Idealism

[Sriram]

Who said anything about ideals being fixed at 6, or 7 or 8.

Quite the reverse, our ideals develop and evolve as get older and gain greater unique experience. Sure there may be a starting point that is acquired from parents and other influential people in our lives as children, but this is in effect the 'canvas' on which our personal ideals are 'painted' so to speak.

It may be that your ideals are similar to your parents (that doesn't mean they are learned) but that isn't the case for many, many people - for example think about all those vegetarians who were not brought up as vegetarians.

In my own personal case may of my ideals are very different to those of my parents - both politically and also in a broader cultural context. My parents were both big 'C' and small 'c' conservatives, rather conformist in their thinking. My ideals are very different - that doesn't mean I didn't love my parents, but I am not them and they are not me. Our ideals are individual shaped by our unique experiences.

My brother is a passionate environmentalist (almost evangelical about it through his 20s) where did that idealism come from, certainly not from our parents.

Who said that your political views and your brothers ideals are learned from parents?!      

I didn't think this was that difficult. Well...let me clarify a little more.

I am talking about different stages that we pass through in our lives. It is largely physical but because of environmental factors, the mental aspects do not always match our physical development.

During child stage we learn from our parents and elders and others in authority. This is a fact.  We do not have enough knowledge or experience or confidence at this stage (6-7-8 etc)  to fix our ideals ourselves.  I gave some examples of vegetarianism, family values etc. I hope there is no dispute on this....

As we reach adolescence we tend to question these same ideals and even go against them because of the skepticism and cynicism that is a hallmark of this stage of development. I am saying precisely that we out grow our parental influence and develop irreverence and cynicism. I hope this is understood...

After significant exposure to a variety of cultures, ideas and experiences we tone down this skepticism and reach a more balanced emotional and intellectual state of mind when we are neither influenced by authority nor by habitual skepticism.

Many people due to cultural and social factors tend to continue at the Child or the Adolescent stage far beyond the physical stages.  Because of this, many Childhood traits and Adolescent traits (and ideals) continue even in advanced age.

The fact that you hold views opposed to your parents (and are clearly proud of it) is itself evidence of the adolescent mindset continuing even today.

[ProfessorDavey]

Who said that your political views and your brothers ideals are learned from parents?!      

You did:

'children often learn their ideals from parents ...'

Political views are very much part of our ideals, ideology and idealism.

[Sriram]

You did:

'children often learn their ideals from parents ...'

Political views are very much part of our ideals, ideology and idealism.

LOL!  Alright...thanks Prof D.

[ProfessorDavey]

During child stage we learn from our parents and elders and others in authority. This is a fact.

Children also learn hugely from other children - and there is evidence that peers have a stronger influence on behaviour and respect toward others etc than parents.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1549711/Children-learn-most-from-peers-not-parents.html

[ProfessorDavey]

LOL!  Alright...thanks Prof D.

Does that mean you are retracting your previous comment implying that we learn our ideals from our parents and other authority figures?

[ProfessorDavey]

The fact that you hold views opposed to your parents (and are clearly proud of it) is itself evidence of the adolescent mindset continuing even today.

What total rubbish.

What you are implying is that the only way you can demonstrate moving beyond what you describe as the adolescent stage it to agree with your parents' views. That is total nonsense. It is perfectly possible to come to a mature position on views and ideologies that is not the same as you parents. Indeed it is likely that this would be due to immersing oneself is a much wider variety of views and opinions within society than just those of your parents, and I thought this was a feature of moving toward your third stage.

And yes I am comfortable (call it proud if you like) with my views, but that has nothing to do with them being different to those of my parents, certainly in a political sense.

[Sriram]

Does that mean you are retracting your previous comment implying that we learn our ideals from our parents and other authority figures?

You have not understood a word of what I have written in spite of my clarification.  I cannot clarify any further.

So...lets just leave it at that Prof...Thanks.

[ProfessorDavey]

You have not understood a word of what I have written in spite of my clarification.  I cannot clarify any further.

So...lets just leave it at that Prof...Thanks.

Wrong - I do understand what you have said (and your so called clarification is no clearer than your original post) - the issue is that I don't agree with you.

You are completely ignoring the massive influence that our peers have on our values, beliefs ideologies etc throughout our lives. While our parents and other childhood authority figures may provide the framework (or canvas) on which to hang (or paint) our values and ideals, it is our ongoing experiences, and critically our interactions with others who we see as peers that actually shapes the person we become. And that is an ongoing process. We change throughout our lives, and we continue to change long after our parents may have died.

[floo]

Who said that your political views and your brothers ideals are learned from parents?!      

