|
|
|
|
|
 |
文章評論 |
 |
|
|
作者：小嬌 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 16:35:11 |
|
|
謝謝華山和雁羚！
用上了德育這個詞，好像就有點點成社會主義的信念了，呵呵。但我想說的更多的是做人的信念和理想，社會的公平公正 - 用我們所熟悉的例子了，就像陳寅恪先生所信奉的“獨立，真實，自由”。是很難，但正是難，才是更需要的。 |
|
|
|
作者：雁翎 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 14:51:20 |
|
|
小嬌：
成功的定義如果是像你所說的，我也沒有什麼意見。
但是許多父母要孩子“上名校，掙大錢“才會覺得成功也多的是。不能說上普通校，掙小錢更成功，但在我的眼裡他們都是一樣成功。一個人根據自己的能力做到力所能及，能力大做大事，能力小做小事，有領導才能當領導，有藝術才能當藝術家。
那什麼樣的人是不成功的呢？我覺得不管一個人做什麼，掙多少錢，如果怨天艾地，非常的不快樂，那這樣的人生不是一個成功的人生。 |
|
|
|
作者：華山 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 14:46:43 |
|
|
小嬌，歡迎上網討論。網絡就是個讓大家敞開心扉交流，百無禁忌的地方，無所謂對錯。
我和博主意見相像，在這物質生活還沒有極大豐富，社會競爭還十分激烈的時代。教育的功利性質就難以忽略。社會上大多數人是通過教育獲得謀生手段。當然隨着社會進步，物質生活的豐富，人們會給予德育更多的注重。
另外，何謂“德”，當下也難以界定。有寧要社會主義草的，也有寧要資本主義草的。更何況“德”育是如此艱難，唐駿經過中國，日本，美國三個國家的高等教育，都沒教育好，何況普通人？ |
|
|
|
作者：seewhy9 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 14:13:01 |
|
|
請允許我同諸位share下面這篇出自一個ABC的讀後感：
Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior, part II
Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior, part II
(note: yes, this is part II, because part I was written almost as a gut reaction to the piece… which was mostly just confusion and turmoil and not worth reading anyway. after stewing on it for twenty-four hours and reading the follow-up, I think I am now in a much better position to reply coherently. so here it is.)
First of all, thank you Wall Street Journal for deliberately choosing a controversial title for the article to intentionally rile up readers. This is, obviously, what “good journalism” is all about after all… to color the upcoming excerpt in a negative light and get thousands of readers upset and inviting angry comments and even more worthless trolls that would have been less likely to happen if you had not LIED about the author’s original intention. Bastards.
For those of you who are uninformed of this “foofaraw” (Lloyd’s word), here’re the relevant links. (I didn’t post this as a link post because I wanted to make sure people read the follow-up and not just the original article.)
* The original article: Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior. This essay is an EXCERPT from the author’s upcoming book, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, something that is only printed in easy-to-ignore italicized text at the end of the piece. (more “good journalism” there.)
* The follow-up: The Tiger Mother Responds to Readers. Where the author clarifies that her book is more of a memoir of her experiences with strict parenting and how her position has changed.
* CNN weighs in: Chinese moms vs. Western moms: Is there a mother superior?. Has a decent video interview, too.
When all is said and done, I honestly believe that Amy Chua is completely well-intentioned and just trying to understand why the marked differences between certain child-rearing strategies exist. She acknowledges that there is no single formula for all children, but points out that there are definitely “quantifiable differences” in the way the two cultures approach it. (She has statistics, even.) Again, I deeply resent WSJ’s interference with what should have been an open-minded and self-reflective piece, not a shitstorm.
That said, I’ve attempted to catalog my thoughts into several different categories and will go through them as systematically as possible. Sometimes I agreed with Amy, and sometimes I didn’t. Sometimes I agreed with comments, and sometimes I didn’t. As a result, the following is going to be a mishmash of opinion and reflection and introspection. Since this is a topic I am very close to and feel very strongly about, it’s going to be a long read, so I hope you’re comfortable!
“Fun” Work
What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you’re good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences. This often requires fortitude on the part of the parents because the child will resist; things are always hardest at the beginning, which is where Western parents tend to give up.
