<p>That’s my point though, it is unrealistic that each individual possess the same mentality and perspective, which is why various individuals succeed, and others do not, regardless of economic factors. I think our differences lie within the concept of success, and what it means to be in a poor situation. The definition of a poor situation varies amongst individuals and is thus perceived and associated alternatively amongst those individuals.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, because that is my perspective, something that contrasts with your perception. The American dream is that through the acquisition of wealth, one is enabled to obtain ultimate contentment, which is illogical. However, different individuals possess alternative meanings of success and contentment. As a unique individual, one possesses an array of standards of what success is and how it can be achieved. For some, the process is simplistic and realistic, whereas for others the process is gradual and difficult. Ultimately though, goals and aspirations can be obtained, through the process of determination and mentality. Being content with oneself is what I equate as internal happiness and success. Perhaps your definition contrasts with that, which solely attributes to the idea of various perspectives. Your perspective leads you to believe that environmental causes influence mental conditions and contentment. While I agree that it can have an effect, I do not believe that it is the sole source. In contrast, I believe that contentment is derived from a perspective. Our perceptions of certain situations and life itself lead us to draw conclusions regarding what happiness is and how it can be achieved. In all honesty though, similarly to the array of perspectives and unique individuals, what happiness is and how it is achieved varies.</p>
<p>And, perhaps I need to clarify. It’s not necessarily that people can’t have the same amount of happiness, but like…how it’s done (this wording is awful).</p>
<p>Here’s an example:</p>
<p>So in this documentary I watched (Hoop Dreams, watch it now!), the mother of one of the main “characters,” says at one point how happy is that her son lived to age 18. Not that he has graduated, or accomplished an academic goal, or succeeded in sports, but that he has lived that long. </p>
<p>So, yes, she is happy.</p>
<p>However, I find this sad.</p>
<p>To her happiness is her son living that long, to others it is something much more. So while she and others may have the same levels of happiness, it’s in different ways. So while perspectives may have been altered, I still find the situation disconcerting and unsettling.</p>
<p>In high school you are successful because you study.
Do you absolutely love studying? (This is CC. This argument is invalid.)</p>
<p>Is so, I stand corrected, but I really do -somewhat- agree with her statement. Certainly there are successful people who had a fun time getting to where they are. And the way your teacher goes about it is wrong o.O</p>
<p>I was gonna post but the debate on this last page scared me, so I’ll just say this:</p>
<p>Guys, she’s asian. When asians get to extremes, they can go crazy. If an asian mom wants to see success, trust me she can do anything humanly possible to drive her children mad (at her, themselves, and the pressure to succeed.) But it’s true this teacher sounds too cuckoo to teach math.</p>
<p>Not to sound stereotypical, but every asian teacher (asian as in moved to america within the last 10-20 years) i have had so far has been out of their minds.
do children in china really learn like that?
i remember reading a statistic that said students in china have the highest suicide rate…this is why.</p>
<p>most people do not have a positive response to misery.</p>
<p>Let’s see. If you look at many successful people, you will notice many have had tough childhood somewhere. </p>
<p>Are billionaires who were children of billionaires successful? I would be skeptical of instances like that. Most of the time they would be “successful” due to inheritance, not necessarily because of their own doing.</p>
<p>People’s individual success should be backed only by what they do themselves, and shouldn’t be boosted by hard work of others.</p>
<p>Maybe I was unclear in the first post, but when I said successful, I was referring to first generation. Those who are born into rock bottom but fight their way to the top are the true success stories. Those who simply inherit so much success and make it balloon go through nowhere nearly as much as the 1st generation. </p>
<p>Does hardship indicate misery? No, they can be connected but they are not the same thing.</p>
<p>^But don’t you find it sad that she finds happiness in that…? So while I’m glad she’s happy, there is so much out there that doesn’t even enter her mind…</p>
<p>It’s all oriented around expectations. Our preferences exceed our necessities. It’s beneficial to acknowledge the simplistic aspects of life. Yes, we perceive her situation as unfortunate and detrimental, but that’s based off of the standards that we are accustomed to.</p>
<p>^Right…don’t you want to change that? Shouldn’t everyone have the opportunity to “expect” the same things? All I want is equal opportunity, which doesn’t really exist right now.</p>
<p>Happiness can be derived from a multitude of aspects. We as individuals undergo actions in an effort to maximize our utility. If simplistic aspects of life satisfy that, why should we possess greater expectations that could possibly deprive us of that contentment? </p>
