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

[Sushan]

There is a problem with the knee jerk reaction of behaving in the opposite manner to how a parent behaved towards us. I'll illustrate. Johnny received so much corporal punishment that he didn't punish his children at all. I don't need to write here how his children may likely turn out. There needs to be balance, not opposite behavior.

Hello Kaitlyn, whilst I agree that there can be no simplified opposite behaviour, I disagree that not using corporal punishment is a problem. I was able to avoid corporal punishment with my son and he turned out okay, just as several other children I know were able to develop into lovely people without corporal punishment. My method was to show my son the consequences of his behaviour in taking away privileges.

To achieve balance you have to start from a place where you truly understand and can make allowances for the excesses of a parent. For example, my mother lived during the years of World War 2. There was little food. This made her a mother who didn't like wastage of food in any way form and believed that 'skinny' was the norm. Treats were issued very sparingly. My sisters and I would be lectured about what we ate if we put on weight. We had to eat everything on our plates even if we truly hated what was before us. I am a bit like this as well, but I am accepting of those who easily put on weight. I am against wastage in a balanced way. I have two children who have sensory sensitivities and they literally cannot eat certain textures and flavors. Grandma thinks they are being molly coddled. I don't react. I understand and make allowances. To both the Mum and the kids.

I think that your examples show that the prime reason for feeding children is nutrition, and the best way to do that is to find foods that achieve that best. In times when food is scarce, the variety is reduced and therefore nutrition means sometimes eating what you wouldn’t choose if you had a choice – but you don’t. In times when food is ample, the danger of obesity is real, as well as the risk of one-sided sustenance, which also has its dangers. It is our responsibility to find a way to ensure a balanced diet. What anyone thinks about that is unimportant.

If a parent over-disciplines, it may be a result of receiving similar punishment as a child. On the scales of justice it goes against the grain to let our own children get away with things. On the other hand we don't want to lean too far in the opposite direction and not provide boundaries at all. Balance means we will choose other ways to discipline. Make the punishment fit the crime. Give one chance before punishing unjustly and warn about the consequences before reacting. Be consistent. Keep our own feelings out of it. Explosions of anger can be just as harmful as no reaction at all.

We could also find ways of avoiding “crime” and accept that mistakes make people. I accepted the mistakes of our son whilst making him realise the consequences, sometimes to the detriment of us all, and encouraged behaviour that would avoid such consequences. I also avoided talking about punishment and spoke instead of outcomes that we all want to avoid.

If our parent seemed unloving find out how they were loved or not. If circumstances during our parent's life meant they did not have the emotional support they needed it is understandable that they cannot give what they didn't receive. We can be different but it needs to be genuine. Not pasted on. Treat our parent better than they deserve and you will likely be treated with more love than you thought they are capable of. And remember to show genuine love to your own children. Children these days don't have the same resilience which is another reason to not repeat the mistakes of a previous generation.
Kaitlyn

Whilst I think that a parent's love should be unconditional, there are reasons for parents being emotionally impaired and unable to give unconditionally, but it has to do with their own situation, and they have to realise the dangers of perpetuating traumatic behaviours. Intergenerational trauma refers to the transmission of trauma, adverse experiences, or abusive behaviours from one generation to the next. It suggests that the effects of traumatic events can be passed down through family lines, impacting the psychological, emotional, and even physiological well-being of subsequent generations. This transmission can occur through various mechanisms, including learned behaviours, disrupted attachment patterns, cultural norms, and social environments.

While I agree with your view on the importance of motivation in parenting and the effectiveness of demonstrating consequences rather than using corporal punishment, it's also important to consider the cultural context of parenting styles, especially in Asian communities (I am coming from an Asian Background). Research indicates that Asian American parenting, often characterized by the 'tiger parent' model popularized by Amy Chua, plays a significant role in the transmission of intergenerational trauma. This style, while focused on high achievement, can sometimes overlook the emotional needs of children, potentially leading to stress and anxiety.

From this perspective, the decision to not use corporal punishment, as you mentioned, can be seen as a step away from traditional, more rigid parenting styles. However, it's also essential to understand that simply avoiding certain practices of our parents doesn't automatically translate to better outcomes.

In light of this, how do we navigate this complex terrain? We're tasked with honoring our cultural heritage while also adapting to the changing needs and understanding of child development. Furthermore, how can we ensure that our parenting choices contribute positively to breaking the cycle of intergenerational trauma, rather than perpetuating it, even unintentionally?

[Sushan]

You are certainly the expert. This topic interested me and it has been difficult to post any comments due to being new. This topic accepted my comment. To have even received a reply so quickly is great. I am aware of intergenerational trauma and its impact. The first comment about corporal punishment was not a comment of agreement on my part. In the country I live in, any physical punishment or smacking is illegal. It was an exaggerated example only. I prefer a child learning from the consequences of their own behavior even where it may cause a bit of discomfort to those around. I smiled when you mentioned detrimental. I can think of a few examples.

I'm really glad to hear that you've found this topic engaging and that your comment was quickly received. As a new participant, your perspectives and experiences are incredibly valuable to this discussion, and it's great that you've joined us in exploring these complex issues. And I am sorry for the inconvenience that you faced as a new member, but it is the customary to keep a new member under probation until he/she posts a certain number of posts.