This is, I think, for the most part, true. There is no better explanation for why I hate math; it’s because I suck at it. And if I had listened to my dad and practiced the basics until they were solid, then practiced more advanced stuff until it was solid, then… etc. I genuinely believe that I wouldn’t suck (and therefore, hate) math so much. Alas.
However, I don’t think it’s always true. I think there are certainly times, especially later in life, when a person can develop an interest in some skill and pursue it and suck at it and still find it fun enough to continue trying. I also think it’s a little unfair to say Western parents “give up” here. Western parents try to find what their children are already naturally inclined to, so that this desire to pursue it regardless of early mistakes is what pushes the child forward, rather than the parents themselves.
The problem is when you’re trying to teach critical skills (i.e. math) that all children need to know and hate for whatever reason. It may be that a more disciplinarian approach is necessary. I could criticize the Western education system here, actually… the way math is taught is extremely dependent on the previous level and it proceeded too fast for me (or I just didn’t get enough homework in early stages). I probably should not have been in the advanced classes with my less-than-stellar understanding, but by then it’s too late.
But let’s try talking about something a little less critical… like, say, music. Why IS it that Chinese parents find it so fashionable to foist some sort of musical training on their children? (And why is it always piano or violin?) It’s not even parents who got the same treatment when they were children… my parents didn’t have any formal musical training, yet they started me on piano when I was four. Wat? This must have something to do with growing up and appreciating music in ways that you can’t when you’re a child. Both parents who have had forced musical educations end up being grateful for the skill “later”… and parents who went without end up wishing they had someone to force them to learn it when it was easy.
I got lucky. Or… maybe it was my PARENTS got lucky. I hated learning piano and after x years of learning docilely, I started to fight back. No amount of shame at my piano lessons (and trust me, I did feel a lot of it) would make me want to practice when I got home. But then they found an article for the San Francisco Girls Chorus in the paper. And maybe they thought something like, hey, it’s like Girl Scouts, only for music! I must have already shown some inclination towards singing for them to bring me in for an audition, and the rest is history.
You see? They found me an expression of music that I enjoyed and I did the rest. They never had to ask me to practice my music, because I took care of it on my own. The threat of doing poorly in rep(ertoire) checks meant enough to me, ME personally, that I took my own rehearsal in hand. (They were less pleased later on when Girls Chorus started to interfere with school attendance, but oh well. >_> )
At the same time, now (at the tender age of 26, lol) I can also admit that I was grateful for the piano lessons, even though I’ve let my skills atrophy so much that it’s probably like I had six years instead of twelve. Just yesterday I was playing scales for the hell of it and promising myself that when I’m more settled, I can commit to something like learning a new song every month. Another resolution to add to the pile.
Conclusion? Hell if I know. Sometimes critical skills are not fun and require more rigid discipline. Sometimes, to get children the skills that you wish they would develop, you can find an acceptable alternative to the “traditional” paths.
There are, of course, the times when even things you are very good at stop being fun, something that Chua kind of ignored. Because just garnering compliments is not enough for true enjoyment. Or maybe when you have fun things to do AS your work… and then they become these weird hybrid activities that are fun when someone’s not paying you. But I guess that’s another topic altogether.
(Or maybe it’s just later in her book. Surely at 13, her daughter was probably pretty good at violin, but still wanted to quit?)
Building Self-Esteem
Confidence in myself and my abilities is definitely something I grapple with regularly, but I don’t think it’s to any extent that is particularly unnatural.
First, I’ve noticed that Western parents are extremely anxious about their children’s self-esteem. They worry about how their children will feel if they fail at something, and they constantly try to reassure their children about how good they are notwithstanding a mediocre performance on a test or at a recital. In other words, Western parents are concerned about their children’s psyches. Chinese parents aren’t. They assume strength, not fragility, and as a result they behave very differently … Chinese parents demand perfect grades because they believe that their child can get them. If their child doesn’t get them, the Chinese parent assumes it’s because the child didn’t work hard enough.
This is, I think, a rather interesting observation / viewpoint, that Chinese parents view their children as strong, thus it’s “okay” to be somewhat verbally abusive, whereas Western parents view their children as “fragile” and are therefore more careful with their words. It’s even more interesting when I consider how strong friendships are sometimes heaped with verbal barbs between one another, whereas fragile (or new) friendships are rarely threatened thus.
