Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sushan]

If by "family" you mean your parents when you're a young adult, then yes, you need to spread your wings and learn to fly. If you mean family as your spouse and children, then no, you should have done that before having a family.

In degenerated, marxist (productivity oriented bonds) and misleaded societies all get's but turned total opposite good and right...

Parents are giver, people of goodness, and a child has much debts, that's why one would be required to ask one's parents if wishing to go forth (go for Noble task, e.g beyond sensuality). Children are recipients of goodness (no, have no rights either), so no real obligation by parents toward them (yet surely own craving might be not easy to get around).

Note: it might be that "state" or "society" children raising falls under "in state duty" in cases. Which is defacto something very viral, although unseen by the most.

It's worthy to note that seeking just ease and joy is never really a reason for abounding "contracts", while on the otherside, if bond to do harmful (for oneself and/or others), there isn't any fault even if the other side might not be happy.

Common "personal freedom" hardly means leave for Noble search/quest and even if looking like Noble it's for the most just another eqo-trip or a hopeless try to escape one's duties, or try to seek for ways to consume without giving back.

And yes - most disturbing - of course a wife would be required to get allowance by husband.

There are also other hindrances for proper going forth, such as debts, in duty of the King (state)...

At least: No higher help for all then to seek and gain real liberation. Of which path, of course, requires gratitude, knowing debts and goodness well. Else wouldn't work. Improper, not rightly, left, one is bond to return again and again.

Thank you for your insight. I appreciate your perspective on the importance of fulfilling familial obligations and the traditional roles within families. However, I believe it's important to consider how society and human thinking have evolved over time.

In modern society, the concept of individual autonomy has gained significant traction. This shift is reflected in various aspects of our legal and social systems. For example, laws surrounding marriage and divorce have evolved to recognize individual rights and personal happiness. In many countries, both partners have equal say in decisions affecting their lives, and the notion of one partner needing permission from the other is considered outdated and inequitable.

Furthermore, societal norms around parenting have also changed. Modern parenting emphasizes the responsibilities of both parents to nurture and support their children, rather than viewing children solely as recipients of goodness. This evolution recognizes that children, too, have rights and deserve respect and care. For instance, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child outlines the rights of children to be protected, to receive an education, and to express their views freely.

It's also essential to acknowledge that personal growth and self-discovery can positively impact family dynamics. When individuals take time to address their personal needs and aspirations, they often return to their families with renewed energy and a clearer sense of purpose. This can enhance the quality of their relationships and their ability to fulfill their familial roles effectively. For example, a parent who pursues further education or therapy might become a more supportive and understanding figure for their children.

Regarding your point about societal bonds and obligations, it's important to recognize that rigid hierarchies and traditional roles can sometimes stifle personal development and lead to dissatisfaction. Many contemporary societies have embraced more egalitarian structures, which have been shown to foster greater creativity, innovation, and overall well-being.

In conclusion, while traditional structures and roles have their merits, it's crucial to adapt and evolve in response to changing societal values and understandings. Balancing personal freedom with family obligations requires a nuanced approach that considers the needs and rights of all individuals involved. How do you think we can reconcile these evolving perspectives with traditional values to create a more harmonious and equitable society?

[Sushan]

Both ideas "personal freedom" and "family obligations" are both vacuous concepts. Neither of them are what they appear to be.

We are the products of our upbringing and cultural influences which have acted upon our innate forms governed by our genetic makeup - none of which we chose.
Family obligations are a set of norms inposed, even indoctrinated upon us which comprise a large part of the influences that act upon us.
Through this all we are unique agents which filter these two concepts, amongst many other determining factors.
Objectively we have zero obligation to our family but we are determined to act fully within our deterministic horizon, and our "person" is not "free" to exceed that determinism.
Yet our paths diverge with time, and once the idea that family and obligations are nothing but phantoms we are able to apply agency to act as we WILL

Thank you for your thought-provoking response. You raise some intriguing points about the concepts of personal freedom and family obligations, suggesting that both are shaped significantly by our upbringing, cultural influences, and genetic makeup.