Your mention of having a few examples for the reference of 'detrimental' outcomes caught my attention. I would be very interested in hearing more about these examples. Sharing real-life experiences can offer practical insights that enrich our understanding of the topic, especially in the context of parenting, where every family's journey is unique.

Do these examples relate to navigating the balance between discipline and understanding, or perhaps to the effects of certain parenting choices on children's behavior and development?

[LuckyR]

Parenting techniques evolve constantly. We can learn from how we were parented and we remember less than ideal situations. As an adult we should be able to reflect and learn from this and realise everyone occasionally makes the wrong decision and makes mistakes whilst parenting. Being a parent comes without a job description and you are immediately dropped into the deep end when your little ones arrive.
I think we should embrace the good experiences and use them for guidance, remember things we would change and evolve with the times

There's knowing what to do and there's being motivated to do the right thing especially when there is competition with one's own self interest. I've found that those who have the motivation can eventually find a good technique, whereas knowing the optimal technique won't be put into action by folks without motivation.

Your emphasis on the role of motivation in parenting is certainly valid, highlighting that knowledge alone might not lead to the effective application of parenting techniques. However, it's also important to consider that knowledge and awareness of different parenting strategies can itself be a motivator. Understanding the potential benefits and outcomes of certain parenting approaches can inspire parents to adopt these methods.

For instance, research in developmental psychology, such as studies by Diana Baumrind on parenting styles, shows that different approaches have varied impacts on child development. Knowing that an authoritative parenting style – characterized by a balance of responsiveness and demandingness – is associated with positive outcomes in children might motivate parents to adopt this style, even if it requires more effort or goes against their initial instincts. (https://iastate.pressbooks.pub/parentin ... apter-1-2/)

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on how this interplay between knowledge and motivation might work in real-life parenting scenarios. Do you think that increasing one's understanding of effective parenting strategies could, in itself, be a source of motivation?

By the time parents are putting parenting techniques into much practice, they've been parenting for a few YEARS. And the most physically demanding (but not emotionally demanding) years. Thus they are already going to be sorted into the Motivated or Not Motivated groups, by the time they're using a technique. I just don't see a Non motivated parent changing sides because of some acquired knowledge. I mean we're not talking about "normal" people here, we're talking about folks who are NOT motivated to parent their children well. Or what we used to call: bad parents.

Liked your less formulaic style better than this one.

[Stoppelmann]

While I agree with your view on the importance of motivation in parenting and the effectiveness of demonstrating consequences rather than using corporal punishment, it's also important to consider the cultural context of parenting styles, especially in Asian communities (I am coming from an Asian Background). Research indicates that Asian American parenting, often characterized by the 'tiger parent' model popularized by Amy Chua, plays a significant role in the transmission of intergenerational trauma. This style, while focused on high achievement, can sometimes overlook the emotional needs of children, potentially leading to stress and anxiety.

This seems to confirm my approach rather than diverge from what I said, so I don’t understand why you started with “while I agree with your view,” indicating a divergence. Before our son was born, I read a great deal of literature on parenting, and I was also under the influence of Erich Fromm, from whom I read very much. In particular, his book “The Art of Loving” affected me greatly. So, one-size-fits-all education philosophies are quite the opposite of my approach – even later as a manager.

From this perspective, the decision to not use corporal punishment, as you mentioned, can be seen as a step away from traditional, more rigid parenting styles. However, it's also essential to understand that simply avoiding certain practices of our parents doesn't automatically translate to better outcomes.

There is no “automatic” with children, in fact with any living creature, because we are sentient beings and not machines. Having been a deeply impressionable child myself, and clearly an exception in my class, I experienced how my own path was the one to liberation and not the prescribed one that others wanted me to take. With that background, my approach to our son was nuanced and although I’m sure it wasn’t perfect, he’s turned out a fine example and loves his parents.

In light of this, how do we navigate this complex terrain? We're tasked with honoring our cultural heritage while also adapting to the changing needs and understanding of child development. Furthermore, how can we ensure that our parenting choices contribute positively to breaking the cycle of intergenerational trauma, rather than perpetuating it, even unintentionally?

I have a problem with “honouring our cultural heritage.” I’m a Brit, so there are many things that I like about my cultural heritage, but also many things that I abhor. This is probably why I emigrated to Europe at 22 and have lived here since, becoming fully integrated into another equally imperfect, culture. I honour my cultural heritage by understanding it, which means that I express my analysis of its merits and faults, because without that, we cannot move forward.

[Sushan]

While I agree with your view on the importance of motivation in parenting and the effectiveness of demonstrating consequences rather than using corporal punishment, it's also important to consider the cultural context of parenting styles, especially in Asian communities (I am coming from an Asian Background). Research indicates that Asian American parenting, often characterized by the 'tiger parent' model popularized by Amy Chua, plays a significant role in the transmission of intergenerational trauma. This style, while focused on high achievement, can sometimes overlook the emotional needs of children, potentially leading to stress and anxiety.

This seems to confirm my approach rather than diverge from what I said, so I don’t understand why you started with “while I agree with your view,” indicating a divergence. Before our son was born, I read a great deal of literature on parenting, and I was also under the influence of Erich Fromm, from whom I read very much. In particular, his book “The Art of Loving” affected me greatly. So, one-size-fits-all education philosophies are quite the opposite of my approach – even later as a manager.

