One More Sentence

One More Sentence simple thoughts.. simple words

https://linktr.ee/blackruns
https://www.black-runs.com

Previously Sophie_S (2014) We are all philosophers, poets and artists.

/pʰi.lo.so.pʰí.a/

In Ancient Greece, philosophia - the love of wisdom - wasn’t just an academic pursuit. It was a way of life for those who sought truth, virtue, and understanding. It hung in the air like the dust of the “agora”. Amateurs of the infinite. Trying to translate what the soul whispers. Philosophy begins in a pause. Poetry in a pulse. Art, in the quiet act of turning pain into beauty.

27/07/2026

Are people like paintings?

When we distance ourselves, do we see the true colours?

A painting doesn’t change simply because we’re looking at it differently. We change our position, and a different truth becomes visible.

Are people similar? Or does the fact that people change while we are changing make a difference?

When we stand too close to a painting we see the brushstrokes, and every single one feels significant. We see its flaws, emotions, and individual moments. A single harsh word or kind gesture can dominate your perception.

Stand too far away… and the details disappear. Memory simplifies people into symbols; either heroes or villains. We stop seeing the complexity that made them human.

So is it about finding the right distance? Where is that sweet spot that composition emerges? When we begin to understand the patterns rather than the incidents. When we notice who they consistently are, not just what they did today.

So when do we see truth?

Perhaps truth is not a single image. A painting is simultaneously made of its individual brushstrokes and the complete scene. Both are true.

Are we not both our individual actions and the pattern they leave behind?

We are always registering patterns. Consciously or subconsciously, the way people treat us, the choices they make, and the words they leave unsaid all become part of our picture of who they are.

We accumulate thousands of hours of pattern recognition. We call it experience.

We’re like AI data centres reaching for water to survive. Experience becomes our training set.

Every gesture, every word, every expression gets logged into a puzzle we’ve seen pieces of before. And once enough of the pieces begin to fit, our attention shifts to the ones that don’t.

Almost deliberately.

Think of human relationships.

When the picture seems too good to be true, we search for the pieces that don’t fit. We look for the flaw that justifies creating distance.

When the picture resembles a pattern we’ve been hurt by before, we search instead for the pieces that don’t belong there. The moments that suggest this time might be different.

Perhaps we don’t just recognise patterns.

Perhaps we compare them against our own internal model of how people ought to behave. That model is shaped by our own character.

A fundamentally kind person struggles to believe cruelty is intentional. They search for evidence that excuses it.
"Maybe they are stressed. Maybe they didn’t mean it. Maybe I misunderstood.”

Someone who has learned to distrust does the opposite. They search for evidence that confirms betrayal.

Neither is looking at the same puzzle objectively. They’re both trying to make the puzzle fit the pattern they already carry within themselves.

We magnify the qualities that resemble our own, because accepting anything else requires accepting that not everyone sees the world as we do.

So, do we project our own values onto others because they’re the only values we’ve ever lived from? Do we simply unconsciously ask - “How can who they are fit with who I am?”.

Sometimes we bend the evidence to preserve our faith in people. Sometimes we bend it to preserve our fear of them.

We like to think we’re studying the painting.

But all along, the painting has been revealing something about the observer.

15/07/2026

Dear you,

On a little paint and a little presence

I was at our humble county house with my mum. She and dad built it when I was still a baby. May he rest in peace.

It stands quietly in the middle of the land, the colour of milk chocolate, almost like a light chocolate cake. It used to be white.

Olive and pomegranate trees surround it. An old fence marks its borders - once bright white, now softened by time - and a rusty gate still welcomes us home.

Decades have passed over the stone tiles beneath our feet. Every season has touched the soil. Every year has left its fingerprint.

My mum looks around and sighs.

“It needs a lot of work”.

I paused. Then I smiled.

“It just needs a little paint… and a little presence”.

The fence needs fresh paint. The gate needs attention. The garden longs for someone to care enough to kneel beside it again.

