undefined

points

[-]

I don't know any high achievers who don't feel they have to prove themselves, so maybe I'm in the wrong cirles. It absolutely is a recipe for all kinds of long term complexes. But when you do work hard and you are satisfied with yourself, that satisfaction comes from something greater than yourself. Having no goal is worse than having an artificial one... and achieving something to make your dead parents happy is better than achieving nothing at all.

The measure of whether it was done in the proper proportion, I think, is whether you find later in life that it was, on balance, a service to you.

by n4r92 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> when you do work hard and you are satisfied with yourself

Ime if you constantly need to prove yourself then you rarely feel this; when you do, the feeling is ephemeral.

> achieving something to make your dead parents happy is better than achieving nothing at all

This feels circular. It assumes a value judgement about achievement which stems from your upbringing.

by noduerme1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

We are taught that achievement means value. Circularly, we value ourselves for achievements and we inculcate this in our children.

It is a value judgment. It's one that not everyone shares. It's surprising to me that a majority of people find it to be a controversial.

I think what's actually going on here in this thread is that people think any value judgment must be a bad thing. Right?

by n4r91 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm not saying that any value judgement is a bad thing. I'm saying that you're viewing your upbringing strictly through the lens it handed you.

As far as I can make out, your argument goes like this:

Strict parenting is good because it produces high achievers. I think achievement is good because I was conditioned to think it was good. I was conditioned to think it was good as a result of strict parenting.

Effectively: strict parenting is good because I was strictly parented.