But Chinese children are rarely “friends” with their parents, even as adults, while I think Western parents often show a higher success rate of being on more friendly terms with their children after they’re grown. Does this mean a Western child-parent relationship is viewed as a tentative friendship that must be grown into something stronger? Does it mean a Chinese child-parent relationship is viewed as inviolable?
Hmm.
In the end, I think that building up a child’s self-esteem can only be assured with more parental involvement. A Chinese parent who scolds and then doesn’t invest themselves personally is not really any better than a Western parent who says “it’s cool” and lets it slide. If the parents don’t invest themselves in their children, then I think it’s more likely that the child will grow up feeling like they are not worth anyone’s time.
I also think it’s very important that “failure” be handled cautiously, while being mindful of possible repercussions. Everyone has off days, but it’s no excuse for being lazy. At the same time, it is absolutely not healthy to cement the idea that failure is equated with great shame. Mistakes are a fact of life and they can be OVERCOME. Perfection is one enormous fabrication; just look at evolution if you want the ultimate model of trial and error. Yes, some mistakes are worse than others, but in academics? Bite me.
Also…
The fact is that Chinese parents can do things that would seem unimaginable—even legally actionable—to Westerners. Chinese mothers can say to their daughters, “Hey fatty—lose some weight.”
Um, yeah, no it’s not. I am exceptionally sensitive about my weight and body appearance and I know exactly who to “thank” for that.
Obligation to Parents
Second, Chinese parents believe that their kids owe them everything. The reason for this is a little unclear, but it’s probably a combination of Confucian filial piety and the fact that the parents have sacrificed and done so much for their children … Anyway, the understanding is that Chinese children must spend their lives repaying their parents by obeying them and making them proud.
This is definitely true. :P Personally, though, I hold the opinion that Chua’s husband did/does.
“Children don’t choose their parents,” he once said to me. “They don’t even choose to be born. It’s parents who foist life on their kids, so it’s the parents’ responsibility to provide for them. Kids don’t owe their parents anything. Their duty will be to their own kids.”
Having said that, I do feel an everlasting debt to my parents and intend to see it through. I often joke that their money is my money. But when I’m finally independent (not TOO long from now, hopefully), the reverse will be true. I don’t exactly resent this obligation… I merely accept that it is there, that I feel it, and that I would be deeply ashamed of myself if I am unable to care for them in return. How can you really hate something that has developed because of the things two people have done for you because they love you?
But I wouldn’t have my own kids and expect this to be true.
Social Interaction
Chua never specifically talks about a “lack” of social interaction, but it was a big talking point for the commenters who were against her particular mode of parenting. Here’s one.
I have had the pleasure of managing and working with many asian american friends who have come from a similarly high pressure/high achievement oriented childhood. While most of them were wonderful, smart and ambitious they all — all of them — lacked a broader sense of perspective, empathetic humility and true leadership qualities. In other words, they were socially incomplete and, somehow, not fully developed as people.
I wasn’t allowed to go to sleepovers until I was in middle school (hi, Kim!). Even Chorus summer camp was off-limits or shortened. In elementary school, I very occasionally went to friends’ houses for birthday parties. I had all the early trappings of a traditional Chinese parent-child relationship.
Except, well, they let me go onto the computer. Where I had AOL and role-play. And boy did my dad regret that sometimes. (hi, charge-per-hour internet!) Who knows how that early exposure to a creative writing chatroom, changed my eventual social trajectory? It certainly gave me the perspective that online interaction could be as worthwhile as face to face interaction, which is a value I hold near and dear to my heart.
Maybe this was a saving grace that allowed me to connect with people, albeit in a limited fashion. My parents always warned me, of course, not to share real information… cause of all the stalkers, you know. I uh… generally obeyed this. :x
Things changed a little when I hit middle school and met The Girls. Suddenly I was going to sleepovers and holding my own! But I definitely remember some tension when I took AIC at ATDP and started developing new connections there that my parents were less than pleased to have me pursue, at the expense of studying for SATs. By then it was too late, really… I was addicted to the gratification that you can only get from having fun with friends and wouldn’t hear a word in edgewise.
