Personal Principles Theory

Principle One: Stage-specific truth matters more than a final answer

A theory of stage-specific truth

Do not rush toward an ultimate answer. Follow the goal that feels most real and meaningful in the present stage.

People change. Age, experience, environment, and turning points all reshape what we want. Because of that, I do not force myself to possess a final answer from the beginning. What matters more is whether I can face myself honestly in each stage, and sincerely follow the goal that I truly recognize as meaningful right now.

I allow myself to grow, and I allow myself to revise. But I do not deny the value of sincere commitment in the present just because the future may change.

Principle Two: Commit sincerely, but do not lose boundaries

A theory of bounded commitment and tolerance for change

A relationship can involve sincere commitment, but it should not require the long-term loss of boundaries. Change should be allowed, but long-term imbalance should not be indulged.

No relationship, whether friendship, romance, or collaboration, should stay in a boundless all-in state forever. I can invest wholeheartedly at important moments, and I can go all in for people or things that truly matter, but I cannot keep doing so at the cost of judgment, feedback, or selfhood.

I accept that people change. I allow others to change, and I am willing to leave some room for that change. If the change is good, I am willing to support it. If the change is harmful, I will point it out, communicate, and try to correct course.

Allowing change is not the same as tolerating long-term imbalance. Giving chances is not the same as postponing judgment forever. When a relationship keeps drifting into imbalance, exhaustion, or broken boundaries, I have the right to reassess it and withdraw my commitment.

Principle Three: Whether a relationship continues depends on sincere communication

A theory of sincere communication and relational continuity

Conflict is unavoidable. What decides whether a relationship is worth continuing is whether sincere, mutual, and sustained communication is still possible.

Conflict always exists. No long-term relationship, whether friendship, romance, or otherwise, can remain conflict-free. What truly determines whether a relationship can last is not the absence of conflict, but whether both sides can still enter sincere communication.

Sincere communication does not need to happen all at once. It can take multiple attempts, different angles, and different degrees of depth. It can also grow more natural, stable, and honest over time. But it must exist, and it must remain mutual.

I am willing to communicate, and I am willing to give time. I am willing to face problems inside a relationship instead of escaping them. But if enough time and opportunities have been given, and the other side still keeps avoiding communication and refusing responsibility for repair, then leaving is not cruelty. It is respect for the basic logic of relationships.

Conflict is not the most dangerous thing. The inability to communicate is. Whether sincere communication remains possible is my core standard for deciding whether a relationship should continue.

Creed

• I respect stage-specific truth and do not demand an ultimate answer too early.
• I value sincere commitment in relationships, but not at the cost of losing boundaries.
• I allow people and relationships to change; I am willing to communicate, revise, and wait, but I will not indulge long-term imbalance or continued avoidance.
• I believe the right companions are not those who never produce conflict, but those who remain willing to communicate sincerely and face conflict together.