I didn't think this was that difficult. Well...let me clarify a little more.

I am talking about different stages that we pass through in our lives. It is largely physical but because of environmental factors, the mental aspects do not always match our physical development.

During child stage we learn from our parents and elders and others in authority. This is a fact.  We do not have enough knowledge or experience or confidence at this stage (6-7-8 etc)  to fix our ideals ourselves.  I gave some examples of vegetarianism, family values etc. I hope there is no dispute on this....

As we reach adolescence we tend to question these same ideals and even go against them because of the skepticism and cynicism that is a hallmark of this stage of development. I am saying precisely that we out grow our parental influence and develop irreverence and cynicism. I hope this is understood...

After significant exposure to a variety of cultures, ideas and experiences we tone down this skepticism and reach a more balanced emotional and intellectual state of mind when we are neither influenced by authority nor by habitual skepticism.

Many people due to cultural and social factors tend to continue at the Child or the Adolescent stage far beyond the physical stages.  Because of this, many Childhood traits and Adolescent traits (and ideals) continue even in advanced age.

The fact that you hold views opposed to your parents (and are clearly proud of it) is itself evidence of the adolescent mindset continuing even today.

I would have said that was a sign of maturity. I am very glad I didn't share my parents opinions on most aspects of life, as I didn't think they were right.

[ProfessorDavey]

I would have said that was a sign of maturity. I am very glad I didn't share my parents opinions on most aspects of life, as I didn't think they were right.

Up to a point.

I think disagreeing with your parents purely out of rebellion isn't a very mature position, but then neither is agreeing with them simply out of obedience to authority.

Developing your own well considered views, that align with your own conscience, that are influenced neither by a need to rebel or a need to agree with your parents is, in my opinion, a sign of maturity.

[ProfessorDavey]

The fact that you hold views opposed to your parents (and are clearly proud of it) is itself evidence of the adolescent mindset continuing even today.

Worth noting that I don't disagree with my parents on all matters, there are plenty of things we do agree on, but there are also others we didn't agree on (noting too that they are both dead, so we don't agree or disagree anymore).

So, for example, neither I nor either of my parents believe in god - interestingly this was something I only discovered pretty late in their lives, although I don't think they had believed at all throughout their adult lives. Point was that the cultural 'default' when they were growing up and when I was growing up was that you should believe. Accordingly I think they never really talked about it at all, and I was briefly sent to Sunday school (as the thing to do). My parents had a lot of pressure from their parents as to 'doing the right thing' - and that is a difference between me and them - a much greater recognition that children have to be given the space, opportunity and confidence to grow into the people they are, not to be shoe-horned into becoming the people their parents are.

[Sriram]

Up to a point.

I think disagreeing with your parents purely out of rebellion isn't a very mature position, but then neither is agreeing with them simply out of obedience to authority.

Developing your own well considered views, that align with your own conscience, that are influenced neither by a need to rebel or a need to agree with your parents is, in my opinion, a sign of maturity.

Exactly...thanks!   

Its not whether you disagree with your parents or elders or religious leaders (or agree with them for that matter). Its about why you do it.

People with the child mind would agree merely because of authority. People with the adolescent mind would disagree merely due to rebellion. Its people who have experience and a broader perspective who will disagree or agree because of clear and considered views.  But most people tend to retain either their child or their adolescent mindset throughout life because the social and cultural environment pressurizes them to do so.

This view could of course differ on different subjects. It could be disagreement on religion but agreement on politics and so on...     

[trippymonkey]

But most people tend to retain either their child or their adolescent mindset throughout life because the social and cultural environment pressurizes them to do so.

Sorry Ji but are you over-generalising a bit ?!!?

[floo]

Up to a point.

I think disagreeing with your parents purely out of rebellion isn't a very mature position, but then neither is agreeing with them simply out of obedience to authority.

Developing your own well considered views, that align with your own conscience, that are influenced neither by a need to rebel or a need to agree with your parents is, in my opinion, a sign of maturity.

There were a lot of things about my parents with which to disagree, not just my opinion, but that of most reasonable people too. You should have heard my maternal grandmother on the topic!

[Bramble]

I'm not sure I have the faintest idea why I have the views have, nor even why these views change over time. I am aware that I often take credit for my views after the fact, although this sense of the exercise of free-will may simply be an inevitable part of the 'I-making' process. If our narrative-writing does take place retrospectively, and frequently in the interests of self-reification, then perhaps these categories of obedience, rebellion and clear consideration may simply be another manifestation of our very human yearning to construct elaborate - and often self-flattering - stories out of mystery and ignorance. Might it not be the case that we just do what we do and then try to make sense of it all afterwards?

