If the parent did not have a bicycle until age 10, the parent will purchase a bicycle for his child at age 5. If the parent never travelled with his family, the parent will take his child on trips and so on.
Through the process of interrogating his own biography, the parent identifies experiences and objects that were absent in his own childhood and ensures such lapses are not present in the life of his child. Now, can it be said that the values and character of a person are in some meaningful way informed by his upbringing? Surely it can. So from this it would follow that values and character are contingent on the conditions of that upbringing.
If this is true, then a parent who raises his child in a way radically different from how his own childhood unfolded is in fact acting in contradiction to his desire for his child to retain his values. This makes sense when we look at self-made men who end up with spoiled children. As the child does not need to go through the same struggles in their childhood as the parent did, the child will not develop the same relationship to the value of money or work ethic as his father did.
However, this issue in relation to child rearing is only tangential to the substantive sentiment itself. Perhaps what the parent means when he says that he wants his child to have all the things he never did, is that the parent desires for the child to have opportunities to excel beyond that which was possible for the parent. For example, if the parent could not afford to attend university, he would desire for his child to have the financial backing to be able to do so.
Yet here too, I believe the sentiment is deeper than mere external opportunity. University is a means to an education. Education in turn is a transformative process that in one way betters the person who has gone through it. However, education is only a form of betterment in one case. An educated person can turn out to be a monster. An uneducated person can turn out to be a saint. It cannot be the case that the only opportunities a parent desires for their child are those linked to education.
Is it the case that parents who have problems with drinking desire that their children not have those problems? It is. Is it also the case that parents who have confidence issues desire for their children to be courageous? Indeed they do. If this is true, then a general rule can be inferred. Parents desire that their children become more virtuous than they themselves are.
Let us see how all this ties together. There are two major categories of virtues. In the first case, there are virtues that pertain to those things which are necessary. In the second case there are virtues that pertain to those things that can be otherwise. Don't worry; this will make sense very soon.
Things that are necessary are things like mathematical truths and knowledge we usually attribute to science; things that don't change. These are the intellectual virtues. Namely, sophia and episteme. When a parents desires for their child to have the opportunity to participate in a higher education, the parent in fact desires their child develop the intellectual virtues of episteme and sophia.
Now, let us turn to the second major grouping of virtues; namely those associated with things that can be otherwise. These are what are usually called the moral virtues such as justice, temperance, prudence, and fortitude. When a parent with a drinking problem desires their child not drink, the parent in fact wishes the child possess the virtue of temperance above that of the parent himself. So too if the parent wishes their child have confidence, which in turn is a consequence of courage, and courage in turn a consequence of fortitude, then the parent really wishes the child have a greater share of fortitude than the parent himself possesses.
No comments:
Post a Comment