Moral obligation to do the greatest good…

[BlsdMama]

It’s an interesting thought. Moral obligation to society to do the greatest good one is capable of vs. personal fulfillment

 

 I have a friend who parents are both doctors, one was involved in research and one child psychology. Her son is exceptional, intellectually speaking. Her father had hoped he would go into medicine. 
The obvious and quick answer is that each person has the freedom to choose where their passion lies. However, while we have made a push towards STEM to open doors and we make it exciting and lucrative, we also *need* the “best and brightest” in STEM careers. It’s part of the reason schools try to identify gifted children - to shape  the outcome. 
 

Discuss. 

[freesia]

I think the basic problem here is deciding who gets to define the greatest good. I have a friend who keeps pushing her dd into STEM bc STEM needs more girls.  It’s obvious to all of us that she is more creative/arts minded. My friend feels she just lacks confidence. When the dd said she wanted to be a high school science teacher, friend discouraged that bc dd just had one bad research experience and needed to be encouraged to go the research route. ( The dd is a junior in university.)

To me, the greater good would be allowing this dd to teach—using her creativity to mentor high school students. Until STEM careers change and become a more flexible and healthy place for mothers, that choice also impacts the next generation. 
 

Lots of areas of life need brilliant people. 

[marbel]

24 minutes ago, BlsdMama said:

Her son is exceptional, intellectually speaking. Her father had hoped he would go into medicine. 

So is the son not going into medicine, and your friend's father is disappointed? Does the father feel that because his grandson is exceptionally intelligent he is suited to medicine as a career? I feel like there is more to the story prompting your post. 

I think we all have the moral obligation to do what we can to relieve suffering in the world. There are lots of ways people can do that. STEM careers are not the only way and I think we do children/young adults/students a disservice to push them toward STEM as if that is the highest/best one can aspire to. 

This is not exactly related but it reminds me of a conversation I had many years ago with a friend. I was not married at the time, nor was she; neither had children. Somehow we got onto the subject of stay-home moms leaving work to care for their children. She felt it was a terrible thing for a woman to do, that by giving up a career to raise children she was letting down "the sisterhood." At that time I had no intention of becoming a stay-home mom but I disagreed that staying home with children was "useless" and "hurt all women" (all the words in quotes are terms she used). It was an enlightening conversation for me as I believed then, and still do, that staying home to raise children is a valid choice for the greater good. It was a long time ago but that conversation has stayed with me. 

Edited October 12, 2022 by marbel

[Clemsondana]

The push into STEM as a way to do good frustrates me, because at any given time the needs are in very specific fields.  Getting funding, or getting a full-time job, is incredibly competitive in the biological sciences, for instance.  Spouse is well compensated for work in a specific area of STEM, and they do sometimes struggle to find people, but it's because it takes so many years to become good at it - they can't hire a recent college grad and have them be productive, and it's a newish field.  Spouse also works very long hours.  Part of why I got out of STEM research is that I knew that I would not want to raise children in an environment in which both parents worked that many hours each week.  Had I not had kids...i didn't love it, and for every job there are 20 people wanting to take it, so I might have stayed but maybe not - it's not as if the work was going to go undone in my absence. 

I would actually say that I do more good teaching, which doesn't require the advanced degree that I have, than I would have in research.  Every year I have students say that I made it make sense, and students come back after starting college to say that my class helped their freshman year be easier because while kids were flunking out they were just adding some new info to what they already comfortably knew.  I've got several nurses and a couple of bio sci students/grad students among my former students.  By the end of the year, all of my students can tell you the difference between correlation and causation, which seems like a societal benefit in and of itself.  🙂  And, teaching has left me time to volunteer.  I've got a few kids for whom I feel like I really made a difference in their ability to get through elementary school academics, and I know what happens to kids who get left behind at that stage.  

None of this takes into account raising my kids.  I had to think about this when I left academia to have kids because it's not a job that you can go back to after a few years.  I decided that I could find ways to be useful, but sometimes it's surprising what that looks like.  For several years I baked cookies that were served to people at our recovery ministry.  Mostly it was anonymous, but occasionally somebody would find out that I was the cookie lady and they'd stop me in the hall to say that it made such a difference to feel like somebody cared.  I used to joke that I have a STEM PhD but the most useful thing that I do may have been to bake cookies.  Spouse sometimes says that the most useful thing that he can do is to keep at his job and make money that can be donated to fund people who are gifted at hands-on work with people in need.  One of my college roommates, also a STEM PhD who teaches, has had 400 kids through her house as a foster family.  I'm sure she's a great teacher and she's written curriculum at a big State U, but I'm guessing that her biggest impact is not professional.  

