Parents have no moral right to "take pride in" their children's success. Most parents undoubtedly do so however they ought not to do so. It is the parent's proper work to prepare the child for adulthood not to lay the grounds for making the child feel a failure. The child will undoubtedly fail in some respects. It is the parent's job to prepare the child for not always measuring up to what society deems to be success.Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 10:04 amIn part, this is due to the parents having pride in and taking credit for their children's success. All loving parents want their children to be happy, and self-sufficiency is one essential component of adult comfort and happiness. But the notion that parents deserve credit for their children's success is, I think, misguided. So is the notion that parents should be blamed for their children's failures.Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 5:36 am The ethic of success is often drummed into children. This is wrong and cruel because the child is not responsible for society's or their parents' expectations.
What is correct is to inform the child other people will often judge him or her according to his or her success, but not to be worried about this as the individual is responsible to his of her own principles, not society's, and the most the parents expect is he will try not to break the law or hurt his friends.
Parenting -- like other human relationships -- is a two-way street. The parent who thinks rote "parenting techniques" will "work" is often incorrect because every child is different, and every relationship is unique. From infancy on, the child influences the relationship just as much as the parent does.
This does not mean that parents shouldn't teach their children. Of course they should. But just as different educational styles and techniques work best for different children, so do different relationship styles. The notion that parenting is a "job" rather than a relationship is responsible for parents becoming ego-involved in the success of their children, and in their failures. Would a spouse take credit (or blame) for the career success of his or her spouse? (I remember Tiger Woods' father writing a book entitled "Raising a Tiger" in which he took credit for his son's golfing success. I found it disgusting.)
As far as lying: the notion that lying is always immoral is ridiculous. Picture this:
A jack-booted Gestapo officer is calmly grinding lit cigarettes into the bare chest of a handsome member of the Maquis, who looks like a young Louis Jourdan. "Tell me where the Jews are hiding!" snarls the officer, for some strange reason speaking in English with a German accent.
"I don't know where they are," insists the handsome member of the French resistance.
Do the "lying is always wrong" crowd really insist that the Maquis either rat out the Jews, or insist that he won't talk even though that would lead to even more torture, and, possibly, to the truth being eventually dragged out of him?
Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
- psyreporter
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
I am not certain if that would be a wise advise for parents, considering the ongoing nature-nurture debate.Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 1:22 pm Parents have no moral right to "take pride in" their children's success. Most parents undoubtedly do so however they ought not to do so. It is the parent's proper work to prepare the child for adulthood not to lay the grounds for making the child feel a failure. The child will undoubtedly fail in some respects. It is the parent's job to prepare the child for not always measuring up to what society deems to be success.
An example story is that of Susan Polgar, world's first female chess chess grandmaster from New York.
NGC: My Brilliant Brain - Nature or Nurture?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wzs33wvr9E
Her father, László Polgár, performed a unique educational experiment to prove that children can make exceptional achievements in life if trained in a special way from a early age.
The story of Jabob Barnett from Indiana, USA shows a similar role that parents may have in the success of a child.
The Spark: A Mother's Story of Nurturing, Genius, and Autism
https://www.amazon.com/Spark-Mothers-Nu ... B009QJMV8A
I understand that it may appear wrong that parents would take credit for the success of their child, however, I question if it would be morally wrong because parents who do so may serve the greater interest of children in general (e.g. parenting knowledge). How could parents communicate their experiential knowledge effectively? By using their ego they can maintain authenticity and reach other parents.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
Do you really think that training has to include a spirit of competition against other people?arjand wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 4:17 pmI am not certain if that would be a wise advise for parents, considering the ongoing nature-nurture debate.Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 1:22 pm Parents have no moral right to "take pride in" their children's success. Most parents undoubtedly do so however they ought not to do so. It is the parent's proper work to prepare the child for adulthood not to lay the grounds for making the child feel a failure. The child will undoubtedly fail in some respects. It is the parent's job to prepare the child for not always measuring up to what society deems to be success.