I agree that our actions and choices are heavily influenced by our background and environment, which can create a deterministic horizon for our behavior. The norms and expectations imposed by our families and society indeed play a significant role in shaping our sense of duty and our pursuit of personal freedom. However, I believe there is room for individual agency within these constraints.

While it is true that we are not entirely free from the influences that shape us, the idea of personal growth and self-discovery often involves recognizing these influences and making conscious choices to transcend them. For instance, many people find that understanding their past and the forces that have shaped them allows them to make more informed and deliberate decisions about their future. This process can lead to a more authentic and fulfilling life, even if it means challenging or redefining traditional family obligations.

Regarding the concept of family obligations, it is worth noting that these are not entirely vacuous. Family structures and roles have evolved, and while traditional expectations may still hold sway, there is growing recognition of the need for flexibility and mutual respect within families. Modern family dynamics often emphasize the importance of supporting each member's personal growth while maintaining a sense of collective responsibility.

For example, many parents today encourage their children to pursue their passions and interests, even if it means deviating from traditional career paths or family expectations. This shift reflects a broader societal trend towards valuing individual fulfillment alongside familial duties.

However, as you pointed out, our paths do diverge with time, and reconciling personal freedom with family obligations remains a complex issue. It is essential to find a balance that allows for personal growth while honoring the commitments and responsibilities we have towards our families.

In light of this, how do you think individuals can best navigate the tension between personal freedom and family obligations?

[Sushan]

Both ideas "personal freedom" and "family obligations" are both vacuous concepts. Neither of them are what they appear to be.

We are the products of our upbringing and cultural influences which have acted upon our innate forms governed by our genetic makeup - none of which we chose.
Family obligations are a set of norms inposed, even indoctrinated upon us which comprise a large part of the influences that act upon us.
Through this all we are unique agents which filter these two concepts, amongst many other determining factors.
Objectively we have zero obligation to our family but we are determined to act fully within our deterministic horizon, and our "person" is not "free" to exceed that determinism.
Yet our paths diverge with time, and once the idea that family and obligations are nothing but phantoms we are able to apply agency to act as we WILL

You are correct that societal norms have no intrinsic "power" and their status as norms is illusory. However, there is an abundance of prior experience with the outcomes associated with following and numerous varieties of ignoring these norms. I'm not personally impressed with the track record of the vast majority of choices that completely flaunt societal norms. Thus my choice (and advice) to use societal norms as a basis upon which I applied minor (but I felt, important) nuanced tweaks or adjustments.

There's nothing new under the sun. Prediction of the future is possible through a careful examination of the past, especially in common, time worn situations.

You've brought up some valid points about the importance of societal norms and the historical evidence supporting their utility. However, I believe there are additional layers to consider when discussing the balance between personal freedom and family obligations.

First, while societal norms do provide a framework for behavior and decision-making, they are not infallible. History is replete with examples where societal norms have perpetuated injustice and inequality. For instance, the norms that once supported segregation and discrimination were widely accepted but were later challenged and overturned because they were fundamentally unjust. This suggests that while norms can guide us, they should not be followed blindly. It is crucial to continuously evaluate and, when necessary, challenge these norms to ensure they promote fairness and equity.

Moreover, the concept of personal growth and self-discovery is not necessarily at odds with societal norms. Many modern societies have evolved to embrace and even encourage individual autonomy and personal development. For example, progressive education systems and workplaces often prioritize personal growth and development, recognizing that well-rounded individuals contribute more effectively to society. Countries like Finland, which have highly regarded education systems, focus on nurturing individual strengths and talents, demonstrating that personal growth can coexist with societal progress.

Regarding family obligations, it is essential to consider the changing dynamics of modern families. Traditional roles have shifted significantly, and there is greater emphasis on shared responsibilities and mutual support within families. This shift reflects a more balanced approach, where both personal aspirations and family duties are valued. The rise of paternity leave and flexible working arrangements in many countries exemplifies how modern societies are adapting to support both personal and family commitments.

