you know, when kids grow up, they tend to want freedom. freedom to choose. what to do, what to wear, what to eat. etc etc. especially after they had a comfortable childhood. and their parents will get anxious and want to put a stop to all this. they will say that things have been going well, do you think you will be able to have ur good life today if it werent for what we have done?( namely to organise everything for the kids, to tell them what to do, how to think.)
i used to wonder what the fuss this was about. i mean, if your life is going fine, comfortable, thats all that matters right? what your parents do are justified. even if they may come across as autocratic. meaning to say, i put comfort as the benchmark: if you ahve that, all's good.
until i start shovelling shit( in a wild sheep chase, murakami likened his job to shovelling snow) and until i really get to know what philosophy is about, that was my stand.
i still agree that in infancy, childhood, we need guidance, we need stability. we need comfort. but i feel that when we grow older, all these are still necessary, but not enough. simply not enough. we need room to grow. more space to truly develop. u can say that my idea is that you need more rigidity at first, to build up the foundation, but when you are matured enough, you should be soaring freely.
using this analogy, think bigger; expand your scope of thought. i think you will noe what i am driving at.
the funny thing is the reason parents give in defending themselves and even criticising us for wanting this and that. in my honest opionion, that reason is kinda irrelevant. the logic is kind of warped, if you ask me. it's too much based on the past. ja, i agree with marx and hegel that history is a monumental engine driving us forward. but thats only when we look at the past and change what needs to be changed. in this case, they arent really using the past in this manner. they arent addressing the issue: why can't we have more freedom? because they havent shown us that freedom and comfort are mutually exclusive, as they seem to want us to believe. they were only telling us how they had given us comfort, sacrificing freedom in the process.
i believe both arent mutually exclusive.
we have to talk cryptically, using analogies, simply because
it's all about safety first.
i used to wonder what the fuss this was about. i mean, if your life is going fine, comfortable, thats all that matters right? what your parents do are justified. even if they may come across as autocratic. meaning to say, i put comfort as the benchmark: if you ahve that, all's good.
until i start shovelling shit( in a wild sheep chase, murakami likened his job to shovelling snow) and until i really get to know what philosophy is about, that was my stand.
i still agree that in infancy, childhood, we need guidance, we need stability. we need comfort. but i feel that when we grow older, all these are still necessary, but not enough. simply not enough. we need room to grow. more space to truly develop. u can say that my idea is that you need more rigidity at first, to build up the foundation, but when you are matured enough, you should be soaring freely.
using this analogy, think bigger; expand your scope of thought. i think you will noe what i am driving at.
the funny thing is the reason parents give in defending themselves and even criticising us for wanting this and that. in my honest opionion, that reason is kinda irrelevant. the logic is kind of warped, if you ask me. it's too much based on the past. ja, i agree with marx and hegel that history is a monumental engine driving us forward. but thats only when we look at the past and change what needs to be changed. in this case, they arent really using the past in this manner. they arent addressing the issue: why can't we have more freedom? because they havent shown us that freedom and comfort are mutually exclusive, as they seem to want us to believe. they were only telling us how they had given us comfort, sacrificing freedom in the process.
i believe both arent mutually exclusive.
we have to talk cryptically, using analogies, simply because
it's all about safety first.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home