It's not about you - NY Times hits the mark.

<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/opinion/31brooks.html?_r=1&ref=davidbrooks[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/opinion/31brooks.html?_r=1&ref=davidbrooks&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Op-Ed Columnist
It’s Not About You
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: May 30, 2011</p>

<p>But, especially this year, one is conscious of the many ways in which this year’s graduating class has been ill served by their elders. They enter a bad job market, the hangover from decades of excessive borrowing. They inherit a ruinous federal debt.
More important, their lives have been perversely structured. This year’s graduates are members of the most supervised generation in American history. Through their childhoods and teenage years, they have been monitored, tutored, coached and honed to an unprecedented degree.
Yet upon graduation they will enter a world that is unprecedentedly wide open and unstructured. Most of them will not quickly get married, buy a home and have kids, as previous generations did. Instead, they will confront amazingly diverse job markets, social landscapes and lifestyle niches. Most will spend a decade wandering from job to job and clique to clique, searching for a role.
No one would design a system of extreme supervision to prepare people for a decade of extreme openness. But this is exactly what has emerged in modern America. College students are raised in an environment that demands one set of navigational skills, and they are then cast out into a different environment requiring a different set of skills, which they have to figure out on their own.
Worst of all, they are sent off into this world with the whole baby-boomer theology ringing in their ears. If you sample some of the commencement addresses being broadcast on C-Span these days, you see that many graduates are told to: Follow your passion, chart your own course, march to the beat of your own drummer, follow your dreams and find yourself. This is the litany of expressive individualism, which is still the dominant note in American culture.
But, of course, this mantra misleads on nearly every front.
College grads are often sent out into the world amid rapturous talk of limitless possibilities. But this talk is of no help to the central business of adulthood, finding serious things to tie yourself down to. The successful young adult is beginning to make sacred commitments — to a spouse, a community and calling — yet mostly hears about freedom and autonomy.
Today’s graduates are also told to find their passion and then pursue their dreams. The implication is that they should find themselves first and then go off and live their quest. But, of course, very few people at age 22 or 24 can take an inward journey and come out having discovered a developed self.
Most successful young people don’t look inside and then plan a life. They look outside and find a problem, which summons their life. A relative suffers from Alzheimer’s and a young woman feels called to help cure that disease. A young man works under a miserable boss and must develop management skills so his department can function. Another young woman finds herself confronted by an opportunity she never thought of in a job category she never imagined. This wasn’t in her plans, but this is where she can make her contribution.
Most people don’t form a self and then lead a life. They are called by a problem, and the self is constructed gradually by their calling.
The graduates are also told to pursue happiness and joy. But, of course, when you read a biography of someone you admire, it’s rarely the things that made them happy that compel your admiration. It’s the things they did to court unhappiness — the things they did that were arduous and miserable, which sometimes cost them friends and aroused hatred. It’s excellence, not happiness, that we admire most.
Finally, graduates are told to be independent-minded and to express their inner spirit. But, of course, doing your job well often means suppressing yourself. As Atul Gawande mentioned during his counter-cultural address last week at Harvard Medical School, being a good doctor often means being part of a team, following the rules of an institution, going down a regimented checklist.
Today’s grads enter a cultural climate that preaches the self as the center of a life. But, of course, as they age, they’ll discover that the tasks of a life are at the center. Fulfillment is a byproduct of how people engage their tasks, and can’t be pursued directly. Most of us are egotistical and most are self-concerned most of the time, but it’s nonetheless true that life comes to a point only in those moments when the self dissolves into some task. The purpose in life is not to find yourself. It’s to lose yourself.</p>

<p>Very Zen. And very true.</p>

<p>yup. </p>

<p>and now- the question. </p>

<p>Let’s say we agree with the article. What do we do about it? </p>

<p>Put another way - can we design an education that addresses the points raised above, and also doesn’t compromise on academic rigor, whatever “rigor” may mean to each of us personally? </p>