Would I be socially stunted if I didn’t originally have the internet and if I hadn’t found friends to hang out with at lunch? It’s hard to say. Part of me thinks no, but another part thinks about my friends in elementary school and that alien feeling I got whenever I attended those birthday parties. I don’t regret not being allowed to stay the night at said parties, but maybe this was because I just wasn’t socially adjusted that young… at least, not in person. I had only two friends from school, neither of whom I had very much in common with, and only interacted with other children on a regular basis when my mother was friends’ with their mother.
At any rate, I recognize that my particular growing circumstances were relatively unique. And though I wouldn’t trade it for anything, I won’t deny that maybe it could have gone very wrong if some things hadn’t gone very right.
Wow, okay, I am finally done. I think I’ve come a long way from our original “Asian Parents foofaraw” about eight years ago, don’t you think? |
|
|
|
作者：小嬌 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 12:54:33 |
|
|
雁羚，其實很多人對成功的理解關不只是成為“師”們 - 醫師律師工程師經濟師。我們曾對first、1.5 和second generation移民的職業選擇和傾向進行過研究，我們發現這三代移民的職業選擇有很大的不同，第一代移民是最艱苦的一代，特別是對於那些如我自己一般的人到中年才移民的人，很多成了戴着博士帽的的士司機。1.5 generation 選擇多了很多，大多數優先選擇“師”型職業。而second、third generation的選擇是豐富多采，時裝設計、漫畫出品、園藝設計等，這些孩子們覺得能出版一本自己的漫畫書就是最大的成功。 |
|
|
|
作者：小嬌 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 12:40:56 |
|
|
華山，對於您的觀點 - “教育的作用不僅僅是培養社會精英，更重要的是。。。培養有一技之長能夠自食其力的各類人才。。。讓他/她能夠在這個競爭愈來愈激烈的社會上站穩腳跟“，這正是教育的真正目的。- 小嬌有些不同的看法，說得不對的話，別見怪。 ：-）
我覺得“培養有一技之長能夠自食其力的各類人才。。。讓他/她能夠在這個競爭愈來愈激烈的社會上站穩腳跟”，這只是教育的其中一個目的。因為如果這是教育的真正目的，受教育者就會失去理想和信念、失卻對社會公平公正和對個人尊嚴的追求，也很容易培養出一大批唐駿式“能夠自食其力”“站穩腳根”的人。然而，一個社會的發展與穩定，公平公正是多麼的重要！ |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 12:24:03 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 12:17:31 |
|
|
昭君：
謝謝你提供的美國朋友對Amy Chua 的評論，的確更客觀中肯一些。雖然沒有讀過她的原著，只是在網上看了書的目錄，但人們僅僅依據一篇文章，就對其人品橫加指責，顯然是有點過頭了。即便是她的育兒經，也不是百分之百地一文不值。人，總是喜歡站在道德制高點去評價他人，這大概也是人性的弱點吧。
Thank you so much for your sharing. |
|
|
|
作者：km |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 12:13:49 |
