THE NEXUS
There are divergent opinion on freedom and happiness conceptually in philosophy and in everyday commonsensical discourse, therefore it is not easy to develop a lingua franca within the purview of meaning definition wise.
Many philosophers from Kant, Tocqueville, Corpenicous, Rousseau, have dealt delibratively and extensively on these important systemic human edifices.
Emmanuel Kant predicted the antagonism between freedom and happiness in his work Metaphysics of Morals, likewise Rousseau said that humans are free beings, yet we are tied up in chains.
Our happiness is contingent on the level of freedom we are allowed to enjoy within our social contractual agreements, therefore to be free does not neccessarily means to be happy and likewise to be happy is not synonymous with freedom.
In the world people are free within the purview of their social contractual agreements yet there are so many un-happy souls around, that raises the question over the principle priorty of freedom over happiness, or what is left of virtuousness, righteousness, goodness, as sources of happiness. we posit here that happiness is psychological imperativeness it has no direct one on one bearing with freedom.
Some have posited that there is a unilateral correspondence relationship between freedom, happiness and materialistic prosperity, vis a vis positive "achievement in life" a common trend prevalent within affluent domains in our commune.
However, the more we look the less illumination we garnered reflective of such correspondence.
This brings my ruminating mind to the question, whether children from "prosperous homes" given the abovementioned view of correpondence relationship do well in life than their counterparts from materially disadvantage background.
It is overwhelmingly puzzling that children from prosperous homes as we know it today, I mean children who have so many fundamental advantages material wise in comparison to their peers from materially disadvantage homes are doing woefully in life generally speaking.
Why, What, How, I hear you say.
I wouldnt want to go into the semantics of what is it to be prosperous in this article, since there are so many definitions and meaning of what prosperity is, as there are authors on this controversial subject matter.
A good feeling about oneself is a neccessary requirement for achievement in life and setting goal to be realised, if this is non existence then the prevalence of low self esteem generated by a non-chalant attitude to define ones goal in life predominate with its distructive consequencies.
There is no gain saying the fact that we see similar discondant tunes being played out with/by children in materially disadvantage homes, however they have been able in most cases to define reasons for their lives and work hard to achieve certain aims and objectives in life.
If you cannot define yourself others will define you.
The fundamental question here is why do children find it difficult to define themselves or who they are? They find it also difficult to gain love, accept love, without associating it with materialistic interpretations or work on their relationships this has led many children into a state of mental confusion leading to truancy, drug abuse, sexual exploitation, school failure, etc.
It is discomforting to see children raised in a child centered parenting paradigm with all nexus of material advantage turning out to be a societal miscreant, or any children at all no matter their social economic background.
One explication within the purview of so many rationalizations is the fact that the children have had love in a child centered parenting household, but too often this love has been given without the required symbiosis or opportunity for the responsible give and take involvement neccessary for a child to develop a successful responsible character.
Many parents are confused about this scenario of misbehaving children, sometimes it creates misunderstanding in the family leading to buck passing blame game that can eventually drag the family into a bottomless pit of disagreements and antagonisticism.
Most children under interrogation often blame their parents for their behaviour, claiming that they are being part of a commune that worships materialistic values and that they have been raised in an atmosphere where things are valued more than people, making them Lose touch with their own humanity.
Going by the above clarifications these children lack a concept of self as loved and worthwhile individual rather they see self love in material things and aquisition, they will not work for long time goals that will positively impact humanity because they value things more than people.
OTUNBA ADE ILEMOBADE is a philosopher.
Twitter: @pearl2prince
Many philosophers from Kant, Tocqueville, Corpenicous, Rousseau, have dealt delibratively and extensively on these important systemic human edifices.
Emmanuel Kant predicted the antagonism between freedom and happiness in his work Metaphysics of Morals, likewise Rousseau said that humans are free beings, yet we are tied up in chains.
Our happiness is contingent on the level of freedom we are allowed to enjoy within our social contractual agreements, therefore to be free does not neccessarily means to be happy and likewise to be happy is not synonymous with freedom.
In the world people are free within the purview of their social contractual agreements yet there are so many un-happy souls around, that raises the question over the principle priorty of freedom over happiness, or what is left of virtuousness, righteousness, goodness, as sources of happiness. we posit here that happiness is psychological imperativeness it has no direct one on one bearing with freedom.
Some have posited that there is a unilateral correspondence relationship between freedom, happiness and materialistic prosperity, vis a vis positive "achievement in life" a common trend prevalent within affluent domains in our commune.
However, the more we look the less illumination we garnered reflective of such correspondence.
This brings my ruminating mind to the question, whether children from "prosperous homes" given the abovementioned view of correpondence relationship do well in life than their counterparts from materially disadvantage background.
It is overwhelmingly puzzling that children from prosperous homes as we know it today, I mean children who have so many fundamental advantages material wise in comparison to their peers from materially disadvantage homes are doing woefully in life generally speaking.
Why, What, How, I hear you say.
I wouldnt want to go into the semantics of what is it to be prosperous in this article, since there are so many definitions and meaning of what prosperity is, as there are authors on this controversial subject matter.
A good feeling about oneself is a neccessary requirement for achievement in life and setting goal to be realised, if this is non existence then the prevalence of low self esteem generated by a non-chalant attitude to define ones goal in life predominate with its distructive consequencies.
There is no gain saying the fact that we see similar discondant tunes being played out with/by children in materially disadvantage homes, however they have been able in most cases to define reasons for their lives and work hard to achieve certain aims and objectives in life.
If you cannot define yourself others will define you.
The fundamental question here is why do children find it difficult to define themselves or who they are? They find it also difficult to gain love, accept love, without associating it with materialistic interpretations or work on their relationships this has led many children into a state of mental confusion leading to truancy, drug abuse, sexual exploitation, school failure, etc.
It is discomforting to see children raised in a child centered parenting paradigm with all nexus of material advantage turning out to be a societal miscreant, or any children at all no matter their social economic background.
One explication within the purview of so many rationalizations is the fact that the children have had love in a child centered parenting household, but too often this love has been given without the required symbiosis or opportunity for the responsible give and take involvement neccessary for a child to develop a successful responsible character.
Many parents are confused about this scenario of misbehaving children, sometimes it creates misunderstanding in the family leading to buck passing blame game that can eventually drag the family into a bottomless pit of disagreements and antagonisticism.
Most children under interrogation often blame their parents for their behaviour, claiming that they are being part of a commune that worships materialistic values and that they have been raised in an atmosphere where things are valued more than people, making them Lose touch with their own humanity.
Going by the above clarifications these children lack a concept of self as loved and worthwhile individual rather they see self love in material things and aquisition, they will not work for long time goals that will positively impact humanity because they value things more than people.
OTUNBA ADE ILEMOBADE is a philosopher.
Twitter: @pearl2prince
Comments
Post a Comment