I guess that's my rambling way of saying that, no matter what you do, you can choose to be useful and contribute to the greater good.  I've often thought about people who make the world better just by being helpful and pleasant.  There are a few local shop owners, a convenience store employee, etc, who have the ability to turn a bad day around for the people that they serve.  I sometimes wonder how many bad things are averted just by the fact that their customers walk out the door with a smile on their faces instead of grumping at the next person that they encounter and setting off some sort of negative butterfly effect.  

[marbel]

9 minutes ago, Clemsondana said:

I've often thought about people who make the world better just by being helpful and pleasant.  There are a few local shop owners, a convenience store employee, etc, who have the ability to turn a bad day around for the people that they serve.  I sometimes wonder how many bad things are averted just by the fact that their customers walk out the door with a smile on their faces instead of grumping at the next person that they encounter and setting off some sort of negative butterfly effect.  

Oh, yes, we have a real dearth of kind people in the world. I work in customer service and am beaten down daily by nasty, rude, condescending, entitled people. It's nice when we can turn the call around and make the caller happier at the end. It's a small thing and certainly not on the level of life-saving surgery. But I could never be a surgeon anyway. 

[Grace Hopper]

This is a philosophy that I think was taught by John Piper. Give yourself away. I remember reading Don’t Waste Your Life and coming away with the message that a person might be wasting their life if they didn’t become either a doctor/nurse or pastor/missionary. 
 

I do believe that a life well lived is in many ways sacrificial. But after personal experience with one of my now adult children and her interactions with others  espousing this concept (church staff and members, and admittedly misguided parents), I believe it’s wrong to generate guilt in someone based on the choices they may make to live in a way that allows for more soul nourishment and delight-driven activity. I’m not talking about hedonism - but some freedom to rest, create, have a vocation that allows for relationship building, and a sense that one has space to move as directed by the spirit rather than the need some other person may be pointing them towards. 
 

[HomeAgain]

The argument feels convoluted.

1. I do not believe schools try to identify gifted students.  The ones I know try to pacify them and do not offer them pathways to sustain, interest, or build a passion.  They also marginalize people of color and do not identify giftedness at a scale that matches that of the white female child.

2. Moral obligation lies within a set of values that drive any career.  We all have a moral obligation to do good.  The ripple effect is real, and that doesn't mean that all bright people need to go into scientific fields.  The teacher who sparks an interest or love for a subject ignites a passion in a child who will go on to their passion.  There was a tidbit I read recently about life-changing events. One woman talked about the time she picked up a Harry Potter book.  She wanted to be Hermione.  So, she play-acted: read a lot, studied to get top marks, learned quite a bit...and went on to get accepted to Oxford (IIRC).  All because an author wrote about a bookish girl.

Moral obligation can't be thrust upon anyone.  It has to be inherent, the drive to do good and understand how one's actions potentially affect the world.  I don't think it matters what you do as long as you act in a way that is considerate and kind and there is love behind it.  In a similar note, forcing someone into a career field they have no interest in will backfire.  It doesn't matter if they should be good at it.  Science is driven by creativity, and creativity is driven by passion.  An apathetic, gifted person will be resentful and may forgo whatever moral obligation they may have thought they had by simply going through the motions.

[City Mouse]

A moral obligation to society to always do what is best for society over self? That sounds unsustainable, and it is definitely not a majority philosophy in the U.S. Are the parents from a different culture where that is a more common idea?

 

Edited October 12, 2022 by City Mouse

[Carrie12345]

There isn’t just one aspect of “greater good”, and we all need to remember that.

Dd has no interest in traditional nursing or doctoring.  She loves being in the ambulance, being the first contact, providing the immediate care. And for a whole lot less money, while remaining, in some aspects, even more valuable than the overseeing and discharging doctor.

Other dd currently provides people with their caffeine and sugar needs, lol. Outside of that, she provides fire and minor medical services… for free. (So does first dd.)

I am 100% proud of the contributions they make to society, which go even beyond the ones I picked for this post.