Agreeing with authority may be a very sensible approach if your life or welfare depends on conformity - hardly a sign of childishness. Similarly, rebelling may be a natural and perfectly healthy reaction to intolerable circumstances, and not at all symptom of arrested development. Perhaps it is only those who enjoy relative freedom from either constraint who can discover a gentler and more balanced path between such extremes. Is it necessary in any of these cases to invoke judgemental classifications or presume conscious authorship of character?

The adulation of ideals always makes me slightly queasy, for reasons I find hard to pin down. Perhaps this has something to do with my own childhood and the fact that I was sent to an old fashioned boarding school at the age of 7, where I was beaten almost daily in the interests of instilling good Christian values. Yet it never seems to me that my life proceeds from a set of learned rules. Rather I simply find myself thinking, feeling and behaving in certain ways spontaneously. There is seldom any sense of deliberation and when there is this commonly leads to some degree of paralysis in the decision making process, suggesting that the promotion of ideals as a kind of instruction book for life may be at best a poor substitute for trust in ones fundamental nature.

Perhaps without the lectures and floggings my spontaneity would have led me to prison. Who knows? If I learned how to behave from my teachers then I also learned a deep mistrust of authority. At no time did I ever consciously try to work out what my own views should be on morals or anything else. I simply found that I was the way I was. Some of the views I found I held put me at odds with social norms and for many years I tried to modify these views to bring me into line. It never worked. I found that when I tried to 'improve myself' I actually began to feel extremely stressed and unwell. Eventually I realised that the problem was trying to be other than what I was. It was a kind of violence against myself. Since then I've not been a fan of self-improvement. Change can and does occur, of course, but this seems to me to happen quite mysteriously and cannot in my experience be forced.

[Rhiannon]

That's a great post, Bramble. I'm sorry that you went through what you did as a child.

For me the desire for 'self improvement' was a symptom of unhappiness, a very clear sign that things were badly wrong in my life. It's no secret that a few years ago I had a breakdown, the roots of which lay in emotional and mental abuse; I came out the other side having undone the worst of the negative beliefs that I had about myself, but I didn't have a clue who I was - my sense of self was made up of the negative judgements of others. Somehow, through all kinds of things, I've got back to a vague sense of self as I feel that I should be. What or who that is I can't really pin down, but I feel at home. What my ideals are I have no idea - like you, I find I react instinctively. Change, it seems to me, is a process of unlearning, letting things fall away. I've realised that there isn't necessarily the need to then build anything up again, it's ok just to stay with the sense of space. I dream, but I don't plan. Life will go where it will.

[ekim]

it's ok just to stay with the sense of space.

.... and to value it .... perhaps what is implied in the Tao Te Ching
"Many spokes are needed to create a wheel
But it is the space at the centre that makes it functional.
Create a pot from clay,
But it is the space within that makes it useable.
A house may have many windows and doors,
But it is the open space that allows them to be used.
Therefore, although we favour what is in Existence
We need to see the spacious value of inner Being."

[Enki]

I like your post 64, Bramble, and can relate to many things that you say. It is much more nuanced and focused than Sriram's posts on this subject which I regard as far too simplistic and generalised.

[Bramble]

That's a great post, Bramble. I'm sorry that you went through what you did as a child.

For me the desire for 'self improvement' was a symptom of unhappiness, a very clear sign that things were badly wrong in my life. It's no secret that a few years ago I had a breakdown, the roots of which lay in emotional and mental abuse; I came out the other side having undone the worst of the negative beliefs that I had about myself, but I didn't have a clue who I was - my sense of self was made up of the negative judgements of others. Somehow, through all kinds of things, I've got back to a vague sense of self as I feel that I should be. What or who that is I can't really pin down, but I feel at home. What my ideals are I have no idea - like you, I find I react instinctively. Change, it seems to me, is a process of unlearning, letting things fall away. I've realised that there isn't necessarily the need to then build anything up again, it's ok just to stay with the sense of space. I dream, but I don't plan. Life will go where it will.

Yes, the desire for self-improvement must come from some sense of inadequacy, mustn't it? The trouble with ideals is that they so easily create an unattainable goal, ensuring that ones sense of inadequacy is never overcome. They seem to be intrinsically alienating. I'm sorry that you've had such a rough ride. You certainly come across in your posts as a very balanced and self-confident person now, so you must have done something right! I like your insight that change is a process of letting things fall away. That's how it seems to me too. 

[ProfessorDavey]

This discussion reminds me of a way we described these stages in our family.