From this perspective, the decision to not use corporal punishment, as you mentioned, can be seen as a step away from traditional, more rigid parenting styles. However, it's also essential to understand that simply avoiding certain practices of our parents doesn't automatically translate to better outcomes.

There is no “automatic” with children, in fact with any living creature, because we are sentient beings and not machines. Having been a deeply impressionable child myself, and clearly an exception in my class, I experienced how my own path was the one to liberation and not the prescribed one that others wanted me to take. With that background, my approach to our son was nuanced and although I’m sure it wasn’t perfect, he’s turned out a fine example and loves his parents.

In light of this, how do we navigate this complex terrain? We're tasked with honoring our cultural heritage while also adapting to the changing needs and understanding of child development. Furthermore, how can we ensure that our parenting choices contribute positively to breaking the cycle of intergenerational trauma, rather than perpetuating it, even unintentionally?

I have a problem with “honouring our cultural heritage.” I’m a Brit, so there are many things that I like about my cultural heritage, but also many things that I abhor. This is probably why I emigrated to Europe at 22 and have lived here since, becoming fully integrated into another equally imperfect, culture. I honour my cultural heritage by understanding it, which means that I express my analysis of its merits and faults, because without that, we cannot move forward.

Thank you for sharing your approach, which has clearly been shaped by a deep understanding of Erich Fromm's philosophy on love and education, as well as your personal journey and cultural experiences. Fromm's perspective, as he articulates in 'The Art of Loving,' views love as a skill that requires active development of one's whole personality, a sentiment that resonates with many, including myself​​.

While I respect and see the merit in your nuanced, individualized approach to parenting, I'd like to offer a perspective from an Asian background, where collective cultural values often play a significant role in shaping individual behavior. In some Asian parenting traditions, for instance, there is a strong emphasis on respect for elders and community that might sometimes conflict with the Western ideal of individualism and self-actualization.

In these traditions, 'honoring our cultural heritage' doesn't necessarily mean uncritical acceptance of all aspects of the culture. Rather, it involves a conscious effort to understand and retain values that promote communal harmony and support, while also recognizing and correcting practices that may not serve the well-being of the individual or family, such as those that might perpetuate intergenerational trauma.

[Stoppelmann]

Thank you for sharing your approach, which has clearly been shaped by a deep understanding of Erich Fromm's philosophy on love and education, as well as your personal journey and cultural experiences. Fromm's perspective, as he articulates in 'The Art of Loving,' views love as a skill that requires active development of one's whole personality, a sentiment that resonates with many, including myself.

While I respect and see the merit in your nuanced, individualized approach to parenting, I'd like to offer a perspective from an Asian background, where collective cultural values often play a significant role in shaping individual behavior. In some Asian parenting traditions, for instance, there is a strong emphasis on respect for elders and community that might sometimes conflict with the Western ideal of individualism and self-actualization.

Respect for elders has always been an essential aspect of my life, and the fact that I worked many years as a nurse in retirement homes and spoke openly about the respect due to my patients and measures taken to confirm their dignity was not overlooked by my son, or by my staff when I became a manager. However, I take your point about self-actualisation, which is a large problem because dignity is not only given but must be lived. In Germany, we have the "Sie" form of address, a formal way of addressing someone, particularly in professional or unfamiliar settings. It is used as a sign of respect and politeness, especially when dealing with older people, strangers, colleagues, or individuals in positions of authority. I retained this form of address when I became a manager and had a deportment that some called arrogant, but in distancing myself and using the “Sie” form, I was respecting my staff as much as my patients.

There is a lot of abuse of familiarity in society, and I have experienced many members of staff who have tried to breach my formal stance, one even jumping into my arms after seeing me after I had left the organisation. I made a point of retaining my stance. I have relaxed a little since retirement, but even our neighbours acknowledge that despite my acceptance of the informal form of address, I retain an inner distance.

In these traditions, 'honoring our cultural heritage' doesn't necessarily mean uncritical acceptance of all aspects of the culture. Rather, it involves a conscious effort to understand and retain values that promote communal harmony and support, while also recognizing and correcting practices that may not serve the well-being of the individual or family, such as those that might perpetuate intergenerational trauma.

I fully support promoting communal harmony and support and see a degeneration in parents' behaviour towards their children and peers. A lack of respect is visible, and my son and I have a dual relationship in which he respects me but also shows his affection. Some might say it appears stiff, but we know otherwise. We have lived a reciprocal relationship in which he has supported us as much as we have supported him, but always within the boundaries of dignity and after asking permission.

I disagree with the lack of formality in life, despite having grown up in a British household where the formally worded address is unknown as such but instead is expressed in gestures and postures. I prefer the semantic method because gestures and postures are often degrading, such as “doffing” one’s cap, the way aristocracy was greeted, and using the title that someone had. I know that in some places in the East, the title is still used, as well as linguistic and behavioural methods of showing respect, and different honorifics, verb conjugations, and pronouns are used depending on the level of formality and the relationship between speakers. This seems overly formal and reminiscent of past times.

We need a balanced method that each of us must find to show respect and award people the dignity they deserve. On the other hand, people must behave in a dignified way.