Not everything needs rebuilding. Sometimes it simply needs us to return.

A little presence.

We spend so much of our lives building, creating, developing and maintaining things we will never take with us. We chase larger homes, new kitchens, better views, greater comforts - believing each improvement will finally make us feel complete.

Sometimes, we treat the people in our lives the same way. Searching for someone smarter. More beautiful. More successful. Funnier. Sexier. More exciting. Always another -er.

As though love, too, can be endlessly upgraded.

Yet I often wonder… How much more do we really need?

Do we build beautiful homes because they bring us peace, or because we’re trying to fill the quiet spaces within ourselves?

Fresh paint fades. Wood weathers. Walls crack. And one day, so will we.

Perhaps our relentless pursuit of "better" quietly blinds us to what is already good.

Comfort is a gift, but it has a peculiar habit of moving the finish line. There is always another renovation, another purchase, another dream waiting just beyond today’s satisfaction.

Meanwhile, how much time do we actually spend inside the homes we’ve worked so hard to create? We’re constantly searching for somewhere else.

A coffee shop. A restaurant. Another country. Another holiday. Another escape. We become experts at leaving the very lives we’ve spent years building. Are we every truly present?

So yes… I’ll paint the fence around my little chocolate cake. Then I’ll sit beneath the olive and pomegranate trees and watch nature quietly remind me of something I keep forgetting.

She never chases the next version of herself. She doesn’t compare one season to another. She doesn’t abandon one landscape in search of a prettier one. She simply remains. She adapts. She nourishes. She blooms.

And somehow, without ever asking for more, she is endlessly enough.

Anyway… I’d better get back to painting.

10/07/2026

Dear you,

On Environmental Disrespect

Few subjects divide us as deeply as the environment.

Scientists present data, charts, and models that point towards a warming planet. Politicians argue over policy, economics, and responsibility. Activists warn of irreversible damage and demand urgent action. Others dismiss the warnings as exaggeration, conspiracy, or simply another cycle in Earth’s long history.

Between these voices, society has become trapped in a debate where certainty is scarce, tempers are plentiful, and every opinion seems to demand allegiance.

But perhaps we have been asking the wrong question.

The most revealing question might not be whether climate models are accurate to the decimal point, nor whether governments and private interests have ulterior motives, nor even whether humanity stands on the brink of catastrophe.

Perhaps the better question is:

What does our treatment of nature say about us?

Long before there were environmental reports or international summits and myriads of forms to sign, human beings understood something instinctively.

Rivers gave life. Forests provided shelter. The seasons dictated survival. Nature was not viewed as an opponent to conquer but as a partner in existence.

Somewhere along the path of progress, that relationship changed.

The natural world slowly became a warehouse of resources rather than a community of living systems. Mountains became minerals. Oceans became shipping lanes and overfished waters. Forests became timber and inconsiderate entertainment. Animals became units of production and consumption. The living world became an inventory.

We stopped speaking of stewardship and began speaking of exploitation.

This shift is philosophical before it is environmental.

Disrespect rarely begins with destruction. It begins with detachment.

When we stop seeing value in something beyond its usefulness to us, we permit ourselves to neglect it. The same principle governs our relationships with people.

When another person becomes merely a means to an end, respect fades. The environment suffers from the same moral blindness.

Whether one believes the planet is warming because of human activity, natural cycles, or a combination of both almost becomes secondary to this larger truth.

If someone borrowed your home and returned it littered with rubbish, broken furniture, polluted water, and neglected gardens, few would argue over the precise cause of the damage before recognising the disrespect that had occurred.

The offence is not measured solely by the consequences but by the attitude that produced them.

Nature deserves the same consideration.

To care for the world around us is not simply an environmental obligation. It is an expression of character. It demonstrates humility, the recognition that we are participants in life rather than its owners. It reflects gratitude for what we have inherited and responsibility for what we leave behind.