Your point about using societal norms as a basis with minor adjustments is pragmatic. It acknowledges the value of established norms while allowing for flexibility and individual agency. However, the key is to ensure that these adjustments are made thoughtfully and ethically. Personal freedom should not come at the expense of family stability, but neither should family obligations stifle individual growth and fulfillment.

To further the discussion, how do you think we can best navigate the tension between adhering to societal norms and embracing necessary changes for personal and collective betterment? Are there specific frameworks or principles that can help us strike this balance effectively?

[Sushan]

Both ideas "personal freedom" and "family obligations" are both vacuous concepts. Neither of them are what they appear to be.

We are the products of our upbringing and cultural influences which have acted upon our innate forms governed by our genetic makeup - none of which we chose.
Family obligations are a set of norms inposed, even indoctrinated upon us which comprise a large part of the influences that act upon us.
Through this all we are unique agents which filter these two concepts, amongst many other determining factors.
Objectively we have zero obligation to our family but we are determined to act fully within our deterministic horizon, and our "person" is not "free" to exceed that determinism.
Yet our paths diverge with time, and once the idea that family and obligations are nothing but phantoms we are able to apply agency to act as we WILL

You are correct that societal norms have no intrinsic "power" and their status as norms is illusory. However, there is an abundance of prior experience with the outcomes associated with following and numerous varieties of ignoring these norms. I'm not personally impressed with the track record of the vast majority of choices that completely flaunt societal norms. Thus my choice (and advice) to use societal norms as a basis upon which I applied minor (but I felt, important) nuanced tweaks or adjustments.

There's nothing new under the sun. Prediction of the future is possible through a careful examination of the past, especially in common, time worn situations.

That change is enevitable, as a determinist I know that the clash of individuals with the norms of the past are always going to forge new roads. And though, whilst the older generation tend to Urumph and the new whipper snappers attitudes declaring "things are not what they used to be", they should recognise that they in their turn did the same to the tradition of their own past.
What is curious, though, is what governs the conditions of what Levi-Stausss identified as Cold, as opposed to Hot societies.
ATM we are faced with an unprecedented socail change opened up by social media, making things pretty hot. As if the 20thC was not enough to deal with. For the first time since news has been writen we now have the chance to see all angles to an issue.

You've highlighted a significant point about the evolution of societal norms and the inevitable changes driven by new generations. I appreciate your perspective and would like to delve deeper.

While societal norms do provide a framework for behavior and decision-making, it's essential to recognize that they are not static. As you rightly pointed out, each generation challenges and reshapes these norms to fit their evolving understanding and context. This dynamic nature of society is crucial for progress and adaptation.

Regarding the deterministic view, I agree that our actions are influenced by our upbringing, cultural context, and genetic makeup. However, I believe there is still room for individual agency within these constraints. Personal growth and the pursuit of autonomy can coexist with family obligations if approached thoughtfully and ethically.

For instance, consider the significant shifts in gender roles over the past century. Traditional norms once dictated that women primarily serve as homemakers. However, as societal understanding evolved, we saw a rise in women's participation in the workforce, leading to policies like maternity leave, flexible working hours, and paternity leave. These changes didn't happen overnight but were the result of challenging and gradually reshaping norms to create a more inclusive and equitable society.

On the topic of social media and its impact on societal change, I agree that it has accelerated the pace of change and provided unprecedented access to diverse perspectives. This "hot" society you mentioned creates both opportunities and challenges. While it allows for a more informed and connected global community, it also brings about issues like misinformation and echo chambers. Balancing these aspects is crucial for harnessing the positive potential of social media while mitigating its downsides.

In practical terms, navigating personal freedom and family obligations requires a balanced approach. One can look at flexible work arrangements, shared responsibilities at home, and open communication within families as ways to support both individual growth and family stability. For example, many successful dual-career families thrive by negotiating roles and responsibilities, ensuring both partners can pursue their professional and personal aspirations while maintaining a supportive family environment.

Your point about examining historical outcomes to predict the future is well taken. While history provides valuable lessons, we must also be open to innovation and adaptation. The unprecedented challenges and opportunities of the 21st century, such as climate change, technological advancements, and global interconnectedness, require us to think creatively and collaboratively.