[Sushan]

Thank you for sharing your approach, which has clearly been shaped by a deep understanding of Erich Fromm's philosophy on love and education, as well as your personal journey and cultural experiences. Fromm's perspective, as he articulates in 'The Art of Loving,' views love as a skill that requires active development of one's whole personality, a sentiment that resonates with many, including myself.

While I respect and see the merit in your nuanced, individualized approach to parenting, I'd like to offer a perspective from an Asian background, where collective cultural values often play a significant role in shaping individual behavior. In some Asian parenting traditions, for instance, there is a strong emphasis on respect for elders and community that might sometimes conflict with the Western ideal of individualism and self-actualization.

Respect for elders has always been an essential aspect of my life, and the fact that I worked many years as a nurse in retirement homes and spoke openly about the respect due to my patients and measures taken to confirm their dignity was not overlooked by my son, or by my staff when I became a manager. However, I take your point about self-actualisation, which is a large problem because dignity is not only given but must be lived. In Germany, we have the "Sie" form of address, a formal way of addressing someone, particularly in professional or unfamiliar settings. It is used as a sign of respect and politeness, especially when dealing with older people, strangers, colleagues, or individuals in positions of authority. I retained this form of address when I became a manager and had a deportment that some called arrogant, but in distancing myself and using the “Sie” form, I was respecting my staff as much as my patients.

There is a lot of abuse of familiarity in society, and I have experienced many members of staff who have tried to breach my formal stance, one even jumping into my arms after seeing me after I had left the organisation. I made a point of retaining my stance. I have relaxed a little since retirement, but even our neighbours acknowledge that despite my acceptance of the informal form of address, I retain an inner distance.

In these traditions, 'honoring our cultural heritage' doesn't necessarily mean uncritical acceptance of all aspects of the culture. Rather, it involves a conscious effort to understand and retain values that promote communal harmony and support, while also recognizing and correcting practices that may not serve the well-being of the individual or family, such as those that might perpetuate intergenerational trauma.

I fully support promoting communal harmony and support and see a degeneration in parents' behaviour towards their children and peers. A lack of respect is visible, and my son and I have a dual relationship in which he respects me but also shows his affection. Some might say it appears stiff, but we know otherwise. We have lived a reciprocal relationship in which he has supported us as much as we have supported him, but always within the boundaries of dignity and after asking permission.

I disagree with the lack of formality in life, despite having grown up in a British household where the formally worded address is unknown as such but instead is expressed in gestures and postures. I prefer the semantic method because gestures and postures are often degrading, such as “doffing” one’s cap, the way aristocracy was greeted, and using the title that someone had. I know that in some places in the East, the title is still used, as well as linguistic and behavioural methods of showing respect, and different honorifics, verb conjugations, and pronouns are used depending on the level of formality and the relationship between speakers. This seems overly formal and reminiscent of past times.

We need a balanced method that each of us must find to show respect and award people the dignity they deserve. On the other hand, people must behave in a dignified way.

Aristotle's notion of the "Golden Mean" suggests that virtue lies in striking a balance between deficiency and excess. In your case, the mean would be a respectful engagement that allows for warmth and individual expression. This principle could serve as a guide for navigating the complexities of interpersonal relationships, where too much formality might create distance, yet too much familiarity may breach respect.

The Confucian emphasis on structured relationships also aligns with your approach. Confucianism teaches that every social interaction should adhere to 'Li' — the proper way of doing things — which involves a respect that need not be cold or distant. Your narrative suggests you embody this by maintaining professional boundaries that still permit genuine human connection.

In societies increasingly leaning toward informality, the concern for lost dignity is valid. However, this shift also presents an opportunity to redefine dignity within modern contexts. Your practice of blending formal respect with genuine warmth could be a model for others seeking this balance.

The evolution of social norms calls for a dynamic approach to formality and respect. It would be interesting to explore how different cultures navigate this evolution and what we might learn from them. How do you think we can further cultivate a society where respect and warmth are not mutually exclusive but are understood as complementary forces?

[Stoppelmann]

Aristotle's notion of the "Golden Mean" suggests that virtue lies in striking a balance between deficiency and excess. In your case, the mean would be a respectful engagement that allows for warmth and individual expression. This principle could serve as a guide for navigating the complexities of interpersonal relationships, where too much formality might create distance, yet too much familiarity may breach respect.

The Confucian emphasis on structured relationships also aligns with your approach. Confucianism teaches that every social interaction should adhere to 'Li' — the proper way of doing things — which involves a respect that need not be cold or distant. Your narrative suggests you embody this by maintaining professional boundaries that still permit genuine human connection.

Yes, you have appraised my position well.

Aristotle's notion of the "Golden Mean," as a key concept of ethical philosophy, could well be the way ahead and a method to find a moderate or balanced position between extremes in human behaviour. However, I observe that extremes seem understood today as forms of authenticity, and few strive to find the right amount or degree of a particular quality or action, which is deemed “stuffy” or too rigid. Moderation is often seen as conforming to norms and not daring to break out, which is far from the truth.

Having read up on the subject, I find it important to see that Aristotle acknowledges that the mean is not a fixed point but can vary from one person to another, depending on the particular circumstances and the individual's disposition. We find ourselves on a spectrum between what is excessive or deficient in certain settings. I was guided in many ways by my own experience of deficiency as a teenager when attending to my son at the same age, which was fortunate because we are very similar despite distinct differences. I was a child who, in secondary school, became aware of the artistic world, and I was taken up in literary, artistic, and musical imagination. It was the 1960s, and my parents came from a working-class background, where such aspirations were pointless and had no utility.

