It’s a paradox of human nature that the youngsters who have an easy and prosperous upbringing, on becoming adults, turn their face to immoralism, nihilism, and apocalyptic cults, while those who are born without sufficient resources and, from their early years, have to work hard to get their daily bread, on attaining adulthood, turn their full-face to good life, morality, and the idea of human progress through intellectualism, good culture, liberty, and innovation.
People who don’t work to actually fulfill their needs instead of just pastimes or school work are less likely to form the understanding of how “effort” is required for “achievement”. So, I would agree that youths that must provide effort to achieve basic existence are less likely to be nihilistic or apocalyptic. I don’t find that they are noticeably intellectual, appreciate culture and history. Cultural influences prior to adulthood seem to be a bigger determinant in that respect. More moral as far as the predominant morality goes? Yeah—I think that’s probable.
Post a Comment