An example story is that of Susan Polgar, world's first female chess chess grandmaster from New York.
NGC: My Brilliant Brain - Nature or Nurture?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wzs33wvr9E
Her father, László Polgár, performed a unique educational experiment to prove that children can make exceptional achievements in life if trained in a special way from a early age.
The story of Jabob Barnett from Indiana, USA shows a similar role that parents may have in the success of a child.
The Spark: A Mother's Story of Nurturing, Genius, and Autism
https://www.amazon.com/Spark-Mothers-Nu ... B009QJMV8A
I understand that it may appear wrong that parents would take credit for the success of their child, however, I question if it would be morally wrong because parents who do so may serve the greater interest of children in general (e.g. parenting knowledge). How could parents communicate their experiential knowledge effectively? By using their ego they can maintain authenticity and reach other parents.
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
I haven't watched the Polgar link (video links seem more Sculptor's bailiwick), nor read the Barnett book. Nonetheless, I stand by my previously stated opinion. No doubt chess is a learned skill (and one in which child prodigies abound). But chess ability is also a natural talent, and I'll bet the Polgar sisters (didn't Susan have a sister who was a great chess player, too?) had inherited talent, possibly from their father's genes. I don't doubt that training the girls from an early age promoted their chess skills. Is that really what parents should do? What's so great about being a chess master?arjand wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 4:17 pm
I understand that it may appear wrong that parents would take credit for the success of their child, however, I question if it would be morally wrong because parents who do so may serve the greater interest of children in general (e.g. parenting knowledge). How could parents communicate their experiential knowledge effectively? By using their ego they can maintain authenticity and reach other parents.
Teaching other parents these "tactics" may not actually improve many lives. I remember when Tiger Woods was at the top of his game, I used to see golfing dads out on the driving range (over)instructing their untalented and uninterested children. They probably bought into the notion that early training could produce a star. Perhaps it can. But natural talent is equally important. Could Pop Polgar create a chess master out of (say) 99.9% of children if he adopted them at an early age. I doubt it. Occasionally the confluence of natural talent and early training coincides to produce a successful result. More often (I'd bet) the training results in misery for all concerned.
Vickie Hearne is a poet and animal trainer who has written a couple of excellent books about animals. She (reasonably,I think) claims that the way to train a dog or horse is to ask it what it wants to do and then train it to do it. The human (says Hearne) is the adept at language and training. He should learn the animal's "language", instead of the other way around. I suspect that is also true of infant children. In the case of the Polgar sisters or Tiger Woods, it so happened that they had the talent for and interest in chess and golf. So the early training paid off. But when other parents try to emulate their tactics, if leads to misery for the child and frustration for the parent. So far from serving the interest of children in general, I suspect that the misplaced egoism of these parents misguides parents.
(I'll grant that Eldrick Woods might have just wanted to coattail on his son's success and make some money selling a book.)
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
There's nothing wrong with being proud of one's children; I object to taking credit for their success.Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 1:22 pm
Parents have no moral right to "take pride in" their children's success. Most parents undoubtedly do so however they ought not to do so. It is the parent's proper work to prepare the child for adulthood not to lay the grounds for making the child feel a failure. The child will undoubtedly fail in some respects. It is the parent's job to prepare the child for not always measuring up to what society deems to be success.
The parent's proper "work" is to love his child, care for his child, and make his child's life as pleasant and filled with wonder as he possibly can.
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
But in who's views could a child actually succeed or fail?Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 10:04 amIn part, this is due to the parents having pride in and taking credit for their children's success. All loving parents want their children to be happy, and self-sufficiency is one essential component of adult comfort and happiness. But the notion that parents deserve credit for their children's success is, I think, misguided. So is the notion that parents should be blamed for their children's failures.Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 5:36 am The ethic of success is often drummed into children. This is wrong and cruel because the child is not responsible for society's or their parents' expectations.