Civilisations often measure greatness by what they build. Should it not be measured by what they preserve?

History repeatedly reminds us that societies capable of extraordinary innovation are equally capable of extraordinary carelessness. We solve problems with astonishing brilliance while creating new ones with remarkable confidence. Our intelligence has advanced faster than our reverence.

Environmental disrespect is therefore not merely about pollution, carbon emissions, or disappearing species. It is about the human tendency to mistake possession for permission.

To believe that because we can alter a landscape, we are justified in doing so. To think that we have an inherent right to abuse, over-consume, and litter the natural world. To assume that dominance is the same as stewardship.

The irony is that nature itself does not negotiate. It neither rewards our opinions nor punishes our politics. It simply responds to our actions. Whether those responses unfold over years or centuries is almost beside the point.

The deeper issue is moral rather than scientific.

How we treat the natural world reflects how we understand our place within it.

Are we caretakers, temporary guests entrusted with something precious? Or are we consumers, measuring value only by immediate utility?

Every generation answers that question, not with speeches or debates, but with its behaviour.

Would we throw empty plastic bottles onto the floor of our own home and invite our guests to do the same? Would we willingly allow guests to consume all the food we had budgeted for the month? Would we light a cigarette, drop it onto the sofa, and simply wait for the house to catch fire?

Of course not. Yet this is often how we treat the world beyond our front door.

Perhaps environmental respect is less about saving the Earth than it is about saving something within ourselves.

For the Earth has endured ice ages, extinctions, continents colliding, and civilisations rising and falling. It will almost certainly outlast us.

The question is whether we will leave behind evidence of a species that learned to live with wisdom, or merely proof that intelligence without reverence is one of the most dangerous forces in nature.



10/07/2026

Dear you,

On Privacy vs. Secrecy

When does privacy become secrecy?

It’s a question I’ve been sitting with for a while. If we’re in a relationship, should we tell our partner every time someone else shows interest in us?

Even the fleeting moments. The harmless compliment. The passing flirtation. The message that went nowhere.

At first, the answer feels obvious. If nothing happened, why mention it? Why create unnecessary insecurity over something that meant nothing?

So I wonder if that isn’t the real question.

It might not be about whether the advance mattered or not. Perhaps it’s whether the silence does.

Secrecy has a curious way of changing shape. It rarely begins as deception. More often, it disguises itself as protection or kindness.

“I don’t want to upset them. It’s insignificant. It would only create problems."

Sometimes that’s true.

Not every passing interaction deserves a conversation. Love isn’t measured by how exhaustively we report our day. Transparency isn’t about accounting for every glance, every compliment or every conversation. That kind of honesty can become performance rather than trust.

Yet I’ve learned that what we choose not to share often reveals as much as what we do.

Not because every omission is dishonest, but because every omission asks a question.

Who am I protecting?

The philosopher Sissela Bok makes a distinction I find incredibly helpful. Privacy, she argues, is something that belongs to you. Secrecy is intentionally withholding something from someone who has a legitimate interest in knowing it.

At first, the difference seems subtle. The more I think about it, the more I realise it’s profound. Privacy protects the self. Secrecy protects information. One says, “this is mine”. The other says, “I need you not to know.”

Instead, perhaps, honesty asks a gentler question:

If my partner found out later, would I wish they’d heard it from me?

If the answer is yes, then maybe it deserves to be shared.

Relationships complicate that distinction because they create something neither person owns alone: a shared reality.

Some experiences remain entirely mine. My thoughts. My memories. My inner world.

Others become ours - not because they happened to both of us, but because they shape the trust between us.

The wisdom, perhaps, lies in knowing the difference.

Imagine this.
A woman is at work. A colleague begins complimenting her from time to time. Nothing inappropriate. Then one afternoon he says, “If you weren’t with someone, I’d definitely ask you out.” She smiles awkwardly, thanks him, and tells him she’s happy in her relationship, and the conversation ends.

