Purpose of spiritual education

First, we cannot lose at the starting line of the spiritual world.

Second, the starting point of education - is the child born a blank slate or is he born with the ability to think rationally?

Third, are there "basic survival skills"? - What must be learned and what can be allowed to develop freely?

Fourth, the purpose of education. - Is the ultimate purpose of education for the parents or for the children?

Although everyone criticizes the idea of "not losing at the starting line", we still have to worry about our children's education without realizing it.

The first thing you need to do is to choose the right school, the right district, the right training course, the right immigration exam, the right to study abroad, and so on. I feel that the people around me, can live for their own time is really not long. Because going to college is up to their parents, graduated, soon married and had children, is for their own children, can really for their own time, I'm afraid that even after the retirement is not much, because then many people have to take the grandchildren, may be dancing square dance is already a luxury.

Improved conditions have allowed us to have more financial resources to train our children in "skills" such as art, music, taekwondo, and Go. Of course, there is a lot more content around the school textbooks, and there is really a lot for kids to learn for the middle school exams and the college entrance exams.

In terms of being a human being, there doesn't seem to be much specialized training at the moment. Recently, I found Albert's Bookstore in the basement plaza of the Civic Center, which seems to have a little bit of this purpose. Of course, they mainly train reading skills, but they can certainly bring some inspiration to children. I've only attended one trial class of "Wisdom and Compassion Education", which specializes in "morality" and "the way to be a human being". It is said that they teach children "national education". I also have some friends who have sent their children to private schools such as "Taihu University Hall" and "Dongshan Academy", but I didn't dare to try it out.

Although I haven't had many in-depth conversations with other parents about education, I feel that many of them have realized that there is a lot of competition in the "spiritual world". I think the main reasons are as follows:

1. The spiritual world undoubtedly has a great influence on the development of the child's character. Emotional intelligence development, reading classes, and even school trips are all intended to make the child's spiritual world sound. Parents are no longer only the results of the child's achievements, especially our generation of college students who have been "persecuted" by the college entrance examination system.

2. Parents are thinking about the meaning of life, and they are unknowingly pinning their hopes on the next generation. They hope that their children will understand the meaning of life and even the meaning of life sooner rather than later.

3. In reality, a lot of counter-examples forced parents to think about this issue. In addition to the "neurological problems" that can arise from a problem in the spiritual world, bad character and habits can also be a source of worry for parents.

There are many other reasons, too many to list.

At present, most parents still put their children's development in the school above, from the above mentioned school districts, the phenomenon of choosing a school can be seen, parents hope that the school, the teacher, and the child's interactions with classmates, the formation of a sound personality, the social life of the adaptive as well as to learn a variety of "skills", especially The first step is to make sure that your child has the right skills for the exam, so that he or she can go to a good university or study abroad.

There are also parents who are beginning to reflect on the current school education, where there are questions about the current college entrance exams, the unfairness of the college entrance exams, and the ability of the child to get into the university after the question of whether it is really helpful, but there are more and more parents who feel that the current education system and the ideology of the problem, the growth of the child "spiritual world" is not conducive or even harmful to the growth. The first is that it is not a good idea to have a good time, but it's a good idea to have a good time.

First of all, there is the dissatisfaction with indoctrination and authoritarianism, which is not a big concern for the parents since they are already surviving in an authoritarian system. Now it's more of a concern that the realism of the schools is hurting the children. In many places, school teachers don't take classes seriously and only care about making money from cram schools, and the harm to children's health caused by the use of poor-quality rubberized running tracks in schools (which is actually corruption as a social phenomenon happening to children).

There is also the concern that the public schools are teaching children in a duckling style, which is a form of spiritual bondage. When the spirit is bound, it is not difficult to develop intellectually and achieve excellent test scores, but I am afraid it will be difficult to make excellent contributions and accomplishments.

So, unbeknownst to me, in addition to test scores, parents are worried that their children are losing out on the "spiritual world".

I think this worry is completely necessary, although it is wrong to worry too much, but ignoring the spiritual world of the child, both for the child and the parents themselves, is irresponsible.

The cultivation of the spiritual world, in the past, was the five speakers, four beauties and three loves, to be the successor of socialism. Now, in the context of utilitarianism, but also in the return of the "national tradition", such as my child's elementary school in the morning to choose the disciple rules, the three character classic part of the passage for students to read in the morning. But there seems to be a lack of systematic, clear theoretical guidance and teaching programs, both in schools and in training institutes, compared to the cultural classes.

I feel that the cultivation of the spiritual world, for children, should include some of the following areas, depending on receptivity:

One, morality or ethics. Although it seems a bit big, we have actually been cultivating morals in our children all the time, such as honesty, diligence, and in China the concept of not wasting and saving (1st grade texts such as hoeing, ants and grasshoppers, etc.). I feel that while instilling, there is a lack of systematization of these moral aspects of education as well as the development of the child's spirit of discernment, that is, to tell him the origin and importance of these morals, it is best to have the child to think for themselves, the opportunity to communicate.