What is correct is to inform the child other people will often judge him or her according to his or her success, but not to be worried about this as the individual is responsible to his of her own principles, not society's, and the most the parents expect is he will try not to break the law or hurt his friends.
What exactly could a child's success or failure being measured against?
So, from your perspective, the children who are hit and abused from infancy influenced the relationship, correct?Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 10:04 am Parenting -- like other human relationships -- is a two-way street. The parent who thinks rote "parenting techniques" will "work" is often incorrect because every child is different, and every relationship is unique. From infancy on, the child influences the relationship just as much as the parent does.
If yes, then that would imply that they deserved it, or at least asked for it, correct?
But if you answer no to the first question, then how exactly do you propose that children from infancy influence the relationship?
Ah okay. So what you find "disgusting", then means that 'what is being proposed' is NOT true, correct?Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 10:04 am This does not mean that parents shouldn't teach their children. Of course they should. But just as different educational styles and techniques work best for different children, so do different relationship styles. The notion that parenting is a "job" rather than a relationship is responsible for parents becoming ego-involved in the success of their children, and in their failures. Would a spouse take credit (or blame) for the career success of his or her spouse? (I remember Tiger Woods' father writing a book entitled "Raising a Tiger" in which he took credit for his son's golfing success. I found it disgusting.)
Are you able to look past your own beliefs?Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 10:04 am As far as lying: the notion that lying is always immoral is ridiculous. Picture this:
A jack-booted Gestapo officer is calmly grinding lit cigarettes into the bare chest of a handsome member of the Maquis, who looks like a young Louis Jourdan. "Tell me where the Jews are hiding!" snarls the officer, for some strange reason speaking in English with a German accent.
"I don't know where they are," insists the handsome member of the French resistance.
Do the "lying is always wrong" crowd really insist that the Maquis either rat out the Jews, or insist that he won't talk even though that would lead to even more torture, and, possibly, to the truth being eventually dragged out of him?
If yes, then who is to say that that one who is saying, "I don't know where they are", is even lying at all in the first place?
In fact, I would suggest that that one is telling thee actual Truth of things.
From what I have observed 'lying is always wrong'. Now, you can put me into any crowd you like, tut if you want to look at this seriously, properly and correctly, then you will have to answer my clarifying questions OPENLY and HONESTLY.
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
Here is another one that sees and views children in relation to "success" and "failure"Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 1:22 pmParents have no moral right to "take pride in" their children's success. Most parents undoubtedly do so however they ought not to do so. It is the parent's proper work to prepare the child for adulthood not to lay the grounds for making the child feel a failure. The child will undoubtedly fail in some respects.Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 10:04 am
In part, this is due to the parents having pride in and taking credit for their children's success. All loving parents want their children to be happy, and self-sufficiency is one essential component of adult comfort and happiness. But the notion that parents deserve credit for their children's success is, I think, misguided. So is the notion that parents should be blamed for their children's failures.
Parenting -- like other human relationships -- is a two-way street. The parent who thinks rote "parenting techniques" will "work" is often incorrect because every child is different, and every relationship is unique. From infancy on, the child influences the relationship just as much as the parent does.
This does not mean that parents shouldn't teach their children. Of course they should. But just as different educational styles and techniques work best for different children, so do different relationship styles. The notion that parenting is a "job" rather than a relationship is responsible for parents becoming ego-involved in the success of their children, and in their failures. Would a spouse take credit (or blame) for the career success of his or her spouse? (I remember Tiger Woods' father writing a book entitled "Raising a Tiger" in which he took credit for his son's golfing success. I found it disgusting.)
As far as lying: the notion that lying is always immoral is ridiculous. Picture this:
A jack-booted Gestapo officer is calmly grinding lit cigarettes into the bare chest of a handsome member of the Maquis, who looks like a young Louis Jourdan. "Tell me where the Jews are hiding!" snarls the officer, for some strange reason speaking in English with a German accent.