Life carries on. Should she tell her partner?

Now change only one detail. She never mentions it. Months later, they’re at a work event together. Her partner meets the colleague for the first time. Laughing, the colleague says, “Remember when I almost asked you out?”

Her partner hears about it for the first time. Nothing has changed. Nothing happened. Yet something feels different. Why? The event hasn’t changed. Only the secrecy has.

That, to me, is philosophically fascinating.

It makes me wonder whether trust is damaged by what happened, or by discovering there was a version of reality I wasn’t invited into.

Martin Buber believed relationships flourish when we encounter each other genuinely, not as edited versions of ourselves. Not because we owe each other every thought that passes through our minds, but because intimacy quietly erodes whenever we begin curating what the other person is allowed to know.

Kierkegaard might ask an even harder question. Did I keep it to myself because it truly didn’t matter? Or because admitting it would force me to confront something uncomfortable within myself?

Perhaps that’s why secrecy is so difficult to define. It rarely begins with betrayal. A sentence left unsaid. A conversation postponed. A harmless detail that somehow feels easier to carry alone.

Over time, those decisions can create distance long before they create conflict.

I’ve seen it in my own life. I’ve seen it in the lives of friends. I’ve watched couples drift apart not because of dramatic acts of infidelity, but because they slowly stopped letting each other witness the truth of their lives. They remained physically close while quietly signing out emotionally.

Maybe that’s why Kant insisted honesty is a duty. Not because every truth is easy, but because every deliberate deception reshapes the relationship, whether it’s discovered or not.

I’m not convinced love asks us to surrender all privacy. I think we all deserve spaces that remain our own.

But I am convinced that love struggles to survive where secrecy becomes more protected than the relationship itself.

So perhaps the question was never whether someone flirted with us. Perhaps the better question is: Does this belong only to me, or has it become part of us?

Maybe that’s the line between privacy and secrecy. And maybe love isn’t asking for perfect transparency.

Maybe it’s simply asking,
“Was there ever a moment when I chose to protect the secret more carefully than I protected us?”

I don’t know about you, but I don’t want someone who simply shares my life. I want a partner in crime. Someone who knows me well enough that we never feel the need to edit ourselves around each other.

And those…
those can’t afford secrecy.



09/07/2026

"The Voice in the Next Room"

Poetry.
She stole my fu***ng life.

She came in quietly,
like a voice in the next room,
asking me to listen.

She stole my mornings,
coffee became confession
and silence formed its own language
I kept trying to ignore.

She stole my sleep at night,
when every thought I buried during the day
came knocking at three in the morning
begging to become a sentence.

Poetry,
she took the easy version of me.
She made me question my gravity,
unearth my every sin
and hold love in the lakes of my hands.

She demanded everything.
Joy. Grief. Longing.

The impossible weight
of a feather-light life.

She made me hold a magnifying glass…
on me.

Oh, poetry…
she didn’t steal my life.
She gave it back.

Deciphered me,
reassembled me.

I live in a sunset now,
holding the conversation
without presence.
Loving people
without apology.

She left me post-it notes of pain,
stuck to where I’d have to see them.

Reminders -
I was still open.
Human.
Here.

So yes, poetry…
you stole my fu***ng life.
But you gave me courage
to turn my scars into sound.
To sentences someone else might hear
and whisper “Me too”.

Because in the quietest moments,
you held me - still - on the floor.
Some call it meditation,
I call it life.
Reflections of our sins at night.

Poetry.

You.
Reading this.

You are poetry.

Remember this.

- One More Sentence -



08/07/2026

Dear you,

On Social Disintegration

The instability of modern politics is not the disease itself; it is the symptom.

The deeper crisis is the erosion of shared moral values, social bonds, and civic responsibility in a society increasingly organised around money and individual gain.

Politics follows culture. Government becomes a reflection of the people it governs.