Changing towns and schools, all of this was taken away from me, and I fell into a disinterested environment that couldn’t imagine what was wrong with me. It took ten years of trials and tribulations before I found my feet, but those years were educational, and I was resolved to prevent my son from feeling the dejection I had felt. At the same time, the learning process was important. It would have been helpful if a book like The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything by Ken Robinson had been around, which only came out in 2009. His TED talk in 2006 Do schools kill creativity? had spoken clearly about my experience, but our son was 24, so it came a bit late. Fortunately, I had inadvertently assisted our son in finding his element, but at least I had the sense to not get in the way.

The Practical Wisdom, which I understand Aristotle called Phronesis, is regarded as important in determining the Golden Mean. Indeed, rigid rules wouldn’t have helped. Instead, careful consideration of the situation assisted us in giving our son the direction he needed and a process of ethical development, including an upbringing with Erich Fromm’s “Art of Loving,” Christian and Buddhist principles, and nursing ethics in mind. Habituation and practice also played a role and our son picked up meditation as he had seen me doing from 2002 onwards. By consistently choosing the mean, I believe he developed a good character.

It looks as though the various sources I was using were themselves influenced by the Golden Mean.

In societies increasingly leaning toward informality, the concern for lost dignity is valid. However, this shift also presents an opportunity to redefine dignity within modern contexts. Your practice of blending formal respect with genuine warmth could be a model for others seeking this balance.

The evolution of social norms calls for a dynamic approach to formality and respect. It would be interesting to explore how different cultures navigate this evolution and what we might learn from them. How do you think we can further cultivate a society where respect and warmth are not mutually exclusive but are understood as complementary forces?

That is a difficult question because “my” approach was brutally brushed aside by technocratic, profit-orientated management that took over nursing. I was fortunate to retire as that happened, but the staff with whom I am still in touch have told me that everything has changed for the worse since I’m no longer there. Of course, I couldn’t have single-handedly prevented that development, so it is more coincidence than contributory that it happened then.

We also have a political divide that identifies itself by extremes which oppose the Golden Mean. The extremes of liberal policies compete with the extremes of coercive and restrictive policies. I feel that the media does its best to encourage these extremes in the utilitarian interest of Klicks and Sales. There is also an atmosphere of mistrust and the eroding of social trust in democratic institutions growing in the wake of populism, expecting the electorate to trust authoritarian leaders blindly. Under such conditions, respect and warmth are considered mutually exclusive, and moderation is an ignored principle.

[Sushan]

Aristotle's notion of the "Golden Mean" suggests that virtue lies in striking a balance between deficiency and excess. In your case, the mean would be a respectful engagement that allows for warmth and individual expression. This principle could serve as a guide for navigating the complexities of interpersonal relationships, where too much formality might create distance, yet too much familiarity may breach respect.

The Confucian emphasis on structured relationships also aligns with your approach. Confucianism teaches that every social interaction should adhere to 'Li' — the proper way of doing things — which involves a respect that need not be cold or distant. Your narrative suggests you embody this by maintaining professional boundaries that still permit genuine human connection.

Yes, you have appraised my position well.

Aristotle's notion of the "Golden Mean," as a key concept of ethical philosophy, could well be the way ahead and a method to find a moderate or balanced position between extremes in human behaviour. However, I observe that extremes seem understood today as forms of authenticity, and few strive to find the right amount or degree of a particular quality or action, which is deemed “stuffy” or too rigid. Moderation is often seen as conforming to norms and not daring to break out, which is far from the truth.

Having read up on the subject, I find it important to see that Aristotle acknowledges that the mean is not a fixed point but can vary from one person to another, depending on the particular circumstances and the individual's disposition. We find ourselves on a spectrum between what is excessive or deficient in certain settings. I was guided in many ways by my own experience of deficiency as a teenager when attending to my son at the same age, which was fortunate because we are very similar despite distinct differences. I was a child who, in secondary school, became aware of the artistic world, and I was taken up in literary, artistic, and musical imagination. It was the 1960s, and my parents came from a working-class background, where such aspirations were pointless and had no utility.

Changing towns and schools, all of this was taken away from me, and I fell into a disinterested environment that couldn’t imagine what was wrong with me. It took ten years of trials and tribulations before I found my feet, but those years were educational, and I was resolved to prevent my son from feeling the dejection I had felt. At the same time, the learning process was important. It would have been helpful if a book like The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything by Ken Robinson had been around, which only came out in 2009. His TED talk in 2006 Do schools kill creativity? had spoken clearly about my experience, but our son was 24, so it came a bit late. Fortunately, I had inadvertently assisted our son in finding his element, but at least I had the sense to not get in the way.

The Practical Wisdom, which I understand Aristotle called Phronesis, is regarded as important in determining the Golden Mean. Indeed, rigid rules wouldn’t have helped. Instead, careful consideration of the situation assisted us in giving our son the direction he needed and a process of ethical development, including an upbringing with Erich Fromm’s “Art of Loving,” Christian and Buddhist principles, and nursing ethics in mind. Habituation and practice also played a role and our son picked up meditation as he had seen me doing from 2002 onwards. By consistently choosing the mean, I believe he developed a good character.