|
|
鐘樓散人：蔡女士。。。把自己認為的幸福快樂強加於孩子身上。。。
美國人在孩子16歲時，一腳踢出去，雙方自由自在，自然什麼都不會強加於孩子身上了。
士別三日，怡然有了一篇精彩之作。。。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 11:59:34 |
|
|
雁翎：
從你的評論看出，你基本上是誤解了我的本意。也許我把尤金的例子用在這裡，並不是很恰當。正因為尤金並沒有為自己當初的選擇無怨無悔，而他的父親在他成長的過程中，既沒有充分意識到兒子的資質特長到底是什麼，更沒有注意去培養發揮這些天賦的東西。卻只在最後一刻想壓制阻攔，結果當然是適得其反。
我並沒有說，世界上都得是醫生工程師，那也未免太可笑幼稚了吧。你講了很多，有些能夠認同。你的結論是我喜歡的，世界是多樣性的，那麼人也是多樣性的。正因如此，我們才應該容忍接納象蔡美兒這樣的母親，儘管我們自己並不想成為這樣的母親。我在前一篇博文里已經說過了。
謝謝你的評論 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 11:59:32 |
|
|
雁翎：
從你的評論看出，你基本上是誤解了我的本意。也許我把尤金的例子用在這裡，並不是很恰當。正因為尤金並沒有為自己當初的選擇無怨無悔，而他的父親在他成長的過程中，既沒有充分意識到兒子的資質特長到底是什麼，更沒有注意去培養發揮這些天賦的東西。卻只在最後一刻想壓制阻攔，結果當然是適得其反。
我並沒有說，世界上都得是醫生工程師，那也未免太可笑幼稚了吧。你講了很多，有些能夠認同。你的結論是我喜歡的，世界是多樣性的，那麼人也是多樣性的。正因如此，我們才應該容忍接納象蔡美兒這樣的母親，儘管我們自己並不想成為這樣的母親。我在前一篇博文里已經說過了。
謝謝你的評論 |
|
|
|
作者：昭君 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 11:59:05 |
|
|
非常贊同 twalker 的觀點。這篇文章不過是一本自傳中的一個章節，如果把它抽離這個context 進行“聲討”, 那就真的是 miss the point 。好像美國人對Amy 的“批判”比我們自己的要溫和得多呢! 剛看到一位美國人的評論到位, share it with you and your readers：
“How do you define success for your kids? This is what the Tiger Mom debate boils down to. What do we want for our children, and what does their success (or lack thereof) mean for our own identities? No matter how you feel about Amy Chua, author of "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" and ground zero for the current battle over the best way to parent, you have to give her credit for being willing to ask these hard questions, and you have to really examine her answers.
”Chua readily acknowledges how she defines success in her children: accomplishment. She says that Chinese mothers assume that their children are strong rather than fragile, as Western moms assume, and that they know that there's ‘nothing better for building confidence than learning you can do something you thought you couldn't.’ This mantra inspires a cycle by which the mother pushes the child by any means necessary to succeed (these means are the most controversial points of Chua's book), and then that success makes the child work harder and become even more accomplished“.