"I don't know where they are," insists the handsome member of the French resistance.
Do the "lying is always wrong" crowd really insist that the Maquis either rat out the Jews, or insist that he won't talk even though that would lead to even more torture, and, possibly, to the truth being eventually dragged out of him?
In what respects exactly do you see a 'child' could even so call "fail"?
To me, if a parent loved their children properly, then they would create a society, or change society, so society did not see and deem child in terms of "success", nor "failure".
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
What "debate"?arjand wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 4:17 pmI am not certain if that would be a wise advise for parents, considering the ongoing nature-nurture debate.Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 1:22 pm Parents have no moral right to "take pride in" their children's success. Most parents undoubtedly do so however they ought not to do so. It is the parent's proper work to prepare the child for adulthood not to lay the grounds for making the child feel a failure. The child will undoubtedly fail in some respects. It is the parent's job to prepare the child for not always measuring up to what society deems to be success.
Nature-nurture has already been solved, and thus there is NO on-going debate left to discuss.
arjand wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 4:17 pmarjand wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 4:17 pm An example story is that of Susan Polgar, world's first female chess chess grandmaster from New York.
NGC: My Brilliant Brain - Nature or Nurture?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wzs33wvr9E
Her father, László Polgár, performed a unique educational experiment to prove that children can make exceptional achievements in life if trained in a special way from a early age.
The story of Jabob Barnett from Indiana, USA shows a similar role that parents may have in the success of a child.
The Spark: A Mother's Story of Nurturing, Genius, and Autism
https://www.amazon.com/Spark-Mothers-Nu ... B009QJMV8A
I understand that it may appear wrong that parents would take credit for the success of their child, however, I question if it would be morally wrong because parents who do so may serve the greater interest of children in general (e.g. parenting knowledge). How could parents communicate their experiential knowledge effectively? By using their ego they can maintain authenticity and reach other parents.
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
Well the father was the one who said and argued otherwise. In fact the father thought so strongly against your view here that he went out to prove it, and in a sense some would say that he proved with the empirical evidence of teaching his child becoming a so called "chess grandmaster".Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 5:59 pmI haven't watched the Polgar link (video links seem more Sculptor's bailiwick), nor read the Barnett book. Nonetheless, I stand by my previously stated opinion. No doubt chess is a learned skill (and one in which child prodigies abound). But chess ability is also a natural talent, and I'll bet the Polgar sisters (didn't Susan have a sister who was a great chess player, too?) had inherited talent, possibly from their father's genes.arjand wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 4:17 pm
I understand that it may appear wrong that parents would take credit for the success of their child, however, I question if it would be morally wrong because parents who do so may serve the greater interest of children in general (e.g. parenting knowledge). How could parents communicate their experiential knowledge effectively? By using their ego they can maintain authenticity and reach other parents.
What is the 'what' in what you are asking here?
Nothing that I can actually see, YET.
No. Even "pop polgar" said that it could not be done.Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 5:59 pm Teaching other parents these "tactics" may not actually improve many lives. I remember when Tiger Woods was at the top of his game, I used to see golfing dads out on the driving range (over)instructing their untalented and uninterested children. They probably bought into the notion that early training could produce a star. Perhaps it can. But natural talent is equally important. Could Pop Polgar create a chess master out of (say) 99.9% of children if he adopted them at an early age.
How could a human being even be born with a so called "natural talent" to play chess, for example?
Is there a "correctly placed" 'egoism'?Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 5:59 pm Vickie Hearne is a poet and animal trainer who has written a couple of excellent books about animals. She (reasonably,I think) claims that the way to train a dog or horse is to ask it what it wants to do and then train it to do it. The human (says Hearne) is the adept at language and training. He should learn the animal's "language", instead of the other way around. I suspect that is also true of infant children. In the case of the Polgar sisters or Tiger Woods, it so happened that they had the talent for and interest in chess and golf. So the early training paid off. But when other parents try to emulate their tactics, if leads to misery for the child and frustration for the parent. So far from serving the interest of children in general, I suspect that the misplaced egoism of these parents misguides parents.