The formation of moral values has a great potential impact on a person's future values, and is the key to a future of happiness. I feel that what is being taught to children now is how to deal with the future when there is a conflict with the reality when they grow up. The other is to teach the child to be happy with too little text, rather let the child be a busy ant every day, can not be a can sing in the shade of the grasshopper.

Second, sex education. In addition to physical aspects such as physiological hygiene, the spiritual aspect of the child is also spread too little. It seems as if the child is too early to go to college, and only after college will they get married and have children. But a child's view of the opposite sex as a child will often determine the happiness of marriage after growing up. Sex education is very important, everyone knows, but how to do it, we still need to further improve.

Third, the balance of logical thinking ability and romantic feelings. We like to give the children to see the fairy tale, which sent a lot of human emotions, but need to pay attention to their own children to accept the fairy tale of the discernment, do not stay in the fairy tale inside the "grow up". The ability to think logically often undermines romantic feelings, for example, after learning that crows drink water, some children do experiments to prove that in the case of half a bottle of water, if the stone is not small enough, the water will not rise too much. If you look at the world with this kind of thinking, the world may be just a combination of various elements such as carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, and you will lose a lot of the fun of life.

Spiritual aristocracy and commoners.

The aristocrats are those who have valuable qualities and are able to hold on to them. Spiritual aristocracy requires people to have independent thinking, personality, and especially their own principles. Will not do things against their will, at least not often, actively do things against their will. Aristocrats can be alone, or they can save the lives of the people in all directions. Spiritual aristocrats are rich in heart and do not blindly follow the world's ideas.

The common man is the mass, and can adjust his morals according to the actual situation. It does not seek to be out of the ordinary spiritually. Perhaps material pursuits are more important than inner introspection. They don't think too much about what life is, the meaning of life and such topics. So there is very little spiritual burden, and even if there is, they will feel that it is a problem of the "material" world, and has nothing to do with their own heart or spirit.

Whether you want your child to be a spiritual aristocrat or a commoner is something that many parents think about. But there should be more people who ignore that the importance of morality compared to survival skills can only be discerned when the child grows up in the future.

There are two voices here, one that thinks the child is a blank slate, and how the parents write him is important , and while it may also respect the child's choices, the parents have undoubtedly put a lot of thought into guiding them. The second believes that children are born with their own minds and will make their own choices. I'm referring to children below junior high school here, too big to have their own judgment naturally.

Modern families, the rough way of education may have been rare, but forcing children to learn "skills" still abounds. Some parents may think that a child's reluctance to learn is just a phase, and that if they push him a little, he'll get over it and still learn. Yesterday, my child's piano teacher told me that we must urge our children to practice the piano every day, and she said that none of the children seemed to love practicing, but in the end, the parents insisted on it, and how many grades they got. There is also a deep impression that year, I saw a few college entrance exams CCTV interviews, the reporter asked the college entrance exams, "the trials and tribulations have no regrets and so on", the college entrance exams replied, said that this experience is their most unforgettable experience, after overcoming the difficulties of obtaining the joy is indescribable, and so on. Let me feel very ashamed that year did not study hard.

There is also in the current educational content and the actual deviation is too large, on vocational training and even scientific research do not help a lot of questioning, some people say that if you can put the unloved things can learn, other things naturally do not matter. The meaning is that education exercises one's character, you see that even you can learn what you don't love well, isn't it a honing for you? The person who passes through the honing is not only superior in intellect, but equally superior in quality, eh?

I don't think I can argue with that.

Another argument is that a child is born with a mind, and it's best to let him make his own choices. For example, the title of the last lecture was "Letting go, letting the child grow".

Here, if the child chooses a direction within the scope of parental approval, it is okay, if not, how to deal with the conflict?

Once went to listen to a fifth-grade children's open class, he liked to observe butterflies. At first, the parents didn't like it and thought it delayed their homework, but they agreed when he insisted, and now they have something to show for it.

But I was torn. I would have applauded him for what happened to other kids, but what happened to me, could I accept? It's too early to "give up the forest for the trees".

Should we follow our children's interests and hearts, or should we make all the arrangements for them? Even if parents don't think about it, it's already all being done.

There's no denying that we need to "force" our children to learn some basic skills, whether they're interested or not.

For example, they should be able to write well, be fast at math and arithmetic, think logically, be good at English, and be good at art. Physical education is also important, and ideally, you should be able to help your parents with household chores and so on.

These are just the "art" aspects. Shouldn't there be basic requirements for the "moral" aspects? At the very least, something that can help with survival.

Different parents have different requirements, but are there "basic survival skills" in the moral realm?

For example, some parents make it a big deal for their children to lie, but many articles argue that "children who lie tend to have higher IQs than normal children".

