I am not a machine, and I am certainly often unaware that I am not behaving optimally from the perspective of others (if you do not see an inadequacy, then you cannot try to work on it).
Apart from that, the following approaches are a guide in my decisions:
- “The freedom of the One ends where the freedom of the other begins.” In practice, this results in respect for the boundaries of other people, for the relativity of one’s own desires, and the need to sometimes coordinate with others, or to coordinate with others.
at least to be open to it.
For me, for example, in road traffic, this means that I sometimes “leave” someone who is not normally entitled to drive when I see that the otherwise “never” would get into the dense, flowing traffic. At some point I will be in a position to do so, and then I will need something like that, or so. I’m happy about it.
At the moment, this is what my actions informs in the here and now – and not any mental constructs that I may carry around with me.
Exceptions would be hostage-taking situations and the like.
So if “because of me” a blatantly irresponsible driver loses his driving licence and has to “Depperltest”, then I am sorry for that somewhere, but I still prefer it to be because of this driver an innocent man is killed.
In meditations, for example, one can notice relatively quickly how far away from “neutral” one is in one’s inner tuning – and conclude that this “electromagnetic subpoena” is most likely a permanent, but hardly concretely feasible impact on its environment.