|
|
|
|
|
 |
文章评论 |
 |
|
|
作者：小娇 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 16:35:11 |
|
|
谢谢华山和雁羚！
用上了德育这个词，好像就有点点成社会主义的信念了，呵呵。但我想说的更多的是做人的信念和理想，社会的公平公正 - 用我们所熟悉的例子了，就像陈寅恪先生所信奉的“独立，真实，自由”。是很难，但正是难，才是更需要的。 |
|
|
|
作者：雁翎 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 14:51:20 |
|
|
小娇：
成功的定义如果是像你所说的，我也没有什么意见。
但是许多父母要孩子“上名校，挣大钱“才会觉得成功也多的是。不能说上普通校，挣小钱更成功，但在我的眼里他们都是一样成功。一个人根据自己的能力做到力所能及，能力大做大事，能力小做小事，有领导才能当领导，有艺术才能当艺术家。
那什么样的人是不成功的呢？我觉得不管一个人做什么，挣多少钱，如果怨天艾地，非常的不快乐，那这样的人生不是一个成功的人生。 |
|
|
|
作者：华山 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 14:46:43 |
|
|
小娇，欢迎上网讨论。网络就是个让大家敞开心扉交流，百无禁忌的地方，无所谓对错。
我和博主意见相像，在这物质生活还没有极大丰富，社会竞争还十分激烈的时代。教育的功利性质就难以忽略。社会上大多数人是通过教育获得谋生手段。当然随着社会进步，物质生活的丰富，人们会给予德育更多的注重。
另外，何谓“德”，当下也难以界定。有宁要社会主义草的，也有宁要资本主义草的。更何况“德”育是如此艰难，唐骏经过中国，日本，美国三个国家的高等教育，都没教育好，何况普通人？ |
|
|
|
作者：seewhy9 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 14:13:01 |
|
|
请允许我同诸位share下面这篇出自一个ABC的读后感：
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：小娇 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 12:54:33 |
|
|
雁羚，其实很多人对成功的理解关不只是成为“师”们 - 医师律师工程师经济师。我们曾对first、1.5 和second generation移民的职业选择和倾向进行过研究，我们发现这三代移民的职业选择有很大的不同，第一代移民是最艰苦的一代，特别是对于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机。1.5 generation 选择多了很多，大多数优先选择“师”型职业。而second、third generation的选择是丰富多采，时装设计、漫画出品、园艺设计等，这些孩子们觉得能出版一本自己的漫画书就是最大的成功。 |
|
|
|
作者：小娇 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 12:40:56 |
|
|
华山，对于您的观点 - “教育的作用不仅仅是培养社会精英，更重要的是。。。培养有一技之长能够自食其力的各类人才。。。让他/她能够在这个竞争愈来愈激烈的社会上站稳脚跟“，这正是教育的真正目的。- 小娇有些不同的看法，说得不对的话，别见怪。 ：-）
我觉得“培养有一技之长能够自食其力的各类人才。。。让他/她能够在这个竞争愈来愈激烈的社会上站稳脚跟”，这只是教育的其中一个目的。因为如果这是教育的真正目的，受教育者就会失去理想和信念、失却对社会公平公正和对个人尊严的追求，也很容易培养出一大批唐骏式“能够自食其力”“站稳脚根”的人。然而，一个社会的发展与稳定，公平公正是多么的重要！ |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 12:24:03 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 12:17:31 |
|
|
昭君：