每個人對“成功”和“幸福”的定義不同。Amy 不過是根據自己的價值觀，對她的孩子進行她認為是正確的教育。我們可以不認同這種極端的教育方式，也可以不認同這種“功利”的價值觀，但如果僅僅從這篇文章的內容就得出結論說，Amy 是一個沒有愛心的母親; 甚至因為在這篇文章中沒有提到她對孩子進行其他方面的價值教育(比如幫助他人，比如關心弱者)，就得出結論說 Amy 關心的僅僅是狹義的, 功利的成功，我覺得是很偏頗的-- 如果我們看看她的一些著作，比如 “World On Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability” ，就會發現，她不僅是一個在自己的領域學有所成的學者，還是一個對世界,尤其是對在全球化過程中成為“犧牲品”的欠發達國家和他們的公民有深刻的關懷和責任感，並極力從學術的角度出謀劃策的學者。相信她在“逼迫”自己的孩子走上她心目中的成功道路的同時，也會給予她們這樣的價值觀的:). |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 11:38:00 |
|
|
twalker:
你的評論中有兩點讓我學習了，第一，“每個人都不可能完全掌控自己的人生”，的確如此。即便是父母，以為自己是過來人了，有人生的閱歷，但也會受到已有人生經驗的束縛。所以，父母與孩子在討論他們人生未來時，應該是互動式的，而不應該是說教命令式的。
第二，“我們所選擇的教育方式都會受到自身的背景、經驗的影響。”，非常認同。
謝謝你的評論。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 11:26:56 |
|
|
鐘樓散人：
關於尤金本人在現實生活中是否快樂，我並不是推測的，這一點我應該是有發言權的，從他父親那裡我了解他很多，也理解他的心態。因為這裡不是寫紀實文學，我沒有必要去深入剖析他的內心感受。
我引用這個例子只是想說明，父母在孩子人生道路選擇上的指導很重要。比如說，如果父母發現孩子有藝術天賦，就要努力培養發揮他/她這方面的特長，而不是壓制，到了最後抉擇關頭，反而束手無策。請別誤解了我的意思。
至於蔡女士教育孩子方面過於功利的一面，早就有人寫了大量篇幅加以指責，我也並不欣賞她的好多想法和做法。
美國人對於教育的危機感，從一個側面也反映了他們對於自己國家面臨的問題的危機感。如果十幾年前，有人拿“中國媽媽”來炒作，我想無論如何也是炒不起來的。所以，從某種意義上來說，蔡美兒也是應運而生的。
謝謝你的來訪評論。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 11:07:53 |
|
|
華山：
有感於你對於教育目的的更進一步的闡述，在“沒有物質生活的極大豐富，教育也就是謀生的手段”，非常認同這一點。
你說得對，對於蔡女士的書及文章，我們也該從正面的意義去理解和討論，而不是僅僅看她的負面影響。我也是這樣想的。
謝謝你的評論。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 10:58:05 |
|
|
謝謝各位寫下如此精彩的評論，我可能只能寫寫讀你們評論的簡短心得，以期互相交流。
小嬌：
很高興你來坐沙發，一看你就是個快樂隨意討人喜歡的媽媽，是不是這樣，如果我沒猜錯的話。你的推測應該是有道理的，蔡教授的幸福感源自她對於自己事業的充分滿足感，所以也想把這種成功的模式移植到女兒身上。至於別人能否仿效得了，就很難講了。
謝謝你！ |
|
|
|
作者：雁翎 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 09:57:10 |
|
|
對文章中有一點非常有看法，就是對蘇聯小伙猶金的評論。怡然用了個“如果”，如果他學更實用的東西那麼他的將來會怎麼樣。
其實這個“如果”是不存在的。先不說成功的定義是什麼，很簡單的道理，世界上不可能都是醫生工程師，如果都是，也掙不到大錢。其次小孩子長到了大學生（如果你有過這樣大的孩子你就知道），可能家長自己也能看得出來，他的能力潛力基本定型了。小時候會以家長的理想為理想，比如把掙很多錢為目標，但是近二十年的人生經歷會告訴孩子們自己他們是不是真的在乎錢。有的孩子比較物質，有的孩子則比較sprital，不在乎自己將來是不是富有，他們自己知道自己是餓不死的（他們的父母很富有），他們就會追求不同的東西。
總的來說，小時候很受窮的成年後追求財富的多一些。藝術家都是一些流浪的靈魂。富有國家的藝術家多一些也更藝術一點是因為更純。他們追求的東西，從中得到的快樂是凡夫俗子們不能想象也不能體會的。
許多了有錢了以後才開始追求藝術也是因為他們的靈魂需要安慰，而物質是做不到這一點的。
