Within a species, one of the few factors that determines a specimen's rank is the ability to overpower others, often through control. However, in our society, power takes form in many different shapes — wealth and intelligence among others. If we define intelligence as the inherent ability to make decisions regardless of our primal instincts, an intelligent person would be able to put their most urgent desires second to their preferences, principles, or other external factors. Even so, people naturally seek fulfillment of their desires over consideration of others.

But then, what is the origin of the feeling of guilt? What is it that makes someone feel ashamed of the actions they take against others, and why can one live happily with certain sins but be disturbed by others for eternity? The truth is, every single intelligent being has a choice in every given situation, and this choice has the power to influence their life and the lives of others. But when one’s interests clash with the interests of another, they may either screw over their competitor and win, or hesitate and suffer a loss … if they even have the choice in the first place, since those who are less privileged don’t have the ability to win. But for those in complete power (or with unlimited wealth), both paths are available almost all the time — they either sacrifice their interests and preserve their principles for the less fortunate or, by pursuing their goals ruthlessly, they sacrifice their morality. Superficially, our current society encourages its constituents to act morally; but does this really lead to a happier life?

Consider the idea of a prosperous kingdom, where the king is a forgiving, merciful ruler. One day, the kingdom is invaded by a neighboring force. Thinking rationally from the perspective of morality, the war will only lead to tremendous losses and depletion of resources for both sides. Knowing this would lead the king to refrain from fighting and surrender. But this decision would enrage those who suffer as a result, while others would come to believe that the king is too weak and would deny his authority. 

Thinking of the kingdom as a representation of a modern human, the invasion being a conflict of interest with another, we can see that the choice between self-interest and self-sacrifice is a never-ending dilemma. Choosing to sacrifice your interests with every decision, you risk a conflict within your sense of self (the divided people of the kingdom) and may find yourself in an unfavorable position in comparison to those who acted with self-interest. Chasing after morality thus only contributes to happiness when the interests of both parties align; otherwise, it only creates a sense of loss.

Yet the selfish pursuit of your ambitions would ultimately lead to the same conclusion. At some point, the public will riot against an ambitious, ego-centric conqueror too, tired of hunger and bloodshed. Selfishness and sacrifice counteract against each other — the conscience put aside to achieve your goal sets your happiness on a declining slope.

In this sense, life may seem black and white — but it’s not. There is no straight path to happiness. Every decision you make will affect the “grayness” of your life; some will make it harder to live, some easier. Power in this world only determines the size of the brush one paints with, as it can easily stain the shade of those nearby. One must carefully balance their choices in a way that maintains a balance in the world — sometimes seek their own interests, sometimes sacrifice themselves to brighten the lives of others. After all, the world is an image painted in gray by billions.