In conclusion, while societal norms provide a foundation, they must be flexible enough to accommodate personal growth and changing contexts. Balancing individual autonomy with family responsibilities is a dynamic process that benefits from historical insights, ethical considerations, and a willingness to adapt. How do you see this balance evolving in the future, especially with the rapid pace of technological and social changes we are experiencing?

[Sushan]

In my honest opinion, I think you come first. While we all have titles and responsibilities to others in our lives, our main concern should be ourselves. You can't give from an empty cup. You can't be what your family needs or expects when you don't even know what you need or what you want. I understand not wanting to put others in a tough spot but you still come first. You need to be fulfilled and happy with who you are, only then can you genuinely help others. You don't owe anybody anything and you shouldn't be dependent on someone for your happiness either.

You rightly pointed out that one cannot pour from an empty cup, emphasizing the need for self-care before fulfilling responsibilities to others. This concept aligns with the idea that personal well-being is foundational for being an effective and supportive family member. For instance, research in psychology shows that individuals who take time for self-care tend to have better mental health and are more capable of supporting their families emotionally and physically.

However, it's also important to recognize that family obligations and personal responsibilities are often interconnected. For example, when parents prioritize their well-being, it sets a positive example for their children, teaching them the importance of self-care. Yet, this balance can be challenging to achieve, especially when immediate family needs are pressing.

In Jennifer Davis's case, her decision to temporarily leave her family for self-discovery might seem drastic, but it also underscores the importance of addressing personal needs to prevent long-term dissatisfaction or resentment. On the other hand, this move can create immediate disruptions and emotional distress for the family left behind. The ethical dilemma here is how to balance personal growth with the immediate stability of the family unit.

In practical terms, many people face the challenge of integrating personal aspirations with family responsibilities. Consider the example of working parents who pursue further education or career advancements. While these pursuits can temporarily strain family dynamics, they often lead to long-term benefits for the entire family, such as improved financial stability and personal fulfillment.

Additionally, societal support systems, such as flexible work policies, childcare support, and mental health resources, play a crucial role in helping individuals balance personal growth with family obligations. These systems can alleviate some of the pressure individuals feel when trying to meet both personal and family needs.

While personal freedom and self-care are vital, they must be balanced with family obligations to ensure the well-being of all members. It’s about finding a harmonious balance where personal growth can coexist with familial responsibilities.

How do you see this balance evolving in today's fast-paced world, and what additional support systems do you think could help individuals navigate these competing demands more effectively?

[Sushan]

In my honest opinion, I think you come first. While we all have titles and responsibilities to others in our lives, our main concern should be ourselves. You can't give from an empty cup. You can't be what your family needs or expects when you don't even know what you need or what you want. I understand not wanting to put others in a tough spot but you still come first. You need to be fulfilled and happy with who you are, only then can you genuinely help others. You don't owe anybody anything and you shouldn't be dependent on someone for your happiness either.

I disagree that parents don't owe their kids anything. You're free to disagree, of course, though good luck to your kids...

Thank you for your perspective. I understand where you're coming from, and I agree that parents do indeed have significant responsibilities towards their children. Providing care, guidance, and support is crucial for the healthy development of a child. However, it's also important to recognize that parents need to maintain their own well-being to fulfill these responsibilities effectively.

[Sy Borg]

OTOH, if you have kids, they're your responsibility. Their needs come first. If you can work on yourself and see to their needs optimally then you can do both. If not, your needs have to wait until you can. Perhaps when they start school.

However, if the problem is so bad that it seriously impacts your ability to parent the children, then perhaps the best thing for the kids is to have you fix that straight away ...

This summarises my position. Fact is, if you have children and you leave them, then you are palming off responsibility.

If your ability to be a positive presence around the child is impossible for a time, then you and your spouse can have that conversation. Fact is that humans are capable of reproducing in their teens but the extension of childhood education is effectively an extension of childhood, so there is a considerable period when conceiving a baby is easy, but not advisable.