<p>Would that educational model work in different places - very selective, not selective, inner-city, rural, you name it? </p>

<p>Interested to hear what the community thinks :-)</p>

<p>It occurred to me - that part of the problem is that in the olden days - people often apprenticed under an elder (parent, neighbor, community member) and we don’t do that. I’m often surprised how many students I get who have never had a job - or considered starting a business. Even my youngest is a black belt at yard sales to raise money for something she wanted even though we had the means to provide for her.</p>

<p>So when we look at the new crop of entrepreneurs we see fresh faces, not the stodgy old ones who became CEO’s of a company that was started by someone else’s dreams.</p>

<p>I wonder if we changed the focus of education to include self reliance, service and innovation if we’d generate grads who were less focused on “Where can I get a job” and more focused on “What ideas can I develop to generate self-sustaining income?”</p>

<p>Just a thought as I am contemplating “untethering” from the last vestiges of the corporate world myself. I found myself thinking the other day - at what point did I get good at playing by the rules instead of making a few of my own.</p>

<p>Hence - I’ve always thought BS was about training leaders (not just corporate or national leaders - but examples of higher order thinking leaders). The shift in terms of digital media and communication has created a whole new frontier.</p>

<p>Just a thought.</p>

<p>ExieMITAlum, it cracks me up to see very, very successful parents giving their children every advantage in life–and thereby guaranteeing that their children won’t be as successful. </p>

<p>We’ve created a system which exists to sort students, rather than educate them. Parents spend millions (billions?) on tutors and educational programs, trying to create the Perfect College Applicant. I rendered another parent speechless the other day. I opined that it was better to make mistakes in high school than college. Something is very wrong with the system when a smart, educated, caring parent is afraid to allow children to make mistakes. </p>

<p>In that, I strongly disagree with Mr. Brooks. He doesn’t really develop a clear argument about what should replace “expressive individualism.” Some sort of mish-mash of taking on problems, being miserable, and submitting to the group? Hunh. Doesn’t sound like something which could inspire one to hang around for another 60 years. </p>

<p>How about, “Go forth, and for once in your life, do what you want to do. Don’t try to impress the neighbors, or your parents, or op-ed writers. Do whatever makes it worth getting out of bed in the morning. You are not a cog in a vast machine. Do not give up the responsibility of using your talents to the fullest. Do not turn away from doing the right thing, even if it doesn’t fit the corporate guidelines. Speak up when you see injustice. To quote Emerson, ‘Be yourself; no base imitator of another, but your best self. There is something which you can do better than another. Listen to the inward voice and bravely obey that. Do the things at which you are great, not what you were never made for.’”</p>

<p>@Periwinkle!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Amen!</p>

<p>It’s the behavior we’re now modeling in our home. I was criticized in a meeting, once, when asked what I wished for my children. I said “Happy, Healthy, Fulfilled.” I guess the other parents were expecting me to say Ivy League, six figure job, big mansion, stocks and bonds, etc. So I had to repeat it:</p>

<p>Happy
Healthy
Fulfilled</p>

<p>Funny - most parents in the room admitted to being unhappy but were pushing their children to find mainstream employment for stability. I pointed out I chucked stability and found bliss and flexibility as a self-employed person instead.</p>

<p>One Sunday the sermon at a local church was “You were born with certain gifts. Find your passions and pursue them. The “money” will sort itself out.” </p>

<p>Seems a lot of people are realizing that bliss isn’t always found between the cogs of relentless corporate gears. :-)</p>

<p>Please do understand that Ivy League, six figure job, big mansion, stocks and bonds, etc. can make you really Happy, Healthy, and Fulfilled. :D</p>

<p>I see several threads in the original Brooks piece. </p>

<p>I think the one I responded to most quickly was “life is about finding serious things to tie yourself to”. </p>

<p>I don’t argue with the immediate response that, whatever your particular serious thing is - if it isn’t attached to an instant huge income, go ahead and do it anyhow. </p>

