Hugh Akston Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Your thoughts on this? http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifestyle/if-your-childhood-sucked-its-time-to-stop-blaming-your-parents.html
Lowe D Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Haha. Parent blamers are angry and pathetic, says the guy who posted a long angry article about it.
ThomasDoubts Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Sanctimonious. Self Righteous. Projecting. Deviod of solutions to acknowledged problems. Absolving parents from the ownership over the products of their labor, or lack thereof. I often wonder if/when I am responsible, and my parents cease to be responsible. I don't have a reasoned answer to that question, but neither does the author. Lacking empathy, he is condesending and humiliating the reader for being adversly effected by their childhood without offering any means of correcting the adverse effects. Essentially, he argues that bad parents cause physical/emotional/psychological damage, and so long as you don't correct that damage, you'll be just like everyone else who's normalized it. And normalizing trauma is the preferable thing to do.
Mike Fleming Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 This person is deflecting the anger he feels for his parents onto everyone else. Especially those who have dealt with their trauma in a way he obviously doesn't want to.
MysterionMuffles Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I dare one of you guys to oppose that in the comments section below.
MysterionMuffles Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 LOL yeah I guess the passive aggressive route with it's quick and snappiness will suffice. These kinds of people seem like the type to reject any valid argument. I get that being optimistic makes for a good life, especially if put into proper use. But I feel like there are some "optimists" out there that adapt the mindset as a way to create self denial. So heh I dunno...I've come across too many irrationals who comment to anti-spanking articles today. If that author has any validity to his words and can be applied to internet folk, it truly is a waste of time and energy blaming online strangers for being stupid.
ThomasDoubts Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I left Facebook months ago. I find it interesting that it's made impossible for one to comment on an article without a facebook account. I went so far as to create an acceptable email address but balked when I was required to link an email account with a facebook account. Feel free to convey my sentiments if you're so inclined. I'm not sure what it says about me that didn't overcome that frustration...
Hugh Akston Posted November 4, 2013 Author Posted November 4, 2013 Could there be a grain of truth in it? I can understand that if your behaviour is unconsciously influenced by your upbringing that this angry rant has no standing. If you however have come to understand, and have gained knowledge regarding the reasons behind your personal issues, you also have gained responsibility to improve yourself and I believe some might start using their upbringing as an excuse not to improve themselves and gain deeper self knowledge and understanding.
PatrickC Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Could there be a grain of truth in it? I can understand that if your behaviour is unconsciously influenced by your upbringing that this angry rant has no standing. If you however have come to understand, and have gained knowledge regarding the reasons behind your personal issues, you also have gained responsibility to improve yourself and I believe some might start using their upbringing as an excuse not to improve themselves and gain deeper self knowledge and understanding. I don't think anyone disputes that one is entirely responsible for oneself, despite our histories. Of course the author is either talking about himself (in the past tense), or he is talking about someone he knows. That said, if I had to listen to someone (or myself) constantly complaining about their parents (or anyone for that matter) and not doing anything about it, I'd probably grow weary of them too. However, his approach is exactly the same as there's. Rather than walk away from this complainer and move on (as he suggests), he prefers to berate and shame them, by suggesting they do nothing about it and just accept things as they are. One can certainly call the author a hypocrite at best, or (more likely) projecting his own history at worst.
Mike Fleming Posted November 7, 2013 Posted November 7, 2013 In fact, I think we are very much into being responsible here despite our histories. If we can excuse our own behaviour because of our histories, then we have to excuse our parents behaviour too (and everyone else in society who does bad things) or we are hypocritical. The reality is that people know they are being abusive or doing something wrong. Even if not straight away they realise it at some point. Upon realisation, you have a choice. Accept it as such and do what is necessary in terms of therapy and reconciling and making good for it. Or doubling down and continuing the behaviour hoping that they will continue to get away with it. Society as a whole seems to prefer the second option.
Matt D Posted January 26, 2014 Posted January 26, 2014 Is there a difference between blaming and holding accountable? I'd like to think there is but I'm having trouble pinpointing it.
Matt D Posted January 26, 2014 Posted January 26, 2014 Let me try to flesh out what I'm thinking instead of posing a question that could be disjointed with the conversation and hoping someone will validate an opinion I have not even put forth. p.s. I know this post was a couple months old, but hey, I was not on the board at that time; I hope you'll forgive me. I don't think anyone disputes that one is entirely responsible for oneself, despite our histories. Of course the author is either talking about himself (in the past tense), or he is talking about someone he knows. That said, if I had to listen to someone (or myself) constantly complaining about their parents (or anyone for that matter) and not doing anything about it, I'd probably grow weary of them too. Mike has a good point, which is that 'blame' is a kind of precursor to 'accountability'. Blaming someone for something only requires making a connection between cause and effect. The reason that blame has a negative connotation and accountability has a more positive connotation here is that we know the complicated nature of cause and effect in important biological/psychological sciences around human development. If, however, someone holds her parents accountable in the here and now for her feelings toward them by talking with them and telling them what she is feeling, then there is great potential for change in the future, usually called closure, at the expense of discomfort in the present. In other words, if you hold another person accountable by taking action, then there is simply no need for pointing blame afterward because you have dealt with the emotion. Only those who have not taken responsibility for how they feel about their childhood can be said to be casting blame in a reckless manner. Does this make sense or ring true for anyone else? Rex's question about the starting line of self-responsibility prior to adulthood is, I think, a common response when talking about parental relationships. We can accept that infants have not developed the skills to question their parents at such a young age, nor would they if they could since they depend on their parents for physical base needs. It is the parents' responsibility to get their child to the level of emotional independence as soon as soon as possible, that is the paradox wherein parents want to keep their children close forever and thereby drive them away forever. Here's where I might get a little more theoretical: Let's say that a parent goes in to his relationship with his child on the assumption that the child upon being born already has achieved a limitless potential for depth, love, creativity, understanding, but simply lacks the skills to communicate and rationalize thoughts. In that case, the job of the parent becomes "how do I teach this child as efficiently/sustainably as possible what she will need to unleash her inherent emotional maturity"? The answer encompasses all the things Stef talks about like being curious and negotiating and explaining how we figure out what is true and false. Perhaps this is one of those things where as long as the theory is helpful in inducing better parents, the exact details of it can be smoothed out over time.... Lastly, maybe this goes without saying, but I don't think it's productive for us as philosophers to give into the temptation of one-liners like "the author had bad parents" even if that has been our experience over years of study. I'm playing devil's advocate, but we really don't know if this guy had mean and terrible parents... all we can say is that the likelihood for it is high and then provide information that supports a broader inference. For someone who has not listened to Stef ad infinitum, jumping to conclusions like this will seem dismissive and rude. As libertarians we don't want to give people justification to fire back at us vis-a-vis their own ridiculous stories. (e.g. "This anarchist was never loved by another person and that's why she has no sympathy for other people, bleh bleh bleh")
PatrickC Posted January 26, 2014 Posted January 26, 2014 Is there a difference between blaming and holding accountable? I'd like to think there is but I'm having trouble pinpointing it. Agreed, holding someone accountable for their actions, if I understand your definition, is a point of 'closure' after considering and perhaps engaging with them for further clarity. Blaming can be seen as a position from someone that has no wish to 'close' their history. Rather they might prefer to ingratiate in blame as a projection, rather than come to a logical conclusion that means they can abstain rationally and freely from that relationship. Hope that helps.
Recommended Posts