People have done far worse to so call "make some money".
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
What exactly could a parent be so called "proud" of one's children?Ecurb wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 6:04 pmThere's nothing wrong with being proud of one's children; I object to taking credit for their success.Belindi wrote: ↑June 17th, 2020, 1:22 pm
Parents have no moral right to "take pride in" their children's success. Most parents undoubtedly do so however they ought not to do so. It is the parent's proper work to prepare the child for adulthood not to lay the grounds for making the child feel a failure. The child will undoubtedly fail in some respects. It is the parent's job to prepare the child for not always measuring up to what society deems to be success.
If one was to be 'proud' of one's children, then what are they proud of exactly?
Also, if one was to be 'proud' of one's children, then they could also be just as easily so called "ashamed" of their children. Now, if a parent was to be 'proud' or 'ashamed' of one's children, then if they are not 'proud' or 'ashamed' of a child's so called "successes" or "failures", then what is that parent 'proud' or 'ashamed' of exactly, in relation to their children?
But parents do not necessarily fill a child's life with wonder. In fact what will be found is generally parents way to strongly diminish the wonder in a child. Life, Itself, is absolutely FULL of wonder. If left to their own accord children are, in fact, also FULL of wonder. That is; Sadly, until society removes this wonder, continually.
My view too, evolution. There are some parents who are up to speed on modern child education which downplays success-oriented social competition and instead praises the child for personal goals the child herself has accomplished.
It's doubtful if society itself gains from training children to be compliant about establishment goals and accomplishments.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
My view too, evolution. There are some parents who are up to speed on modern child education who praise the child for the child's goals and accomplishments without reference to social establishment norms. Society itself looses by training children to be too compliant.evolution wrote: ↑June 18th, 2020, 1:27 amWhat exactly could a parent be so called "proud" of one's children?
If one was to be 'proud' of one's children, then what are they proud of exactly?
Also, if one was to be 'proud' of one's children, then they could also be just as easily so called "ashamed" of their children. Now, if a parent was to be 'proud' or 'ashamed' of one's children, then if they are not 'proud' or 'ashamed' of a child's so called "successes" or "failures", then what is that parent 'proud' or 'ashamed' of exactly, in relation to their children?
But parents do not necessarily fill a child's life with wonder. In fact what will be found is generally parents way to strongly diminish the wonder in a child. Life, Itself, is absolutely FULL of wonder. If left to their own accord children are, in fact, also FULL of wonder. That is; Sadly, until society removes this wonder, continually.
My view too, evolution. There are some parents who are up to speed on modern child education which downplays success-oriented social competition and instead praises the child for personal goals the child herself has accomplished.
It's doubtful if society itself gains from training children to be compliant about establishment goals and accomplishments.
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
As far as being proud of their children: parents who love their children are naturally elated to see them do well. I'm not sure if "proud" is the right word. Still, I think we can be proud of our friends and loved ones success without taking credit for it. Pride is (of course) the deadliest of the seven deadly sins (the sin of Lucifer), but when a reasonable parent lovingly says to his child, "I'm so proud of you," I don't think he has pride in his own accomplishments, he's merely happy about his child's,and wants the child to know it.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
- psyreporter
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
Yes, and similarly one could argue that one is 'lucky' to be alive. The origin of the idea luck is essentially the mystery of life.
Is beauty not evidence of thoughtful consideration?
My argument is that favorability of facts is merely a perspective.
The mystery of one's perspective in relation to having found one's 'true love'. One has found his/her true love, a single moment in time of greatest significance in one's existence as a human. Whatever meaning is in the human or in the Universe, is united and fulfilled in relation to one's self in that single moment of time and can last into eternity.
