There's been a lot of controversy around Yale law professor Amy Chau's memoir,Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother.In this book,Chau explains her strict way of parenting , why Chinese parents are far superior to Westerners , and how they can make their children into piano prodigies,ect.
She makes her 2 daughters play the violin and piano continuesly for hours without breaks for water , or even the bathroom , does not allow them to have sleepovers/playdates , ect.I myself am half Chinese(other half : Taiwanese),and I myself am not treated under these strict parenting "techniques".What do you think of this ?
*Information from TIME magazine,and various news stations.
And again, the logical thing over here may not be the logical thing over there. To us, their way may not seem logical, but to them it may. So how does one go about finding the correct answer here?
If you can suggest / prove it logically.
The girl learned how to play the note perfectly, did she not? So... with what I said earlier about logic being different over there... wouldn't she (mother) have just proved her side of the story through logic?
And again, the logical thing over here may not be the logical thing over there. To us, their way may not seem logical, but to them it may. So how does one go about finding the correct answer here?
The girl learned how to play the note perfectly, did she not? So... with what I said earlier about logic being different over there... wouldn't she (mother) have just proved her side of the story through logic?
But would she have done it out of her own choice? Would she have chosen to do it, and, when one chooses something, they say that it is what they find most conducive to their happiness (for lack of a better word - happiness here is defined as "that which people pursue". Thus, because it required coercion to be executed, it decreased the overall happiness of the world, and was thus of a negative utility.
But would she have done it out of her own choice? Would she have chosen to do it, and, when one chooses something, they say that it is what they find most conducive to their happiness (for lack of a better word - happiness here is defined as "that which people pursue". Thus, because it required coercion to be executed, it decreased the overall happiness of the world, and was thus of a negative utility.
Perhaps, perhaps not. Some tend to go the other way and not do as told due to multiple reasons. Procrastination being one of them.
As for the happiness thing... Once the girl learned how to do it, she, the article reported, was even more ecstatic then her mother. Where as she repeated "I'm doing it mommy!" more then once...
I think that the best way to raise a 'successful' child would be not to coerce him/her into doing seemingly successful activities, but rather to cultivate an interest to commit to these activities.
Personally, I think it's crazy. However, nothing new to be honest. I know a guy who wasn't allowed to get anything less then 'A'. If he received all 'A' grades except for one 'B', he'd be grounded/punished etc. To Western parents, this is insane. To Eastern parents, this is normal. To Westerns, Eastern parents are too strict. To Eastern, Westerns are too forgiving.
Any way of parenting always has it's consenquences,strict or not.Oh,yeah.one more part from the bookne of her daughters drew something for her birthday,but rejected saying that there wasn't enough effort.When questioned by an interviewer,she still stands on that descision because"they know I cherish those drawings and poems that they made a lot of effort into"
Do you have any real facts that that is infact normal, or just profiling?
^Therefor, your opinion and belief is as good as mine. I can believe you are wrong, you can believe I'm wrong. But which view is the correct "answer"? How does one define his as the "correct" answer, while the other "wrong"? And so, what makes your answer any better then mine and mine any better then yours?
Can someone with real knowlege and facts talk about this?
Can someone with real knowlege and facts talk about this?
This is one of those deals where it's very hard, or impossible even, to set up a nearly flawless experiment. That being said, you should watch the video I posted a link to. Near the end he talks about suicide rates and such. Of course, these can't be argued as there are too many variables that could effect the outcome, but none the less it gives you something to think about.
