Post by rachelnewcomb on Aug 5, 2011 14:29:48 GMT -5
The life of the “Organization Kid” described by Brookes seems bland. Every moment planned, their life is carefully choreographed. Where is the opportunity to explore? To find one’s own path? There is little opportunity for nonconformity or free thought in such an environment. Only by unquestioning obedience can a day’s tasks accomplished. There is not a minute to spare.
The poignancy of “The Organization Kid” made me a little nauseous. I was instantly reminded of my own academic lifestyle, one I know to be shared by many of my success minded peers. Free time for many of us is nonexistent and when it does it has to be carefully planned to accommodate everyone’s hectic schedules. Still even then it’s nearly impossible to enjoy a dinner or movie out with friends because in the back of your mind there’s always something else you should be doing, more studying, ACT prep, applications for scholarships, etc. The pressure to succeed in every capacity is tremendous. We are motivated by the success our future can hold.
Princeton students described themselves as “tools for processing information”. American students across the nation, in varying academic settings are trained as “tools for processing information.” Such a goal is selling students short of their full potential. Who wants to be an academic robot churning out achievement after achievement for simply the sake of accomplishment? I don’t. Where lies the passion in such a life? The creativity? The ability to think critically and solve problems? Society should not foster a passion for achievement. Neither trophies nor certificates will solve society’s most daunting problems.
I agree with Brooks’s statement that, “Most kids see their education as a means to an end.” Too many students today lack a passion for their education. They believe its value to lie only in the degree and salary it will result in. Our insatiable need for achievement has led to an impersonal educations, to students who lack the perspective that education provides for true personal betterment.
The article reminded me of a quote I recently stumbled across. After being asked what surprised him most about humanity the Dalai Lama responded, “Man. Because he sacrifices his health in order to make money. Then he sacrifices money to recuperate his health. And then he is so anxious about the future that he does not enjoy the present; the result being that he does not live in the present or the future; he believes as if he is never going to die and then dies having never really lived.” The “Organization Kid” is inclined to such a life. By holding tight to dreams of success and accomplishment, we are in danger of never enjoying the present; living an empty life.
I do, however, lack Brooke’s nostalgia for the chivalrous past. Are character and virtue important? Unquestionably yes. Should more be done to provide a degree of moral guidance for young people, or at least ask them questions that prompt moral development? Yes. Instilling character is a difficult task, but the so called meritocracy needs to have values to guide its capabilities. Virtue is something one finds by oneself. There’s no set of morals that everyone can agree on, but students need to be prompted to find their own personal morals and to find a larger meaning in their life’s work.
Though the meritocrats of today need not to be the elite of the past. Brookes talked a little too fondly for my taste of the merits of paternalistic patriarchy of the early twentieth century. Virtue shouldn’t be in place to simply sustain large egos.
The poignancy of “The Organization Kid” made me a little nauseous. I was instantly reminded of my own academic lifestyle, one I know to be shared by many of my success minded peers. Free time for many of us is nonexistent and when it does it has to be carefully planned to accommodate everyone’s hectic schedules. Still even then it’s nearly impossible to enjoy a dinner or movie out with friends because in the back of your mind there’s always something else you should be doing, more studying, ACT prep, applications for scholarships, etc. The pressure to succeed in every capacity is tremendous. We are motivated by the success our future can hold.
Princeton students described themselves as “tools for processing information”. American students across the nation, in varying academic settings are trained as “tools for processing information.” Such a goal is selling students short of their full potential. Who wants to be an academic robot churning out achievement after achievement for simply the sake of accomplishment? I don’t. Where lies the passion in such a life? The creativity? The ability to think critically and solve problems? Society should not foster a passion for achievement. Neither trophies nor certificates will solve society’s most daunting problems.
I agree with Brooks’s statement that, “Most kids see their education as a means to an end.” Too many students today lack a passion for their education. They believe its value to lie only in the degree and salary it will result in. Our insatiable need for achievement has led to an impersonal educations, to students who lack the perspective that education provides for true personal betterment.
The article reminded me of a quote I recently stumbled across. After being asked what surprised him most about humanity the Dalai Lama responded, “Man. Because he sacrifices his health in order to make money. Then he sacrifices money to recuperate his health. And then he is so anxious about the future that he does not enjoy the present; the result being that he does not live in the present or the future; he believes as if he is never going to die and then dies having never really lived.” The “Organization Kid” is inclined to such a life. By holding tight to dreams of success and accomplishment, we are in danger of never enjoying the present; living an empty life.
I do, however, lack Brooke’s nostalgia for the chivalrous past. Are character and virtue important? Unquestionably yes. Should more be done to provide a degree of moral guidance for young people, or at least ask them questions that prompt moral development? Yes. Instilling character is a difficult task, but the so called meritocracy needs to have values to guide its capabilities. Virtue is something one finds by oneself. There’s no set of morals that everyone can agree on, but students need to be prompted to find their own personal morals and to find a larger meaning in their life’s work.
Though the meritocrats of today need not to be the elite of the past. Brookes talked a little too fondly for my taste of the merits of paternalistic patriarchy of the early twentieth century. Virtue shouldn’t be in place to simply sustain large egos.