Increasingly I notice how we have stopped asking, “What is good?” and instead ask, “What benefits me?”.

If that is the question we ask of ourselves, should we really be surprised when it becomes the question our institutions ask of us?

Why are we so shocked with how we are governed?

I don’t know if politics has failed us. Perhaps it has become us.

Aristotle believed that the character of a city could never exceed the character of its citizens. Politics, for him, was not separate from ethics. It was ethics made visible. And this is where I start to feel like a failure as I, too, am a part of this humanity.

I have been thinking about that a lot lately.

He did not believe that the purpose of a nation was merely survival, nor wealth, nor military strength. A city exists, he wrote, not simply that people may live, but that they may live well.

Are we?

We have become remarkably good at measuring things that can be counted. GDP. Productivity. Consumption. Profit.

Yet I cannot remember the last time I heard anyone ask whether we are becoming wiser. Or kinder. Or more just.

Perhaps those things no longer fit neatly into a spreadsheet. Have we forgotten that the true purpose of a nation is to cultivate citizens who can live virtuous and fulfilling lives? Have we forgotten that we are here to live one ourselves?

There are days when I believe we have wandered so far from ourselves that I struggle to imagine the road back. Then there are days when a stranger reminds me that the road never disappeared.

About a year ago, I dropped my hat outside our little country house. I forgot about it.

A year later, I walked past the same spot. A neighbour I’d never met stepped out of her house smiling, holding my hat in her hands.

“I’ve been waiting for someone to come looking for this,” she said.

It was such a small thing. She could have thrown it away. She could have kept it. She could have ignored it entirely. Instead, she chose honesty.

I remember walking home thinking - not about the hat - but about hope.

It felt, in some quiet way, as though God was whispering, “I am still here. Do not despair.”

Aristotle believed that virtue is formed through habit. Not grand gestures. Not speeches. Not declarations. Habits. We become just by doing just things. Generous by practising generosity. Courageous by choosing courage.

Perhaps civilisation is built in exactly the same way. Not through elections every four or five years. But through neighbours returning hats.

Perhaps we forget that we shape the world little by little. Our choices today, define the world tomorrow. I sound simplistic, or is the point merely simple?

Sometimes I disagree with Aristotle. He famously called man a political animal, believing we naturally flourish in communities because only communities allow us to cultivate justice, reason and virtue.

On my darker days, I read that sentence and think he never opened social media. Or watched the evening news. Or sat quietly on a train listening to strangers reduce one another to stereotypes.

Some days I find myself fantasising about disappearing into the countryside forever.

No neighbours. No politics. No endless outrage. Just trees. Silence.

Isolation may not be our natural condition. But lately, it has felt strangely tempting. Then I remember the woman with my hat. Perhaps I am not tired of community, but tired of what we have mistaken for community.

Because somewhere between the market and the algorithm, we forgot that a society is not merely an economy. Markets are extraordinary at allocating resources. They are hopeless at deciding what is morally valuable.

The market can tell us the price of a loaf of bread. It cannot tell us the value of trust, acceptance, or neighbourliness. When market logic begins to govern education, healthcare, relationships, even our own sense of identity, we begin measuring people the way we measure products.

Useful. Unproductive. Successful. Disposable.

And then we wonder why politics begins to resemble a marketplace instead of a moral conversation.

Social media only magnifies the problem. Algorithms reward outrage. Certainty. Tribal identity. The more furious we become, the more visible we become. And so politics increasingly resembles the internet. A competition for attention. A game. Sometimes I genuinely have to stop and ask myself, "Is this really our reality?"

Have we reduced public life to politicians playing Battleship while the rest of us quietly absorb the collateral damage? And we watch. We scroll. We consume. As though spectators in our own civilisation.

At least I do not have to buy another hat.

That one makes me laugh every time I think it. Perhaps because it reminds me that hope often arrives wearing ordinary clothes.