Some people are still not ready in their twenties or thirties, or ever. It's very individual and the above intersection of physiology and culture doesn't help. I don't much judge people for screwing up, though. That's just The SNAFU of Chaos, which we all know is necessary for reality to change and develop.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I agree that when children are involved, their needs must take precedence, and any decisions made by the parents should prioritize their well-being. The idea of "palming off responsibility" is a valid concern, and I appreciate the emphasis on having honest conversations with one's spouse to navigate these challenges.

However, it's also important to recognize that not everyone has the luxury of perfect timing or the opportunity to achieve full personal growth before starting a family. Life often presents unpredictable challenges, and personal development can continue well into adulthood. For instance, someone might only realize their need for significant personal growth or change after they've already had children. This doesn't necessarily mean they're irresponsible; it simply reflects the complex nature of human development.

Consider the case of individuals who face mental health issues or who have experienced trauma that only surfaces later in life. Their ability to be a positive presence around their children might be compromised if they don't address these issues, even if it means temporarily stepping back to focus on their well-being. In such cases, finding a balance between personal growth and family obligations becomes crucial, and it's not always a straightforward path.

Moreover, societal and cultural pressures often dictate when people should start families, like the South Asian culture which I belong to, sometimes leading to premature decisions that might not align with their personal readiness. This societal framework can complicate the intersection of physiology and culture, as you mentioned, making it challenging for individuals to navigate these waters without external judgments or pressures.

So, while I agree with the need to prioritize children's needs and the importance of timing, I also believe there should be empathy and support for those who find themselves in difficult situations. How can we create a supportive environment that allows individuals to address their personal growth needs without neglecting their family responsibilities?

You used an example of a person who removes themselves from their children to protect them from the complexities of their mental illness. That's fair. It' a different situation to someone leaving their family to follow great work or relationship opportunities. Once children are born, well, they are vulnerable little beings that need their parents to look after them, and to show them how to deal with the world.

A sad example is where a poorly-suited couple have children and then one of the partners meets The One - the person they feel they were meant to be with. But the children are at home. There is no good outcome, more SNAFU :)

What of a person with young children who has a grand vision - not a delusion, but inspiration that genuinely could change the world? Genghis Khan. Gandhi. Einstein. Stalin. Kafka. All high achievers and lousy fathers. Were they right or wrong? I don't know. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette ...

Still, in this age of AI, it seems that future great innovations will be made by corporations using this most powerful of tools, rather than by individual people. This issue will probably resolve itself, at least for a while.

[LuckyR]

In my experience the things that Real People ditch their family for are either their careers or selfish indulgences (not to work on their character flaws).

[Sy Borg]

In my experience the things that Real People ditch their family for are either their careers or selfish indulgences (not to work on their character flaws).

That sounds about right to me. As soon as a parent has a senior corporate role, there will be tension between the employer's requirements and the baby's/partner's requirements. Some extra difficult decisions are made all the time - people feeling like they could miss one-in-a-lifetime opportunities for self-actualisation, or that they have missed their calling, or that they will never know love in that marriage, etc. Not everyone is philosophically inclined, and many people believe in fate, destiny and the like. If they think they are missing the boat, they worry.

As for selfish indulgences and refusal to work on character flaws, I figure that, if a person was capable of doing better, then they would do better. Raw potential and abilities are not enough. While some people have extraordinary level of resilience, perseverance, patience and general inner strength, logically there will be others who are extraordinarily brittle, impatient, restless and generally weak.

Heck, I'm not so flash, myself, so I'm loathe to judge. People do stupid nonsense all the time, and I've done my share. In fact, the family setting is perhaps the arena where more foolish nonsense happens than anywhere else. Any Family Court lawyer would surely testify as much. Family is where sex, money and responsibility intersect ... what could possibly go wrong?

[LuckyR]

In my experience the things that Real People ditch their family for are either their careers or selfish indulgences (not to work on their character flaws).