<p>But I’m also interested in Brooks’ line of reasoning about team vs individual - outside of family and friends, the things that matter most to me do have something to do with being on a team - things for which the biggest return was seeing the job get completed, or at least pushed along - in what seemed like the right way rather than the wrong way. could be business, could be volunteer work, could be recreation (for my sins I run a couple of recreational sports teams). Eventually, there was/is some personal credit to be had - that’s good, everyone likes a pat on the back. But the real sense of accomplishment seems to have come from the accomplishment itself, and yes, there is some kind of extra thrill from being part of a group that made it happen. </p>

<p>I don’t want to argue for “either/or” - sometimes the approach needs to be individual, sometimes group. But if we are programmed to want to belong to groups (and I think there is some basis for that - not 100%, but certainly not 0% either), then let’s have it be a positive group rather than a negative group. </p>

<p>But how to get that into an education? </p>

<p>Work experience? I kind of like the idea of community service, but in practice it can deteriorate to “here are my hours”, rather than “what I learned in my CS job”. never-the-less, my kids’ community service (all from summer volunteer jobs) has been the making of them - possibly the best part of their education so far. </p>

<p>Responsibility? Older students responsible for younger students? </p>

<p>Well, still thinking.</p>

<p>@Invent, and if you’re not happy and fulfilled, your psychiatrist/life coach/ex-wife might be! ;)</p>

<p>On a serious note, though, if that’s your goal, that’s your goal. Just, pursue it because you want it.</p>

<p>@Ssacdfamily,

</p>

<p>People vary. Not everyone wants to belong to groups. [Caring</a> for Your Introvert - Magazine - The Atlantic](<a href=“http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring-for-your-introvert/2696/]Caring”>Caring for Your Introvert - The Atlantic)</p>

<p>

When people talk about “finding themselves,” they feel that they have lost their individualism/personality. Imagine how psychologically unhealthy it is to tell a generation of kids who are loosing their individualism to Facebook/texting/our extremely superficial world that they the shouldn’t try to “find themselves.”</p>

<p>Apparently the Washington Post also gets it right once in a while. Enjoy this story about the value of a college degree!</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-is-a-college-education-really-worth/2011/06/02/AGzIO4HH_story_2.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-is-a-college-education-really-worth/2011/06/02/AGzIO4HH_story_2.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Well, Peter Thiel is brilliant. Though he did say,"“While I don’t think any class of people should be disenfranchised, I have little hope that voting will make things better”.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.thielfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=10[/url]”>http://www.thielfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=10&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>[YouTube</a> - ‪Peter Thiel Rewards Students for Dropping Out of College‬‏](<a href=“Peter Thiel Rewards Students for Dropping Out of College - YouTube”>Peter Thiel Rewards Students for Dropping Out of College - YouTube)</p>

<p>I liked the article about caring for your introvert- I think I am one! But I don’t think that introvert and team are mutually exclusive - either end of the introvert-extrovert spectrum can make a choice to put the job first or the self first. </p>

<p>(Before someone says it’s giving in to the machine to put the job first - not in our house. At a truly simple level - you pay a baby-sitter to put themself first or your kid first?)</p>

<p>After a week of mulling it over, the message I remember from the original article is still the sense of putting something other than yourself first, and finding out, in the long run, that you benefit from that. Losing yourself to find yourself.</p>

<p>Related note Can’t find the link, but the New York Times had an article this morning about the amount of money (I’m considering a career change!) some people are paying to get their kid tutored for a humanities class that stresses primary sources and finding things out for yourself. The school is sadly bleating that they wish the parents wouldn’t…but on it goes. </p>

<p>What are they going to do when Johnny gets into the working world and finds out that if he does exactly what he’s told to, but not one step more, he will be viewed as supremely irritating by those in charge of getting him paid. (We had a guy the other day who reproduced an error and concluded that the system was working just the way we said it was! Can’t make this stuff up!)</p>