Stage 1: Daddy knows everything

Stage 2: Dad knows nothing

Stage 3: Actually Dad does know some things after all

Problem with Siriam's approach, is that it seems to equate to:

Stage 1: Daddy knows everything

Stage 2: Dad knows nothing

Stage 3: Actually I've decided that Dad does know everything after all

[ippy]

This discussion reminds me of a way we described these stages in our family.

Stage 1: Daddy knows everything

Stage 2: Dad knows nothing

Stage 3: Actually Dad does know some things after all

Problem with Siriam's approach, is that it seems to equate to:

Stage 1: Daddy knows everything

Stage 2: Dad knows nothing

Stage 3: Actually I've decided that Dad does know everything after all

Like this post of yours proff.

ippy

[Sriram]

Yes, the desire for self-improvement must come from some sense of inadequacy, mustn't it? The trouble with ideals is that they so easily create an unattainable goal, ensuring that ones sense of inadequacy is never overcome. They seem to be intrinsically alienating. I'm sorry that you've had such a rough ride. You certainly come across in your posts as a very balanced and self-confident person now, so you must have done something right! I like your insight that change is a process of letting things fall away. That's how it seems to me too.

What you say brings out the issue with Ideals that I was attempting to bring out in this thread. Many people are actually scared of ideals and about living up to them.....which shows a certain fear of being inadequate and not matching up. This really is unfortunate....and is precisely why I started this thread in the first place. 

Self improvement and development is a normal human trait and comes with our nature. So...most people should not have a problem with ideals. They would be enthused by them in fact.

[Sriram]

This discussion reminds me of a way we described these stages in our family.

Stage 1: Daddy knows everything

Stage 2: Dad knows nothing

Stage 3: Actually Dad does know some things after all

Problem with Siriam's approach, is that it seems to equate to:

Stage 1: Daddy knows everything

Stage 2: Dad knows nothing

Stage 3: Actually I've decided that Dad does know everything after all

LOL!! I have stated in my reply 50 as follows..."After significant exposure to a variety of cultures, ideas and experiences we tone down this skepticism and reach a more balanced emotional and intellectual state of mind when we are neither influenced by authority nor by habitual skepticism."

Which part of the above, according to you, corresponds to your statement ..." Stage 3: Actually I've decided that Dad does know everything after all"??!!

[SusanDoris]

I'm not following this topic closely, but am reading an article at the moment titled, 'The Overtton Window' which is relevant I think.

The link is to the Wikipedia article, not to the one I am reading.

[torridon]

I'm not sure I have the faintest idea why I have the views have, nor even why these views change over time. I am aware that I often take credit for my views after the fact, although this sense of the exercise of free-will may simply be an inevitable part of the 'I-making' process. If our narrative-writing does take place retrospectively, and frequently in the interests of self-reification, then perhaps these categories of obedience, rebellion and clear consideration may simply be another manifestation of our very human yearning to construct elaborate - and often self-flattering - stories out of mystery and ignorance. Might it not be the case that we just do what we do and then try to make sense of it all afterwards?

Agreeing with authority may be a very sensible approach if your life or welfare depends on conformity - hardly a sign of childishness. Similarly, rebelling may be a natural and perfectly healthy reaction to intolerable circumstances, and not at all symptom of arrested development. Perhaps it is only those who enjoy relative freedom from either constraint who can discover a gentler and more balanced path between such extremes. Is it necessary in any of these cases to invoke judgemental classifications or presume conscious authorship of character?

The adulation of ideals always makes me slightly queasy, for reasons I find hard to pin down. Perhaps this has something to do with my own childhood and the fact that I was sent to an old fashioned boarding school at the age of 7, where I was beaten almost daily in the interests of instilling good Christian values. Yet it never seems to me that my life proceeds from a set of learned rules. Rather I simply find myself thinking, feeling and behaving in certain ways spontaneously. There is seldom any sense of deliberation and when there is this commonly leads to some degree of paralysis in the decision making process, suggesting that the promotion of ideals as a kind of instruction book for life may be at best a poor substitute for trust in ones fundamental nature.

Perhaps without the lectures and floggings my spontaneity would have led me to prison. Who knows? If I learned how to behave from my teachers then I also learned a deep mistrust of authority. At no time did I ever consciously try to work out what my own views should be on morals or anything else. I simply found that I was the way I was. Some of the views I found I held put me at odds with social norms and for many years I tried to modify these views to bring me into line. It never worked. I found that when I tried to 'improve myself' I actually began to feel extremely stressed and unwell. Eventually I realised that the problem was trying to be other than what I was. It was a kind of violence against myself. Since then I've not been a fan of self-improvement. Change can and does occur, of course, but this seems to me to happen quite mysteriously and cannot in my experience be forced.

Lovely post.  We don't get much from Bramble but it is sure worth waiting for