Not long after, I heard someone - ten years younger than me - complain that every bus was full of immigrants. Not immigrants. Illegal immigrants.

I wanted to ask: “Did you ask everyone for a passport? Did you check their visa? Or did you simply mistake skin colour for evidence?”

We have become frighteningly confident in conclusions we have never earned.

Judgement has become faster than curiosity. Certainty has become easier than compassion. That frightens me far more than any election result.

Sometimes I wonder whether I have failed my ancestors. Whether I have inherited something precious and quietly allowed it to fracture. Then I remember that neighbour again.

One ordinary act of honesty standing against a thousand loud headlines. Perhaps that is how civilisation has always survived. Not because extraordinary people rescued it. But because ordinary people refused to stop practising virtue. Aristotle was right about one thing above all else.

Character is habit.

And habits belong to all of us. Not governments alone. Not politicians.

Us.

Families. Schools. Neighbours. Friends. Every promise we keep. Every kindness we choose. Every lie we refuse to tell. No law can legislate virtue. It can restrain vice. But it cannot teach love. It cannot produce trust. It cannot create responsibility. Those things are cultivated long before they arrive in Parliament. I fear the lack of trust is not in politicians, but in ourselves.

If our moral compass fractures, our politics will inevitably reflect the break. Politics is not the origin of social disintegration. It is its consequence.

So perhaps renewal will not begin with the next election. Perhaps it begins when someone quietly returns another person’s hat.

Mine did.

To the stranger who reminded me that goodness still exists, thank you. You gave me back more than a hat.



18/06/2026

Dear you,

On Birth and Existence

Mind-blowing.

Why am I here?

What version do I believe? The one of science or the supernatural one? Have I arrived by pure chance? Am I mere coincidence? Or am I here with purpose - to learn, to aid? Am I the product of karma? Did I sign a contract on the way down? Am I just a cell in the universe that evolved enough to ask questions about itself?

What is convenient for me to believe?

The Earth's conditions allowed complex chemistry to begin? That life emerged through abiogenesis, RNA worlds, and protocells? Or do I find more hope in the comfort of intentional creation - life as consciousness?

Maybe everything is energy. Frequency. Movement.

Whatever version I choose, spirituality keeps whispering the same thing: Life is not random.

Science may explain the mechanism, but spirituality explores the meaning.

From a young age, I can remember joking with family members… “Next time, you’re on your own. I’m not coming back here to help you.”

Jokingly, of course.

But what if it wasn’t a joke?

What if, this life, was your choice? What if you volunteered for this?

If Jung was around, perhaps he’d say: 'Perhaps the “choice” is not a literal pre-birth contract, but a symbolic truth.'

Our psyche seems drawn toward certain lessons, wounds and transformations. Almost as if life continuously presents the material needed for inner integration.

Even if matter came first and consciousness emerged later or consciousness came first and matter emerged within it - what does it change?

Are we expressions of something universal?
Fragments of consciousness learning itself through form?

I am not an expert. But I can put two and two together.

We do not merely compute like AI.

We feel. We grieve. We imagine. We love.

And somehow, we are aware that we are aware. Whether you call that consciousness, spirit, or soul - there is something astonishing about being alive.

Science and faith are not enemies. Teilhard was an advocate of this. Evolution does not only produce biological complexity, but an increasing consciousness.

He intentionally drew from Christian symbolism, despite being both a priest and a scientist.

“I am the Alpha and the Omega.” - found in the Book of Revelation. For Teilhard, the idea of an ultimate Omega Point being the culmination of evolution was central. This converged with the divine. A God drawing evolution forward. This would mean life is not a random drift, but with direction towards deeper awareness and union.

What a magnificent philosophical loop this creates. If God is both the Alpha and Omega, then perhaps reality is not simply moving from past to future. Perhaps we are pushed by our origin and drawn by our destiny.

We experience life as though it contains pattern, symbolism, lessons and coincidences.