<p>If all indviduals were equal, how would we define success? Can an individual succeed without an alternative individual’s failure? I suppose it depends on the definition of success and one’s perspective. If society was composed of equal individuals though, could we still associate individuals with unique characteristics?</p>
<p>^I said equal opportunity, not equal. I believe everyone should have the same opportunities. Right now, our education system does not provide that: certain people receive better educations than others (k-12 public schools). I think everyone should have the opportunity to receive the same level of education. That doesn’t mean everyone will be smart or dumb, but just the same opportunities. Of course they would be individuals. But there’s no reason I should receive a good education while someone else receives a poor one. It’s unfair and sad, but hopefully can be changed.</p>
<p>Because with greater expectations, comes a chance for greater happiness. Read Brave New World. I will take sin, and suffering, in the life…because of the immense possibilities for happiness that are also present.</p>
<p>The definition of education varies. Life is an education. We formulate perceptions of aspects oriented around our society and develop them through the compilation of inductive and deductive reasoning. I do not believe that economical equality will be achieved. However, there is individual equality. A sufficient education can be acquired through one’s utilization of life experiences, resources, and thought development. </p>
<p>I think that expectations can be achieved within reason. However, an expectation to acquire wealth in an effort to obtain happiness will inevitably result in failure and lack of contentment. Perspective defines expectations and contentment. It sets the foundation of our lives.</p>
<p>I am not talking about economic quality. Yes, education is obviously taking place at all times, not only at schools.</p>
<p>But what I’m saying is, regardless of economic levels, social status, race, gender, etc, we (we can stick to US) should all be able to receive the same level of public education in our schooling. A school in suburban DC (me) should not be much better and more funded than a school IN DC. It’s unfair. Plan and simple. </p>
<p>So, there is NOT individual equality. Yet.</p>
<p>There is not yet “liberty and justice for all.”</p>
<p>Perspectives matter. And it’s these perspectives I gain that have allowed to realize how fortunate I am–is it bad that I want others to have the same advantages I have had?</p>
<p>^OBVIOUSLY. That’s what I’ve been saying. The reality is that there is not individual equality or equal opportunity and that’s what I wish to change.</p>
<p>Growing up in hard circumstances is a detriment, not a help, to success.</p>
<p>“Growing up in hard circumstances is a detriment, not a help, to success.”</p>
<p>That can really go either way. Those who crumble are taking it as a detriment, not help. Those who fight and survive, learn from the hardship, and USE it for their benefit are the ones that are helped by growing up in tough environment.</p>
<p>Again, you wish to change it. But what are you going to do about it? If you aren’t going to do anything, don’t bother talking about it. </p>
<p>I could wish all I want for a college degree. But if I sit back and don’t do anything, that wish is worthless. There is no such thing as a free lunch.</p>
<p>You are calling people inferior who don’t deserve it. If you think hard circumstances are helpful, then why aren’t people in inner cities the ones who go to Harvard, let alone even graduate? Are you saying it’s their will? If so, that’s offensive and ignorant.</p>
<p>I do wish to change. What can I do? I’m not sure exactly. But I hope through my own education, I will further learn what problems there are and potential ways to solve it. I’m not sure exactly what I want to major in, but I have thought of public policy or education. There is no panacea, but I will certainly try to help. I don’t know why you are putting me down for that.</p>
<p>And even if I didn’t “want” to help, I can still talk about it. Freedom of speech, bud.</p>
<p>RIght. But some people have inherently better chances for a college degree and others and I AM NOT REFERRING TO NATURAL TALENT. But to environment. It’s not only willpower or mentality.</p>
<p>Do they all crumble? No.
Is going to Harvard the only definition of success? Not in my book.</p>
<p>There are people from inner cities who make it to pro leagues, people from inner cities who are millionaires. If they can, why not the others?</p>
<p>Inferior? Now you are pulling words out of my mouth. Those who do not use it to an advantage crumble. Is that an indication of inferiority? I don’t think so. There are help for them out there.</p>
<p>I’m telling you that there’s a fine line between idealistic and realistic. It’s a good thing that you want to help. But it has actual solid impact when you actually carry that out.</p>
<p>If you didn’t want to help, but you still talked as if you wanted to, that’s not just freedom of speech. That would be lying. So much for morals if that were to happen.</p>
<p>Notice how I said “That can really go either way.” You talked about one side, I talked about the other. It’s called balance.</p>