It looks as though the various sources I was using were themselves influenced by the Golden Mean.

In societies increasingly leaning toward informality, the concern for lost dignity is valid. However, this shift also presents an opportunity to redefine dignity within modern contexts. Your practice of blending formal respect with genuine warmth could be a model for others seeking this balance.

The evolution of social norms calls for a dynamic approach to formality and respect. It would be interesting to explore how different cultures navigate this evolution and what we might learn from them. How do you think we can further cultivate a society where respect and warmth are not mutually exclusive but are understood as complementary forces?

That is a difficult question because “my” approach was brutally brushed aside by technocratic, profit-orientated management that took over nursing. I was fortunate to retire as that happened, but the staff with whom I am still in touch have told me that everything has changed for the worse since I’m no longer there. Of course, I couldn’t have single-handedly prevented that development, so it is more coincidence than contributory that it happened then.

We also have a political divide that identifies itself by extremes which oppose the Golden Mean. The extremes of liberal policies compete with the extremes of coercive and restrictive policies. I feel that the media does its best to encourage these extremes in the utilitarian interest of Klicks and Sales. There is also an atmosphere of mistrust and the eroding of social trust in democratic institutions growing in the wake of populism, expecting the electorate to trust authoritarian leaders blindly. Under such conditions, respect and warmth are considered mutually exclusive, and moderation is an ignored principle.

The interplay between Aristotle's Golden Mean and Confucian principles, as mirrored in your personal and professional life, offers a rich tapestry for examining the application of these philosophies in the modern world. Your life story, characterized by a transition from an artistically vibrant environment to a more disengaged one, and the thoughtful guidance you provided to your son, exemplify the practical embodiment of these ancient tenets. This journey underscores the importance of striking a balance, not only in moral virtues but also in the pursuit of passions and interests, resonating deeply with Aristotle's concept of finding the right measure in various aspects of life.

In parenting, your application of Phronesis, or practical wisdom, reflects a nuanced understanding of guiding without imposing, allowing your son to navigate his own path between extremes. This approach demonstrates a living example of the Golden Mean and aligns with the Confucian value of nurturing harmonious relationships through empathy and understanding.

However, the challenges you faced in your nursing career, marked by a shift towards a more technocratic and efficiency-driven approach, illustrate a broader societal trend that often sidelines these ethical considerations. This shift raises a pivotal question: How can we reintegrate the values of balance and ethical reflection championed by Aristotle and Confucius in professional environments increasingly governed by efficiency and profit motives?

Moreover, the current societal and political climate, which tends to glorify extremes, further underscores the relevance of these philosophical principles. Your narrative, both personal and professional, offers valuable insights into how individual actions, grounded in balanced and ethical principles, can act as a counterbalance to these prevailing trends. This suggests that the practical application of these philosophies in contemporary life might begin at the individual level, through cultivating a personal ethos that values balanced judgment and empathetic engagement. This individual ethos could potentially influence broader institutional and societal norms, demonstrating how moderation and balance can lead to more fulfilling, ethical, and effective outcomes.

Your story, therefore, is not just a personal narrative but a microcosm of the broader challenge society faces: navigating a world increasingly inclined towards extremes, guided by the principles of balance, moderation, and ethical wisdom.

This leads to a philosophical inquiry that extends beyond the confines of individual experience and touches the core of societal evolution: In a world that often equates success with extreme measures and quick results, how can we foster a collective consciousness that values and rewards the pursuit of balance and ethical depth, both in personal endeavors and professional achievements? I would like to hear your opinion on this.

[Stoppelmann]

However, the challenges you faced in your nursing career, marked by a shift towards a more technocratic and efficiency-driven approach, illustrate a broader societal trend that often sidelines these ethical considerations. This shift raises a pivotal question: How can we reintegrate the values of balance and ethical reflection championed by Aristotle and Confucius in professional environments increasingly governed by efficiency and profit motives?

The disturbing thing for me when considering this question is that the CEO who gave me hope before he was swept away actually championed a more balanced and ethically reflective professional culture and our first large conference (held on the Ferry between Kiel and Oslo) reflected all the measures that we would have to adopt:
Leadership Commitment
Ethical Guidelines and Policies
Training and Development
Incorporating Ethical Considerations into Decision-Making
Promoting Work-Life Balance
Employee Involvement and Benefits
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Measure and Evaluate
Rewarding Ethical Behaviour
Networking
Continuous Improvement

I was so enthralled by the approach that I implemented it quickly and noticeably so that I was the first choice when the question arose as to who should become regional manager This is probably why the technocratic revolution several months later shocked me with its devastating efficiency and led to a huge exodus at my level in the corporation.

As far as I can tell, this is the difference between the opposing approaches: one initiates enthusiastic engagement, whereas the other demands obedience. The latter approach bore all the characteristics of authoritarian rule, and the uniformity it sought hardly recognised the individual circumstances that a diverse organisation has. Even the joviality had gone, and a hard line was drawn between top and bottom. Everything became top-down. “See to it!” was the most common order. I was told that I had the wrong priorities.