 

[marbel]

3 hours ago, Grace Hopper said:

This is a philosophy that I think was taught by John Piper. Give yourself away. I remember reading Don’t Waste Your Life and coming away with the message that a person might be wasting their life if they didn’t become either a doctor/nurse or pastor/missionary. 

I feel like I'm posting too much in this thread, but... I read that book and have such mixed feelings about it.

Obviously, someone needs to work to be able to support pastors and missionaries. And of course people can minister in many ways. I am not opposed to people in paid ministry - my husband was a paid pastor for a time - but there needs to be a large body supporting that.

And doctors/nurses/all medical professionals have a lot of supports behind them. Medical equipment needs to be manufactured and transported. Yes, STEM people are developing the technologies but it's not STEM experts on the assembly lines, driving the trucks/running the trains. STEM people design hospitals but they are not actually building them.

Sanitation workers are contributing in a very basic way to the common good. 

Another memory: at a family get-together, nieces and nephews asking aunts and uncles what they did for work. I tried to explain corporate training. My husband tried to explain computer architecture. My brother, who operated paving equipment, said "I build roads." He won the day. And, pretty visible contribution to the common good there. 

ETA:  So I kind of veered off the "intellectual gifted" part of this. But I have known intellectually gifted people who chose to work in what would be considered low-intellect fields. They are still contributing to the greater good.

Edited October 12, 2022 by marbel

[Grace Hopper]

6 minutes ago, marbel said:

I feel like I'm posting too much in this thread, but... I read that book and have such mixed feelings about it.

Obviously, someone needs to work to be able to support pastors and missionaries. And of course people can minister in many ways. I am not opposed to people in paid ministry - my husband was a paid pastor for a time - but there needs to be a large body supporting that.

And doctors/nurses/all medical professionals have a lot of supports behind them. Medical equipment needs to be manufactured and transported. Yes, STEM people are developing the technologies but it's not STEM experts on the assembly lines, driving the trucks/running the trains. STEM people design hospitals but they are not actually building them.

Sanitation workers are contributing in a very basic way to the common good. 

Another memory: at a family get-together, nieces and nephews asking aunts and uncles what they did for work. I tried to explain corporate training. My husband tried to explain computer architecture. My brother, who worked in paving, said "I build roads." He won the day. 

I totally agree with you! 
 

My post above was related to my strong personal memory that the book I mentioned conveyed that those God had gifted with high intellect should feel morally obligated to perform the apex duties of medicine or spiritual leader (ie, physical healer or spiritual healer). 

[catz]

I am not fond of the concept that only one type of person/career type is only giving back to society and the rest of us are living in self-involved bubbles which this seems to imply.  Some doctors are doing high end plastic surgery for celebrities.  And some stay-at-home parents are providing formative years for tomorrow's leaders and innovators.   I can think of many high profile people in STEM that I don't think are operating in a way that puts the greatest good first.  They're putting their bottom line first.  

The way doctors are educated in the US is a lot about money for med school.  Your odds of getting through undergrad and able to get through grad school are much better for those raised in wealth.  That doesn't necessarily lead to the best and most compassionate doctors at the end of the day.  And I have certainly worked with doctors who have no bed side manner and seem to just bask in a sea of self importance.  Until it's fair and equitable to get a higher ed and it's fair and equitable to get health care, I just can't buy into this thought process.  

We need best and brightest with fingers in everything.  Not just STEM.  Think about what Lyn Manuel Miranda did teaching history with musical theater and flipping the script on casting minorities into founding father's roles as a random example.  There are small scale working artists in many cities that will never have that kind of fame but are doing important work for young people in their communities every day.  And where would we be without plumbers, construction workers, baristas, public servants, teachers, etc.  

I do think we all have obligations to society.  But I also think no one person gets to declare what someone else's greatest good is.  I am STEM educated.  I actually think if we had a society where people were encouraged to create and innovate - like by decoupling employment and health insurance, living wage, etc that could go a long way.  

The family in the OP sounds maybe like they're locked into a cultural mindset that assumes very narrow roads for success.    

[Brittany1116]

Well, if covid showed us anything, it was that doctors were not the only "essential workers". Grocery store employees, delivery drivers, and others were suddenly critical to society. And who knows how many of those were considered "wasted potential".

