In the last paragraph, the discussion and his argument were about how, in his words, parents and children are the exact same. It is a very interesting and broad statement that doesn’t have any basis for being true. However, I think this is a way of symbolism or overdramatization so that he can make his argument. If Hanh would’ve said “[a] children’s experiences are derived from their parents”, it wouldn’t have as much effect as “[a] children’s experiences are shaped from their parents and therefore a big percentage of personality is due to their upbringing and/or their youth.” Instead of going with the broad approach to his argument and saying that “the child is their father”, Hanh could’ve given a more in depth and realistic determination about how a child’s surroundings such as their parents or guardians shape the rest of their life. Hanh is a wise man and has a different viewpoint and way of thinking than the good majority of philosophers that we have learned about in this unit. He goes above and beyond and goes outside the box and says more controversial things. That is what makes what he says so interesting to learn
In the last paragraph, the discussion and his argument were about how, in his words, parents and children are the exact same. It is a very interesting and broad statement that doesn’t have any basis for being true. However, I think this is a way of symbolism or overdramatization so that he can make his argument. If Hanh would’ve said “[a] children’s experiences are derived from their parents”, it wouldn’t have as much effect as “[a] children’s experiences are shaped from their parents and therefore a big percentage of personality is due to their upbringing and/or their youth.” Instead of going with the broad approach to his argument and saying that “the child is their father”, Hanh could’ve given a more in depth and realistic determination about how a child’s surroundings such as their parents or guardians shape the rest of their life. Hanh is a wise man and has a different viewpoint and way of thinking than the good majority of philosophers that we have learned about in this unit. He goes above and beyond and goes outside the box and says more controversial things. That is what makes what he says so interesting to learn