This creates a powerful intuition:

Maybe I am not merely happening to life. Maybe life is also happening through me. I am not sure consciousness is a late accident. Perhaps we are not small minds trapped inside a vast universe, but one aperture through which the universe becomes aware of itself. (reminiscent of Alan Watts)

Perhaps reality is not random, nor scripted. Perhaps purpose and chance are not opposites, but collaborators.

Perhaps I arrived by chance with purpose, or on purpose and learning through chance.

Either way, I am here.

Aware that I am aware. Alive inside a universe strange enough to produce matter that feels, questions, grieves, imagines, and loves.

And maybe that is miracle enough: That the universe, through us, has learned to ask who it is.



13/06/2026

Dear you,

On Happiness

Life breaks us. In every possible way.

It takes from us our certainty, our youth, our loves, our illusions of any permanence. Some wounds arrive as thunder, others gather slowly, like water finding cracks in stone. Yet it is not merely suffering that defines us, but what we summon of it.

Somewhere in-between the damage, we are called upon to create our own happiness.

Do we? Are we capable of happiness? Am I?

I believe we are. Yet a more difficult question lingers within me: are we capable of sustaining it?

We are creatures of excess, so we rush forward when patience is required and retreat when courage is demanded. We confuse intensity for purpose and stillness for surrender.

The ancient sages spoke of opposing forces within us. One driving us to act, conquer, build and shape the world according to our will. The other draws us to reflect, receive, surrender, understand.

Is the lesson in sustaining balance? A daily practice. A continual adjustment of our sails against changing winds.

Each hardship exposes an excess, a deficiency or an illusion. If we are willing to learn, our fractures become instruction.

Should I not view happiness as absence of pain, then? Could it instead be the quiet harmony that emerges when opposing forces within us cease their struggle and begin to work together?

Is it harmony, rather than happiness that we seek? As fragile as it is, can fortune take harmony away?

I wonder if we feel comfortable within harmony. Do we sit peacefully with happiness?

Have you ever found yourself experiencing apprehension in the presence of happiness?

A fleeting thought that perhaps you are not deserving of it, or that it isn’t here to stay. As if happiness is borrowed - a charming visitor for a day.

Even with all my self-awareness, doubt enters the room whenever happiness grazes me. A small voice whispers that it may be temporary. That something will inevitably disturb the peace.

It’s almost as though we have become more familiar with problems than with contentment. As though part of us has developed an underlying sadistic need for struggle. We know how to complain, analyse and anticipate what might go wrong. Yet rejoicing, accepting, and simply existing in harmony can feel strangely unfamiliar.

It wasn’t until I realised that happiness had always been around me, and that I simply wasn’t noticing it, that my perception began to shift.

I began to see that I had inherited a perception that was never entirely my own. One that had infiltrated my mind from a young age, shaped by expectations, comparisons, and society’s endless insistence that happiness exists somewhere beyond the present moment.

Always further ahead. Always requiring more.

But what if happiness is not something we chase?

What if it is something we simply need to notice?

To do so, we must also notice the other side of the coin: our painful craving for complaint. The subtle addiction to focusing on what is missing. A drug.

So, the “I don’t have enough to go on a holiday” becomes “I have enough to share a good meal with my loved ones”.

The “My mum doesn’t understand that I am an adult”, becomes “She understands me in a way nobody else does. She is always there.”

That to me, is happiness.

Not a grand event. Not a life free of hardship.

The mere collection of tiny realisations about our ordinary days. Enough of those moments ,gathered together, become a happy life.

The problems do not disappear. They simply become what they were always meant to be. Things we deal with, rather than things we worship. Things that occupy less space, allowing more room for gratitude, connection and joy.

The more I questioned the stories I had been given, the more I realised that happiness had never abandoned me.

It had simply been waiting patiently beneath the noise, asking only that I pay attention.

One More Sentence

Address

London

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when One More Sentence posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share