That sounds about right to me. As soon as a parent has a senior corporate role, there will be tension between the employer's requirements and the baby's/partner's requirements. Some extra difficult decisions are made all the time - people feeling like they could miss one-in-a-lifetime opportunities for self-actualisation, or that they have missed their calling, or that they will never know love in that marriage, etc. Not everyone is philosophically inclined, and many people believe in fate, destiny and the like. If they think they are missing the boat, they worry.

As for selfish indulgences and refusal to work on character flaws, I figure that, if a person was capable of doing better, then they would do better. Raw potential and abilities are not enough. While some people have extraordinary level of resilience, perseverance, patience and general inner strength, logically there will be others who are extraordinarily brittle, impatient, restless and generally weak.

Heck, I'm not so flash, myself, so I'm loathe to judge. People do stupid nonsense all the time, and I've done my share. In fact, the family setting is perhaps the arena where more foolish nonsense happens than anywhere else. Any Family Court lawyer would surely testify as much. Family is where sex, money and responsibility intersect ... what could possibly go wrong?

I've seen both and my observation is that those who focus on career "benefit" from BOTH a better career and not spending as much time doing childcare which they don't enjoy much and/or aren't very good at.

Those who focus on selfish indulgences don't require a detailed explanation as their motivations are self evident.

[Samana Johann]

In conclusion, while traditional structures and roles have their merits, it's crucial to adapt and evolve in response to changing societal values and understandings. Balancing personal freedom with family obligations requires a nuanced approach that considers the needs and rights of all individuals involved. How do you think we can reconcile these evolving perspectives with traditional values to create a more harmonious and equitable society?

Simple: right and wrong. What ever is inbetween is still wrong. No problem to leave relation and family if going for higher, eg. renouncing and lead the holly life. All wrong if relaying on consume, yet wishing not to fulfill obligations for re-lay(tion).

[Chris_winW]

I’ve thought about this a lot myself. I love my family, but sometimes I feel like I’m just a husband and a dad, and nothing more. It's tough because you don't want to be selfish, but you also need to be true to yourself. I think it’s about finding that balance. For me, taking some time each week for my hobbies helps. It makes me happier, and in turn, I'm a better husband and father. It’s not always easy, but I believe it’s possible to have personal freedom while still being there for your family. Communication is key—everyone needs to understand each other’s needs.

[Sushan]

OTOH, if you have kids, they're your responsibility. Their needs come first. If you can work on yourself and see to their needs optimally then you can do both. If not, your needs have to wait until you can. Perhaps when they start school.

However, if the problem is so bad that it seriously impacts your ability to parent the children, then perhaps the best thing for the kids is to have you fix that straight away ...

This summarises my position. Fact is, if you have children and you leave them, then you are palming off responsibility.

If your ability to be a positive presence around the child is impossible for a time, then you and your spouse can have that conversation. Fact is that humans are capable of reproducing in their teens but the extension of childhood education is effectively an extension of childhood, so there is a considerable period when conceiving a baby is easy, but not advisable.

Some people are still not ready in their twenties or thirties, or ever. It's very individual and the above intersection of physiology and culture doesn't help. I don't much judge people for screwing up, though. That's just The SNAFU of Chaos, which we all know is necessary for reality to change and develop.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I agree that when children are involved, their needs must take precedence, and any decisions made by the parents should prioritize their well-being. The idea of "palming off responsibility" is a valid concern, and I appreciate the emphasis on having honest conversations with one's spouse to navigate these challenges.

However, it's also important to recognize that not everyone has the luxury of perfect timing or the opportunity to achieve full personal growth before starting a family. Life often presents unpredictable challenges, and personal development can continue well into adulthood. For instance, someone might only realize their need for significant personal growth or change after they've already had children. This doesn't necessarily mean they're irresponsible; it simply reflects the complex nature of human development.

Consider the case of individuals who face mental health issues or who have experienced trauma that only surfaces later in life. Their ability to be a positive presence around their children might be compromised if they don't address these issues, even if it means temporarily stepping back to focus on their well-being. In such cases, finding a balance between personal growth and family obligations becomes crucial, and it's not always a straightforward path.