There is also the ability to be persistent, which is something that parents often harp on about, but is it really good for children to develop a character that doesn't turn back until they hit the southern wall? After all, not everyone can be Steve Jobs.

Some people push the national education, especially the discipleship, three character classic and so on. They see it as the root of morality. But this kind of "indoctrination" type of education, regard the child as a blank slate, in my opinion, the child's ability to think is harmful. Once a parent wanted to send my child's class a copy of the Three Character Classic, which was opposed by most of the parents and finally kicked out of the class group.

(I personally think that children who don't fight with mom and dad are not good children, of course, not really fight, but through the fight finally reached a **** knowledge, if the parents are wrong, the parents have to change, the children are wrong, the children have to change. (Just a family opinion of course.)

I think we can all agree that there are some basic survival skills, both "technical" and "moral", but which ones are necessary is debatable.

But it is clear that some parents are teaching their children "selfishness" as a basic "survival skill". And selfishness is a major cause of adult unhappiness.

While most adults are selfish, minors, who are less influenced by adults and still have a childlike spirit, are not, even though they may protect their favorite toys from being shared with others.

"Possessiveness" and "jealousy" are two important outward signs of selfishness.

The selfishness of "sole possessor" is either very mean to others, or even mean to oneself, because any expenditure affects one's own "sole possessor". The selfish person, any accidental expenditure or even the normal cost, let himself suffer a lot, so the pain will be accompanied by his own life.

Self-possession makes you want to get more material things or vanity than others, and jealousy makes you not want to see anyone, even your friends, better than you or even close to you.

To build one's own happiness on the unsuccessfulness of others is like building a castle on the beach, which will be shattered inside oneself when the wave of others' success comes.

Because of selfishness, a person's life becomes unhappy. Selfishness and misery index are directly proportional. Because selfish people are difficult to share the joy from the success of others, and even can not get true friendship and even family love. Therefore, it is not an exaggeration to say that the greatest suffering in life comes from selfishness.

Unfortunately, selfishness comes more from the education of the minor. Once formed, it is also very difficult to change, even in adulthood through learning and introspection, after the realization of this error, the joy of life is also a harm, and will even be entangled for life.

Any conscious behavior of human beings (even unconscious behavior can be considered as conscious subconscious) can be attributed to both self-interest and altruism. But people who don't believe in dialectics or Taoism (that is, there are two sides to everything, or if there is a yin, there is a yang) can attribute altruistic behavior to self-interest as well. It's like saying you do good deeds every day, ultimately to make yourself happy, or even become a Buddha in the future, so you can at least be born into a good family, right?

So the purpose of spiritual education also needs to be discussed, are we giving to our children in this way for ourselves, or for our children?

You can't simply say for the sake of the child, for the sake of the child's parents, most of them still hope that in the future the child will have some achievements, can come back to see themselves from time to time. At least, I hope the child will not let himself worry about his survival when he grows up, right?

Some people may say that I have no expectations for my child, but I just hope he is doing well, or at least I can't say it's for my own benefit. This is also true, but it will fall into the suspicion of "leaving the child alone". After all, there are too few exceptions, and most people don't dare to have no expectations for their children's future.

So let's say that the purpose of spiritual education is both "self-interested" and "altruistic," which is a compromise between being for the parents and being for the children.

Self-interest (for the parents) is the happiness of seeing their children grow up happily and, if they achieve something, it is a great joy. Sometimes, parents may want to be old, the child can be around better. In short, the child's happiness, so that their hard work has not been wasted, this is the parents' greatest happiness.

Altruism (for children), I always think, a person whether there is achievement or a lot of wealth, is the reason for his intelligence (in fact, IQ and IQ are considered to do intelligence, I think some people do not do well in math, but do a very good job, we will also think that he is "smart"), but can not live a happy life, but also look at his spiritual world is sound. I'm not sure if you're going to be able to get a good deal on a new product, but I'm sure you'll be able to get a good deal on a new product.

A recent article, Don't treat your friends as contacts, is a reflection on current pragmatism. If a friend is only a friend if he or she is "useful" to you, then a person is doomed to be lonely in the spiritual world. Lonely people are seldom happy (some may cite hermits and monks as counter-examples. One can be a hermit or a monk, but do parents want their children to be destined to become hermits and monks?) .

Many people admire or aspire to the Steve Jobs and Tao Yuanming style of life. I also envy the success of Steve Jobs' paranoia and Tao Yuanming's spontaneity, but I don't hesitate to say that I don't want my children to be like that.

For myself, the purpose of spiritual education, in self-interest, I hope that the child will be able to achieve, family happiness. Whether or not they will be with themselves in the future is not so important, I should have my own life, my own friends.

In terms of altruism, I hope that my child can also go to actively explore the meaning of life (more as a doer than a thinker), dare to try what he likes, have the good moral sentiments that human beings *** have, be a responsible person in family life, and at the same time know how to bring happiness to his family, love his family, and at the same time have the love of his family.