谢谢你提供的美国朋友对Amy Chua 的评论，的确更客观中肯一些。虽然没有读过她的原著，只是在网上看了书的目录，但人们仅仅依据一篇文章，就对其人品横加指责，显然是有点过头了。即便是她的育儿经，也不是百分之百地一文不值。人，总是喜欢站在道德制高点去评价他人，这大概也是人性的弱点吧。
Thank you so much for your sharing. |
|
|
|
作者：km |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 12:13:49 |
|
|
钟楼散人：蔡女士。。。把自己认为的幸福快乐强加于孩子身上。。。
美国人在孩子16岁时，一脚踢出去，双方自由自在，自然什么都不会强加于孩子身上了。
士别三日，怡然有了一篇精彩之作。。。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 11:59:34 |
|
|
雁翎：
从你的评论看出，你基本上是误解了我的本意。也许我把尤金的例子用在这里，并不是很恰当。正因为尤金并没有为自己当初的选择无怨无悔，而他的父亲在他成长的过程中，既没有充分意识到儿子的资质特长到底是什么，更没有注意去培养发挥这些天赋的东西。却只在最后一刻想压制阻拦，结果当然是适得其反。
我并没有说，世界上都得是医生工程师，那也未免太可笑幼稚了吧。你讲了很多，有些能够认同。你的结论是我喜欢的，世界是多样性的，那么人也是多样性的。正因如此，我们才应该容忍接纳象蔡美儿这样的母亲，尽管我们自己并不想成为这样的母亲。我在前一篇博文里已经说过了。
谢谢你的评论 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 11:59:32 |
|
|
雁翎：
从你的评论看出，你基本上是误解了我的本意。也许我把尤金的例子用在这里，并不是很恰当。正因为尤金并没有为自己当初的选择无怨无悔，而他的父亲在他成长的过程中，既没有充分意识到儿子的资质特长到底是什么，更没有注意去培养发挥这些天赋的东西。却只在最后一刻想压制阻拦，结果当然是适得其反。
我并没有说，世界上都得是医生工程师，那也未免太可笑幼稚了吧。你讲了很多，有些能够认同。你的结论是我喜欢的，世界是多样性的，那么人也是多样性的。正因如此，我们才应该容忍接纳象蔡美儿这样的母亲，尽管我们自己并不想成为这样的母亲。我在前一篇博文里已经说过了。
谢谢你的评论 |
|
|
|
作者：昭君 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 11:59:05 |
|
|
非常赞同 twalker 的观点。这篇文章不过是一本自传中的一个章节，如果把它抽离这个context 进行“声讨”, 那就真的是 miss the point 。好像美国人对Amy 的“批判”比我们自己的要温和得多呢! 刚看到一位美国人的评论到位, 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“.
每个人对“成功”和“幸福”的定义不同。Amy 不过是根据自己的价值观，对她的孩子进行她认为是正确的教育。我们可以不认同这种极端的教育方式，也可以不认同这种“功利”的价值观，但如果仅仅从这篇文章的内容就得出结论说，Amy 是一个没有爱心的母亲; 甚至因为在这篇文章中没有提到她对孩子进行其他方面的价值教育(比如帮助他人，比如关心弱者)，就得出结论说 Amy 关心的仅仅是狭义的, 功利的成功，我觉得是很偏颇的-- 如果我们看看她的一些著作，比如 “World On Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability” ，就会发现，她不仅是一个在自己的领域学有所成的学者，还是一个对世界,尤其是对在全球化过程中成为“牺牲品”的欠发达国家和他们的公民有深刻的关怀和责任感，并极力从学术的角度出谋划策的学者。相信她在“逼迫”自己的孩子走上她心目中的成功道路的同时，也会给予她们这样的价值观的:). |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 11:38:00 |
|
|
twalker:
你的评论中有两点让我学习了，第一，“每个人都不可能完全掌控自己的人生”，的确如此。即便是父母，以为自己是过来人了，有人生的阅历，但也会受到已有人生经验的束缚。所以，父母与孩子在讨论他们人生未来时，应该是互动式的，而不应该是说教命令式的。
第二，“我们所选择的教育方式都会受到自身的背景、经验的影响。”，非常认同。
谢谢你的评论。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 11:26:56 |
|
|
钟楼散人：
关于尤金本人在现实生活中是否快乐，我并不是推测的，这一点我应该是有发言权的，从他父亲那里我了解他很多，也理解他的心态。因为这里不是写纪实文学，我没有必要去深入剖析他的内心感受。
我引用这个例子只是想说明，父母在孩子人生道路选择上的指导很重要。比如说，如果父母发现孩子有艺术天赋，就要努力培养发挥他/她这方面的特长，而不是压制，到了最后抉择关头，反而束手无策。请别误解了我的意思。
至于蔡女士教育孩子方面过于功利的一面，早就有人写了大量篇幅加以指责，我也并不欣赏她的好多想法和做法。
美国人对于教育的危机感，从一个侧面也反映了他们对于自己国家面临的问题的危机感。如果十几年前，有人拿“中国妈妈”来炒作，我想无论如何也是炒不起来的。所以，从某种意义上来说，蔡美儿也是应运而生的。
谢谢你的来访评论。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 11:07:53 |
|
|
华山：
有感于你对于教育目的的更进一步的阐述，在“没有物质生活的极大丰富，教育也就是谋生的手段”，非常认同这一点。
你说得对，对于蔡女士的书及文章，我们也该从正面的意义去理解和讨论，而不是仅仅看她的负面影响。我也是这样想的。
谢谢你的评论。 |
|
|
|
作者：怡然 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 10:58:05 |
|
|
谢谢各位写下如此精彩的评论，我可能只能写写读你们评论的简短心得，以期互相交流。
小娇：
很高兴你来坐沙发，一看你就是个快乐随意讨人喜欢的妈妈，是不是这样，如果我没猜错的话。你的推测应该是有道理的，蔡教授的幸福感源自她对于自己事业的充分满足感，所以也想把这种成功的模式移植到女儿身上。至于别人能否仿效得了，就很难讲了。
谢谢你！ |
|
|
|
作者：雁翎 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 09:57:10 |
|
|
对文章中有一点非常有看法，就是对苏联小伙犹金的评论。怡然用了个“如果”，如果他学更实用的东西那么他的将来会怎么样。
其实这个“如果”是不存在的。先不说成功的定义是什么，很简单的道理，世界上不可能都是医生工程师，如果都是，也挣不到大钱。其次小孩子长到了大学生（如果你有过这样大的孩子你就知道），可能家长自己也能看得出来，他的能力潜力基本定型了。小时候会以家长的理想为理想，比如把挣很多钱为目标，但是近二十年的人生经历会告诉孩子们自己他们是不是真的在乎钱。有的孩子比较物质，有的孩子则比较sprital，不在乎自己将来是不是富有，他们自己知道自己是饿不死的（他们的父母很富有），他们就会追求不同的东西。
总的来说，小时候很受穷的成年后追求财富的多一些。艺术家都是一些流浪的灵魂。富有国家的艺术家多一些也更艺术一点是因为更纯。他们追求的东西，从中得到的快乐是凡夫俗子们不能想象也不能体会的。
许多了有钱了以后才开始追求艺术也是因为他们的灵魂需要安慰，而物质是做不到这一点的。
至于蔡美儿的文章和教育方式，我觉得这个方式在她自己身上得到了成功，如果她也很满足，她是一定会在下一代身上重复的。因为她不知道除了这条路人生还有别的路。她其实忽略了许多的事实就是她的孩子成长环境已经和她自己那时候很不一样，小孩子的个体也是很不一样，蔡美儿如果再次成功（制造出一个快乐满足富有有地位有好丈夫好孩子的另一个哈佛教授）是偶然的。而不成功是必然的，比如有地位有钱但不快乐，有好丈夫不一定有好孩子，快乐而幸福不一定富有又有社会地位。其实我们也不知道她的正式生活，如果她要花那么多的时间和精力，那么多的愤怒和压力在孩子们身上，孩子的成功对她的影响如此巨大，很难说她的生活多么完美。
还是那句话，好事不可能都让一个人占全了，还是看各人的取舍。但是不管什么样的人生，其实人都在追求一样东西，就是心灵的满足。这个追求不管人意识得到与否，一定会在人生的某个阶段冒出来的。