This leads to a philosophical inquiry that extends beyond the confines of individual experience and touches the core of societal evolution: In a world that often equates success with extreme measures and quick results, how can we foster a collective consciousness that values and rewards the pursuit of balance and ethical depth, both in personal endeavors and professional achievements? I would like to hear your opinion on this.

We can observe a development in our world that doesn’t seem to be slowing down, reflecting the experience I described above. Business seems to be driving this forward, which is perhaps understandable because, in recent history, we see much the same happening in pre-Nazi Germany, which had a lot of support from American moguls. Of course, it is now a global movement, and each bloc has its own version, but there seems to be agreement between them. “Resistance is futile” was a quote I used in my professional situation, and in the end, I got out. Our world doesn’t have that option.

Therefore, as futile as it may appear, resistance is the only option, and it can only be attempted with a bottom-up approach. A collective consciousness that values and rewards the pursuit of balance and ethical dept can only grow out of a personal commitment that spreads in families and organisations which remain constructively critical of the attitude that often equates success with extreme measures and quick results. In other words, such a countermovement is a combination of integrity, commitment, compassion, generosity, and community.

[Alex Lynn]

Yes! It is very possible to improve on our parent's method of parenting and raise our own children in a better way. Personally, I have actually identified the areas where my parent failed while raising us. For example, my parent doesn't correct us when we kids fight each other unnecessarily. Now I discover they did not have the moral to counsel us against domestic violence because they themselves fight each other. Knowing all these areas where my parents are lacking, I am sure I can raise my children in a better and create a home of the exact opposite of what I have as a kid while growing up.

[Sushan]

However, the challenges you faced in your nursing career, marked by a shift towards a more technocratic and efficiency-driven approach, illustrate a broader societal trend that often sidelines these ethical considerations. This shift raises a pivotal question: How can we reintegrate the values of balance and ethical reflection championed by Aristotle and Confucius in professional environments increasingly governed by efficiency and profit motives?

The disturbing thing for me when considering this question is that the CEO who gave me hope before he was swept away actually championed a more balanced and ethically reflective professional culture and our first large conference (held on the Ferry between Kiel and Oslo) reflected all the measures that we would have to adopt:
Leadership Commitment
Ethical Guidelines and Policies
Training and Development
Incorporating Ethical Considerations into Decision-Making
Promoting Work-Life Balance
Employee Involvement and Benefits
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Measure and Evaluate
Rewarding Ethical Behaviour
Networking
Continuous Improvement

I was so enthralled by the approach that I implemented it quickly and noticeably so that I was the first choice when the question arose as to who should become regional manager This is probably why the technocratic revolution several months later shocked me with its devastating efficiency and led to a huge exodus at my level in the corporation.

As far as I can tell, this is the difference between the opposing approaches: one initiates enthusiastic engagement, whereas the other demands obedience. The latter approach bore all the characteristics of authoritarian rule, and the uniformity it sought hardly recognised the individual circumstances that a diverse organisation has. Even the joviality had gone, and a hard line was drawn between top and bottom. Everything became top-down. “See to it!” was the most common order. I was told that I had the wrong priorities.

This leads to a philosophical inquiry that extends beyond the confines of individual experience and touches the core of societal evolution: In a world that often equates success with extreme measures and quick results, how can we foster a collective consciousness that values and rewards the pursuit of balance and ethical depth, both in personal endeavors and professional achievements? I would like to hear your opinion on this.

We can observe a development in our world that doesn’t seem to be slowing down, reflecting the experience I described above. Business seems to be driving this forward, which is perhaps understandable because, in recent history, we see much the same happening in pre-Nazi Germany, which had a lot of support from American moguls. Of course, it is now a global movement, and each bloc has its own version, but there seems to be agreement between them. “Resistance is futile” was a quote I used in my professional situation, and in the end, I got out. Our world doesn’t have that option.

Therefore, as futile as it may appear, resistance is the only option, and it can only be attempted with a bottom-up approach. A collective consciousness that values and rewards the pursuit of balance and ethical dept can only grow out of a personal commitment that spreads in families and organisations which remain constructively critical of the attitude that often equates success with extreme measures and quick results. In other words, such a countermovement is a combination of integrity, commitment, compassion, generosity, and community.

Since you have provided many valuable points in your response, I would like to categorize them under several subtopics (as I see) and give my opinion on them.

1. Leadership and Ethical Culture: Your experience with a CEO who championed an ethical culture is a perfect example of how leadership can positively influence an organization. Effective leaders can inspire ethical behavior by embodying the values they preach. A leader who actively demonstrates a commitment to ethics can foster an environment where employees feel valued and understood, contrasting sharply with a solely efficiency-driven approach.

2. Ethical Decision-Making and Corporate Responsibility: Your approach in incorporating CSR and ethical guidelines reflects a growing awareness in the business world that profit and ethics aren't mutually exclusive. Companies are increasingly recognizing that sustainable success requires a balance between financial goals and social responsibilities. Ethical practices can lead to long-term benefits, including brand loyalty and a positive corporate image.

3. Work-Life Balance and Employee Well-being: The emphasis you placed on work-life balance is crucial. Research has consistently shown that employees who enjoy a good balance are more productive, engaged, and loyal. In a technocratic environment, this becomes a challenge, but also an opportunity for innovation in workplace policies and culture.