至於蔡美兒的文章和教育方式，我覺得這個方式在她自己身上得到了成功，如果她也很滿足，她是一定會在下一代身上重複的。因為她不知道除了這條路人生還有別的路。她其實忽略了許多的事實就是她的孩子成長環境已經和她自己那時候很不一樣，小孩子的個體也是很不一樣，蔡美兒如果再次成功（製造出一個快樂滿足富有有地位有好丈夫好孩子的另一個哈佛教授）是偶然的。而不成功是必然的，比如有地位有錢但不快樂，有好丈夫不一定有好孩子，快樂而幸福不一定富有又有社會地位。其實我們也不知道她的正式生活，如果她要花那麼多的時間和精力，那麼多的憤怒和壓力在孩子們身上，孩子的成功對她的影響如此巨大，很難說她的生活多麼完美。
還是那句話，好事不可能都讓一個人占全了，還是看各人的取捨。但是不管什麼樣的人生，其實人都在追求一樣東西，就是心靈的滿足。這個追求不管人意識得到與否，一定會在人生的某個階段冒出來的。
我覺得我們要承認世界的多樣性，什麼樣的能力做什麼樣的事，人比較會快樂。 |
|
|
|
作者：twalker |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 07:13:36 |
|
|
實際上，每個人都不可能完全掌控自己的人生！人生的道路有着許許多多主觀與客觀、偶然和必然的因素。作為父母，當然是希望能夠為兒女提供良好的環境，引導他們走上為社會作貢獻，為自己謀幸福的道路。
我們所選擇的教育方式都會受到自身的背景、經驗的影響。Amy的方式也不例外，與她的家庭背景，人生經歷有關。Amy從菲律賓華人移民家庭出身，以她的聰明才智，努力奮鬥，成為耶魯的教授，著名作家。不但如此，他的夫婿是猶太人，她自然也會領悟到猶太人育兒經。對她的選擇，我們不一定同意，但應該有一份尊重。
網上對Amy的教育方式的評論，許多是在沒有讀Amy的原文，沒有了解Amy的個人背景下的寫的。不少評論眾口一詞，口誅筆伐。個人以為實不可取。 |
|
|
|
作者：鐘樓散人 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 06:22:25 |
|
|
因為尤金單身、沒有穩定的經濟收入而推測他的精神生活有問題，只是一種推測。在美國，窮並快樂着的人，不在少數。只要尤金快樂，其他都可以不計。而且，如果當初他沒有走上演員這條路，會是他終生的遺憾，可能會讓他終其一生感到痛苦，這將是人生最大的失敗，遠超過單身和沒有穩定收入。
蔡女士教育孩子方式的功利主義之所以不可取，也正是因為把自己認為的幸福快樂強加於孩子身上。其實，人生的幸福快樂遠非“功利”二字可以涵蓋，中國、乃至亞洲父母們的認識誤區，恰恰就在這裡。
“人必生存着，夢才有所附麗。”這話不錯。在美國，生存對絕大多數人而言並不是問題，因此不必為了一個本不存在的問題犧牲自己的快樂和夢想。
在中國，在亞洲，人們多年來基本生活沒有保障，窮怕了，因此才有了虎媽、虎爸，這可以理解。在美國社會，孩子們有了享受快樂童年的條件，何必一定要去剝奪。蔡女士不許女兒參加學校的課外活動，可見她心目中的幸福，是多麼單薄和蒼白。但願中國的虎媽們比蔡女士多些智慧。 |
|
|
|
作者：華山 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-16 05:22:01 |
|
|
“教育的作用不僅僅是培養社會精英，更重要的是。。。培養有一技之長能夠自食其力的各類人才。。。讓他/她能夠在這個競爭愈來愈激烈的社會上站穩腳跟“，這正是教育的真正目的。
記得當年背”共產主義“定義時有這麼一句”物質生活極大豐富，勞動已不再是謀生的手段“。後面跟着的是”各盡所能，各取所需“，實際意思是”自由發揮，各取所需“。
共產主義是後資本主義階段，可望而不可及。而教育大概也算勞動的一種形式吧？沒有物質生活的極大豐富，教育也就是謀生的手段。當年中國學生刻苦學習，為的是上大學，跳”農“門；然後，還是刻苦學習，出國留學；然後，還是刻苦學習，研究生時期成績沒有B以上，拿不到資助。我們這一代留給後代的，除了靠歷經艱辛，打下一點物質生活基礎，其他言傳身教的，也就是這點刻苦學習的傳家寶吧。而且，將來的社會如何？社會競爭是否會加劇？美國是否還能長期保持一家獨大？”生於憂患，死於安樂“。也得讓孩子們懂得這一點。
蔡女士的文章確實有些故作驚人之態。但別忘了，蔡女士不是純正的大陸媽媽，她家從菲律賓來，與大陸近年的教育沒有特別的關聯。她是耶魯教授，有個猶太裔夫君，代表了上流社會。她從憂慮美國的衰敗而現身說法，用心十分良苦。這對無論是想恪守東方傳統，亦或是想儘快融入西方主流的家長們，她的文章都有正面的參考價值。 |
|
|
|
作者：小嬌 |
|
留言時間：2011-01-15 22:01:02 |
|
|
難得處於summer school期間，沒那麼忙，能趕上發第一條評論（這好像叫占沙發？），好開心。哈哈.
很贊同怡然的觀點，媽媽無所謂好不好，人與人相處，包括父母與子女相處方式、教育方法，也是蘿蔔青菜各有所好，有時更是一物降一物。如果如蔡教授所言，雖然她生活於非常嚴厲的家庭，失去了一般孩子的童趣，但她覺得自己非常開心，開心父母對她管教如此嚴厲，於她而言，這不就是幸福嗎？當然，小嬌相信她的幸福感是來自於她成年後事業的成功，而過於嚴厲的家教本身。 |
|
|
|
|
