2015 year of Artistic Integrity
The word 'integrity' evolved from the Latin adjective 'integer', meaning 'whole or complete'. As such integrity can be thought of as an inner sense of 'wholeness'.
Artistic integrity is the outcome of measurable behaviour resulting from enacted values and standards of honesty, morality, belief, intent and creativity.
The measurable behaviours of ethics is regarded by many as the honesty and truthfulness of one's actions. Ethical integrity supports internal consistency as a virtue, and suggests that parties, holding within themselves demonstrably conflicting values, should account for the discrepancy. As discrepancy is a active hallmark of human changes, ethical changes can lead to ethical conflicts as well as sound ethical relationships.
The integrity of chan6es is founded in creativity, morality, earthly life and compassion.
In 2005, when Chris Kathryn decided to embark on an exploration of what change meant in the minds of others, she decided to begin her research with change music lyrics. This collation of change songs and lyrics are here on non profit chan6es. Chan6es Music is accompanied by a wide body of change information. Check out the search box below and if you can't find the change help you are looking for, share your search query in the I'd Like To Share comment box below, and both your query and Chris's response to it will be posted on You're Welcome.
Thank you Christian Wolf for sharing How Singing Changes The Brain
integrity retiring from office (1801)
James Gillray, was an English caricaturist and print maker famous for his etched political and social satires, mainly published between 1792 and 1810 . Gillray's cartoon, 'Integrity Retiring From Office!' (1801) shows William Pitt's government walking out of the Treasury while the Whigs - including Joseph Jekyll with his dustpan and brush - watch on with glee. Pitt had resigned because he had promised the Irish a measure of Catholic emancipation as part of the deal leading up to the Act of Union (1800), but George III refused to support the move.
Real elephants are the largest living mammalian relatives of humans. They used to live longer than us, but today human poachers, traders and consumers are the reason for their short lives. Today Elephants are being brutally murdered by people who revere money more than life and this is leading to their extinction. Money is planet earths biggest white elephant. Money does not oxygenate, it does not water and it does not give life, but where there is a belief in possession, there is also the belief that everything comes at a price. The ultimate price of earthly transactions is always life. The war money inflicts on earthly life infuses into the integrity of what it means to be human. So much so that today only a vary rare human believes they can live without money. Elephants can certainly live without money. All an elephant needs is life. Animals can certainly live without money. All animals need is life. Earth lives without money. Earth gives
us life. So what are we doing with our money and how do our choices impact on life?
What is the truth about change?
The world change is brimming with human integrity yet a change message can confuse the integrity of another. Also feeling confused by a change message isn't about the integrity of a communicator, but it is about message clarity. For example, lets say "change the world!" is transmitted and now "change the world!" is in the minds of both the speaker and the listener. The ambiguity in "change the world!" now lies entirely with the creativity of both parties. As change is a noun and a doing word, when it is used in a sentence, the transmission is generally about some kind of call to action. Without knowing what kind of world is being referred to, the action of " the world!" is now open for interpretation. Einstein might call the physicality of that interpretation realitivity. Where the person is standing at the time the call for change is given, compared to where the person is standing when the call for change is received and digested. In Einstein's world both positions matter. A social scientist might interpret Einsteins theory of relativity in accordance to personal historical records of experience, culture, capability for understanding, belief and perception about what the term world represents to a thinking and feeling individual. So, while a statement calling for a changed world might feel perfectly at home with the integrity of the caller, the call may feel less appealing to the receiver in accordance to where the message has been received and how the message is being creatively interpreted. Any call to activate change in the orators perception of the word world is full of integrity even if that integrity is not transmitted clearly enough to offer a listener clarity. A simple statement like 'change the world", could simply be a call from a mum to a teenager to action a regular picking up of dirty laundry from the floor of the teenagers bedroom. It could be a call to join a group, a religion, a party, a complaint, a revolution, a love in, an end to suffering, a meal, a war. When using the word change, clarity about the call to action is imperative if the orator wants the message of intent to be transparent. The more the intention of any message is understood, the more the integrity of the orator is appears and in so doing helps to clarify message intent as moral or immoral, just or unjust, right or wrong, doable or undo able, wanted or unwanted. So lets change the world by furthering our understanding of what it means to be called to action from those who are calling us to action it. Let us change the world by questioning the intent of the orator calling for action so that we may be clearer about how our integrity fits into the message. Keeping in mind that all messages about change are full of integrity, even though the call to action is not always clear.
May your God bless you and keep you in mindful courage, serenity and wisdom