我觉得我们要承认世界的多样性，什么样的能力做什么样的事，人比较会快乐。 |
|
|
|
作者：twalker |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 07:13:36 |
|
|
实际上，每个人都不可能完全掌控自己的人生！人生的道路有着许许多多主观与客观、偶然和必然的因素。作为父母，当然是希望能够为儿女提供良好的环境，引导他们走上为社会作贡献，为自己谋幸福的道路。
我们所选择的教育方式都会受到自身的背景、经验的影响。Amy的方式也不例外，与她的家庭背景，人生经历有关。Amy从菲律宾华人移民家庭出身，以她的聪明才智，努力奋斗，成为耶鲁的教授，著名作家。不但如此，他的夫婿是犹太人，她自然也会领悟到犹太人育儿经。对她的选择，我们不一定同意，但应该有一份尊重。
网上对Amy的教育方式的评论，许多是在没有读Amy的原文，没有了解Amy的个人背景下的写的。不少评论众口一词，口诛笔伐。个人以为实不可取。 |
|
|
|
作者：钟楼散人 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 06:22:25 |
|
|
因为尤金单身、没有稳定的经济收入而推测他的精神生活有问题，只是一种推测。在美国，穷并快乐着的人，不在少数。只要尤金快乐，其他都可以不计。而且，如果当初他没有走上演员这条路，会是他终生的遗憾，可能会让他终其一生感到痛苦，这将是人生最大的失败，远超过单身和没有稳定收入。
蔡女士教育孩子方式的功利主义之所以不可取，也正是因为把自己认为的幸福快乐强加于孩子身上。其实，人生的幸福快乐远非“功利”二字可以涵盖，中国、乃至亚洲父母们的认识误区，恰恰就在这里。
“人必生存着，梦才有所附丽。”这话不错。在美国，生存对绝大多数人而言并不是问题，因此不必为了一个本不存在的问题牺牲自己的快乐和梦想。
在中国，在亚洲，人们多年来基本生活没有保障，穷怕了，因此才有了虎妈、虎爸，这可以理解。在美国社会，孩子们有了享受快乐童年的条件，何必一定要去剥夺。蔡女士不许女儿参加学校的课外活动，可见她心目中的幸福，是多么单薄和苍白。但愿中国的虎妈们比蔡女士多些智慧。 |
|
|
|
作者：华山 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-16 05:22:01 |
|
|
“教育的作用不仅仅是培养社会精英，更重要的是。。。培养有一技之长能够自食其力的各类人才。。。让他/她能够在这个竞争愈来愈激烈的社会上站稳脚跟“，这正是教育的真正目的。
记得当年背”共产主义“定义时有这么一句”物质生活极大丰富，劳动已不再是谋生的手段“。后面跟着的是”各尽所能，各取所需“，实际意思是”自由发挥，各取所需“。
共产主义是后资本主义阶段，可望而不可及。而教育大概也算劳动的一种形式吧？没有物质生活的极大丰富，教育也就是谋生的手段。当年中国学生刻苦学习，为的是上大学，跳”农“门；然后，还是刻苦学习，出国留学；然后，还是刻苦学习，研究生时期成绩没有B以上，拿不到资助。我们这一代留给后代的，除了靠历经艰辛，打下一点物质生活基础，其他言传身教的，也就是这点刻苦学习的传家宝吧。而且，将来的社会如何？社会竞争是否会加剧？美国是否还能长期保持一家独大？”生于忧患，死于安乐“。也得让孩子们懂得这一点。
蔡女士的文章确实有些故作惊人之态。但别忘了，蔡女士不是纯正的大陆妈妈，她家从菲律宾来，与大陆近年的教育没有特别的关联。她是耶鲁教授，有个犹太裔夫君，代表了上流社会。她从忧虑美国的衰败而现身说法，用心十分良苦。这对无论是想恪守东方传统，亦或是想尽快融入西方主流的家长们，她的文章都有正面的参考价值。 |
|
|
|
作者：小娇 |
|
留言时间：2011-01-15 22:01:02 |
|
|
难得处于summer school期间，没那么忙，能赶上发第一条评论（这好像叫占沙发？），好开心。哈哈.
很赞同怡然的观点，妈妈无所谓好不好，人与人相处，包括父母与子女相处方式、教育方法，也是萝卜青菜各有所好，有时更是一物降一物。如果如蔡教授所言，虽然她生活于非常严厉的家庭，失去了一般孩子的童趣，但她觉得自己非常开心，开心父母对她管教如此严厉，于她而言，这不就是幸福吗？当然，小娇相信她的幸福感是来自于她成年后事业的成功，而过于严厉的家教本身。 |
|
|
|
|