4. Resisting Authoritarianism in Business Practices: Drawing parallels between technocratic business practices and authoritarian regimes is a powerful observation. It reminds us that businesses need to nurture a culture of openness and diversity. Encouraging different perspectives and fostering an inclusive environment can be antidotes to authoritarian tendencies.

5. The Role of Individual and Collective Action: Your belief in the power of resistance from the bottom-up resonates with historical movements where change was driven by grassroots efforts. Individual commitment, when combined, can lead to significant societal shifts. It's a reminder that change often starts with small, personal commitments that gather momentum.

6. The Potential for a Countermovement: The countermovement you envision, rooted in integrity and community, is more than an ideal; it's a necessity in today's world. Such movements start small but can grow through consistent efforts and the power of example. They remind us that in a world often focused on short-term gains, long-term well-being hinges on ethical depth and balance.

These reflections add to your insightful observations. I'm curious to know how you see these ideas being implemented in real-world scenarios, especially in light of your experiences. What practical steps do you think can be taken to foster such a change in the corporate world?

[Dr Jonathan Osterman PhD]

This shift raises a pivotal question: How can we reintegrate the values of balance and ethical reflection championed by Aristotle and Confucius in professional environments increasingly governed by efficiency and profit motives?

However we would attempt to do it, it certainly is
not going to be easy, convenient, pleasant, or profitable.

I see a need for radical painful sacrifices.

But we should try and put such attempt in the widest perspective
that, ultimately, we will die rather sooner than later,
and our life is a kind of "once-in-a-lifetime opportunity"
to follow our heart's bravest dreams.

[Sushan]

Yes! It is very possible to improve on our parent's method of parenting and raise our own children in a better way. Personally, I have actually identified the areas where my parent failed while raising us. For example, my parent doesn't correct us when we kids fight each other unnecessarily. Now I discover they did not have the moral to counsel us against domestic violence because they themselves fight each other. Knowing all these areas where my parents are lacking, I am sure I can raise my children in a better and create a home of the exact opposite of what I have as a kid while growing up.

The personal example you've shared is a testament to the potential for positive change in parenting styles across generations. Recognizing the mistakes of our parents and consciously choosing to address them in our own parenting can indeed be a successful strategy. However, it's a complex process with both challenges and opportunities.

Data on domestic violence and family conflicts show that these experiences have a profound impact on children. Growing up in such an environment can lead to various emotional and behavioral issues. Children who witness domestic violence are at a higher risk of repeating such patterns in their own relationships, either as victims or perpetrators. This cycle can be hard to break, but awareness and conscious effort, as you've shown, can make a difference.

The issue of parents lacking moral authority to advise their children due to their own shortcomings is a significant one. It highlights the importance of self-awareness and personal growth in parenting. By acknowledging and addressing our own flaws, we can provide more genuine and effective guidance to our children.

Philosophically, this touches on the concept of ethical development. As Aristotle suggested, virtues are habits that we develop through practice. In parenting, this means actively cultivating virtues like patience, understanding, and non-violence, especially if they were lacking in our own upbringing. It's about striving to be better, not just different from our parents.

Your approach to parenting, aiming to create a home environment opposite to the one you experienced, is admirable. It reflects a conscious decision to break negative cycles and establish a healthier family dynamic. However, it's also important to remember that parenting is not just about avoiding the mistakes of our parents. It's about finding a balance, learning from the past, and adapting those lessons to the unique needs and personalities of our children.

In striving to correct the mistakes of our parents and create a healthier environment for our children, how do we ensure that we are not inadvertently imposing our own unresolved issues or overcorrecting to the point where new problems arise? How do we navigate this delicate balance between learning from the past and responding to the unique challenges of the present, especially when our intentions are to provide a better upbringing for our children?

[Sushan]

This shift raises a pivotal question: How can we reintegrate the values of balance and ethical reflection championed by Aristotle and Confucius in professional environments increasingly governed by efficiency and profit motives?

However we would attempt to do it, it certainly is
not going to be easy, convenient, pleasant, or profitable.

I see a need for radical painful sacrifices.

But we should try and put such attempt in the widest perspective
that, ultimately, we will die rather sooner than later,
and our life is a kind of "once-in-a-lifetime opportunity"
to follow our heart's bravest dreams.

Your acknowledgment of the inherent challenges in this endeavor is both realistic and insightful. You rightly point out that reintegrating values like balance and ethical reflection in today's professional environments is neither easy nor convenient. This suggests a fundamental clash between traditional values and modern business practices. What specific challenges do you see in trying to bridge this gap? How can organizations and individuals navigate the tension between efficiency-driven goals and the slower, more reflective pace of ethical deliberation?

The notion of "radical painful sacrifices" is quite striking. It implies a deep commitment to higher values, even at the cost of personal or organizational comfort. In your view, what kind of sacrifices might be necessary to achieve this balance? Are these sacrifices more of a personal nature, or do they extend to organizational structures and cultures?

Your reference to the fleeting nature of life and the importance of pursuing our "heart's bravest dreams" introduces an existential dimension to the discussion. It raises a philosophical question: How does our awareness of mortality influence our professional choices and the values we uphold in our work? In your experience, does this awareness encourage a greater focus on ethical reflection and balance, or does it drive a pursuit of efficiency and profit due to the limited time we have?