did this and there happened that one, this that happened is it(he,she) convenient(agrees) for me?, is it(he) good? And later when one presents a similar dilemma to take as a precedent the decision taken previously with his(her,your) respective results and consequenc...