An absolute unique moment in time of ultimate significance that lasts into eternity. A mystery by which only the term 'luck' could aply.
Before pain is felt, the environment must have been valued. What causes pain is denoted as "bad" before the senses can have developed.
Seconds are merely a pattern recognized by an observer.
Everything = every thing. The meaning of the word is plural.evolution wrote: ↑June 16th, 2020, 6:21 amBut I NEVER said EVERY thing (plural) could be infinite.
I said, 'Everything (singular) is just infinite and eternal'.
To me,
'EVERY thing' is plural for EVERY single thing.
'Everything' is singular for thee One Everything.
When 'EVERY thing' literally comes together they become thee One Everything.
The sum of EVERY thing together is thee One, Everything.
One implies a begin and at question is if it can precede an observer.
A begin implies an end. As such, the concept One cannot be infinite. One is as a totality (i.e. the Universe) and requires an observer to be possible.
What logic could justify the idea of a word 'One' that is separated from One as it is said to hold meaning as the denotion of singularity?
As it appears, you make a false attempt to include the observer into something that cannot precede the observer.
- psyreporter
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Would it be moraly right to tell young people the truth about life?
I am not capable to judge that.
When one considers Aristotle's statement that philosophical contemplation is the greatest human virtue, a corresponding measure of success may not involve a spirit of competition against other people.
Competition, like war, can provide many advantages but I question if it is an intelligent method. Competition appears to be an easy option for people to achieve progress. It is easy to choose to compete against others who are already "successful" or to destroy others "good" to improve one's reflection upon them.
When one denotes "good" in relation to one's self (or one's child), one makes an ethical claim by which one denotes "bad" which - when not paired with an intelligent structure/design - automatically results in a disposition towards competition.
According to Bertrand Russell ethical philosophy offers little more than self-serving argument to justify violence, which is essentially competition towards other people. He developed a disgust of all ethical claims.
Philosophers and Pigs
Russell told one colleague that the talk (On Scientific Method in Philosophy, Oxford) ‘was partly inspired by disgust at the universal outburst of “righteousness” in all nations since the war began. It seems the essence of virtue is persecution, and it has given me a disgust of all ethical notions.
...
In private, Russell referred to the essay as ‘Philosophers and Pigs’.
...
Russell’s antiwar protest was so extensive that it would cost him both his job and, for a time, his personal freedom. His theoretical antidote to the irrational, sectarian vitriol between European nations was to try to show how logic could function as an international language that could be used impartially and dispassionately to adjudicate disputes. His theoretical antidote was, in other words, analytic philosophy.
‘The truth, whatever it may be, is the same in England, France, and Germany … it is in its essence neutral’
https://aeon.co/essays/philosophy-at-wa ... l-analysis
There may be situations or environments in which competition is the most plausible driver for progress. When structured for the purpose of maximum value creation, i.e. paired with 'intelligent design', it may be a good method for progress.
What is 'success'? Is it to prevent an astroid from hitting earth, thereby to study hard and pioneer ways to secure prevention of such a potential event, resulting in improved strength and resilience for humanity? Is it to increase hapiness or intellectual satisfaction for humans in the short time that they are on earth? Is it to take part in generic human life with a certain character or disposition and maintain values that have been given by one's ancestors, religion or culture?
Perhaps only parents can make a sound attempt to answer the question and set 'expectations' before a child is grown up. The expectations, while they allow for failure, also provide a potential for reward. This, from the perspective of the parents, may be the greatest thing that they can provide to their child: their highest love. A fulfillment of the ultimate "good" from the perspective of the parents allows them to provide their greatest love. What more could a child want?
When the child turns out to be otherwise, the parents (or society) may not be capable of giving their "highest love" and may consider the child "failed" but perhaps from the perspective of the child, fulfillment of his/her own expectations or purpose in life may be a greater good.
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023