Moreover, societal and cultural pressures often dictate when people should start families, like the South Asian culture which I belong to, sometimes leading to premature decisions that might not align with their personal readiness. This societal framework can complicate the intersection of physiology and culture, as you mentioned, making it challenging for individuals to navigate these waters without external judgments or pressures.

So, while I agree with the need to prioritize children's needs and the importance of timing, I also believe there should be empathy and support for those who find themselves in difficult situations. How can we create a supportive environment that allows individuals to address their personal growth needs without neglecting their family responsibilities?

You used an example of a person who removes themselves from their children to protect them from the complexities of their mental illness. That's fair. It' a different situation to someone leaving their family to follow great work or relationship opportunities. Once children are born, well, they are vulnerable little beings that need their parents to look after them, and to show them how to deal with the world.

A sad example is where a poorly-suited couple have children and then one of the partners meets The One - the person they feel they were meant to be with. But the children are at home. There is no good outcome, more SNAFU

What of a person with young children who has a grand vision - not a delusion, but inspiration that genuinely could change the world? Genghis Khan. Gandhi. Einstein. Stalin. Kafka. All high achievers and lousy fathers. Were they right or wrong? I don't know. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette ...

Still, in this age of AI, it seems that future great innovations will be made by corporations using this most powerful of tools, rather than by individual people. This issue will probably resolve itself, at least for a while.

While I agree with most of the points that you raised, I think the shift towards AI and corporate-driven innovations might create new frustrations. With AI handling more groundbreaking work, individuals may feel less personally accomplished and seek new ways to achieve that sense of fulfillment. This could lead to more instances of people pursuing ambitious goals at the expense of their personal lives, creating more SNAFU situations. The desire for personal achievement and recognition is a powerful motivator, and without traditional outlets, people might push boundaries in other areas, potentially causing further disruptions.

[Sushan]

In my experience the things that Real People ditch their family for are either their careers or selfish indulgences (not to work on their character flaws).

I think career advancements often stem from a desire to improve the family's well-being, not just selfish indulgence.

Statistics show that career advancement is a significant factor for many people. According to a 2020 survey by Pew Research, 45% of working parents in the U.S. reported making a career change for better work-life balance, even if it meant sacrificing time with their families. This suggests that the drive for career success is often intertwined with the desire to provide better opportunities and financial stability for one's family.

[Sushan]

In my experience the things that Real People ditch their family for are either their careers or selfish indulgences (not to work on their character flaws).

That sounds about right to me. As soon as a parent has a senior corporate role, there will be tension between the employer's requirements and the baby's/partner's requirements. Some extra difficult decisions are made all the time - people feeling like they could miss one-in-a-lifetime opportunities for self-actualisation, or that they have missed their calling, or that they will never know love in that marriage, etc. Not everyone is philosophically inclined, and many people believe in fate, destiny and the like. If they think they are missing the boat, they worry.

As for selfish indulgences and refusal to work on character flaws, I figure that, if a person was capable of doing better, then they would do better. Raw potential and abilities are not enough. While some people have extraordinary level of resilience, perseverance, patience and general inner strength, logically there will be others who are extraordinarily brittle, impatient, restless and generally weak.

Heck, I'm not so flash, myself, so I'm loathe to judge. People do stupid nonsense all the time, and I've done my share. In fact, the family setting is perhaps the arena where more foolish nonsense happens than anywhere else. Any Family Court lawyer would surely testify as much. Family is where sex, money and responsibility intersect ... what could possibly go wrong?

You make a valid point about the complexity of family dynamics. The intersection of sex, money, and responsibility often creates a fertile ground for irrational behavior and conflict. It's true that the family setting can be a hotspot for "foolish nonsense," as you put it, because it involves such intense personal stakes. The pressures of maintaining relationships, financial stability, and parenting can sometimes lead people to make unwise decisions.

It's fascinating to see how some people manage to balance their work and personal lives effectively, thriving in both areas. Resilient individuals often possess a strong sense of purpose and the ability to adapt to changing circumstances. They tend to prioritize their responsibilities, set clear boundaries, and seek support when needed. These strategies enable them to pursue career goals without neglecting family obligations.