[Carol in Cal.]

In terms of 'greatest good', it's really almost impossible to see in advance what that would be.

Instead I think that it's morally appropriate to do your best in whatever situation  you find yourself, to choose/shape your life according to your morals and your talents, and to pray for wisdom and to see and be part of bringing about the good that God plans.

I've noticed that education is not everything and also that education is never a waste.  That includes formal education but also self-education.  I think that the only real waste is embodying bitterness, pride, malice, and/or laziness.

Edited October 12, 2022 by Carol in Cal.

[Jaybee]

I believe we do the greatest good when we do a good job at honest work, especially if it is work that we enjoy or have a passion for. To put a scale on the most "important" work denies the importance of the millions of people whose work helps make our world run more smoothly, but who do things they will never get a Nobel prize for. (Ending lots of sentences with prepositions here. Oh well.) Three people I know well do these things: nurse practitioner to children in high risk situations, filmmaker, and...not sure how to define the last one. The last one works for a person starting a new company that provides services like fencing land, building small bridges, clearing land, digging ponds, etc. All three love their work and are good at it. All three are contributing to society in helpful ways. To make the creative be an NP, or the NP to build bridges, or the bridge builder to care for sick children wouldn't make sense. And just because you "can" do something because your brain is capable of it, doesn't meant that you should; there are many different paths that one can follow to contribute to society in moral and healthy ways. I don't think you can place them on a morality scale. Sometimes the little things we do have greater moral impact than some of the more visible outward things.

[kbutton]

I think that maybe the family in question is really thinking about not squandering privilege even if they talk and think about the greater good. As others have pointed out, not all good comes through the best and the brightest and the richest.

39 minutes ago, catz said:

I am not fond of the concept that only one type of person/career type is only giving back to society and the rest of us are living in self-involved bubbles which this seems to imply. 

We need best and brightest with fingers in everything. 

I agree. 

Subject-matter experts belong in every field and are necessary in every field for quality, logistics, improvements, efficiency, trouble-shooting, etc. 

I am not sure that altruistic jobs should be the only benchmark for a life well-lived, though I am certainly grateful for people who run CURE hospitals, NGOs, and do mission work. 

[Junie]

People should be able to find work that they are skilled for and that they love.  I would hate to have a doctor who would rather be doing something else.  

 

[Jean in Newcastle]

As a Christian, my obligation is to God, not society. (Not that the two are mutually exclusive). Btw- society needs garbage collectors as much as research scientists. Think of what would happen if garbage was never collected. 
 

I think that people in general do their best work if what they do fits their personality, interests or needs in some way. 

[Clemsondana]

One other related thought about serving the greater good.  I've come to think that everybody ought to pick one thing that they can volunteer to do that doesn't benefit their own family, and then do it.  Obviously there are people in situations where they can't, but most people can do something - take a meal to a shut-in once a month, mail a get-well or thinking of you card twice a month, etc.  Obviously other people can take on something bigger like a weekly volunteer job or managing an organization.  It could be an extension of your paid job - a bit of free tutoring or a landscapre cutting the grass of a shut-in without charging them.  I realize how much my kids have benefitted from people who just keep doing the thing that they do once their kids outgrow it - continuing to coach a sport or academic club, or work in the concession stand at the ball field, or teach Sunday school, or volunteer in a school.  Other people use their side hustle or hobby - I know several musicians who go to nursing or retirement homes and play once a month. 

To state more directly what I alluded ot in my first post, the thing that you do to contribute to society doesn't have to be your paid job, although it can be.  My dad was recently telling me about the man who was his little league coach - it was one of the kid's uncles, who was free to coach in the afternoon because he was a police officer whose shift ended around when school got out.  My grandfather helped with boy scouts because he was a camping and fishing kind of guy who had no sons; my mom has fond childhood memories of going camping with a boy scout troop.  I help out with most of my kids' activities - I can now keep score in 3 different sports 🙂 - and the people who organize and coach these often see it as a kind of ministry with a goal of giving kids an outlet and building character.  I've know situations where people watched out for an older person that they aren't related to, taking them to the store and appointments.  Other people deliver Meals on Wheels.  Somebody has to have the time and energy to do that and be available when it needs to be done.  Maybe it's a SAHM or a warehouse worker whose shift ends at 11 am.  The past few years have shown really clearly how much social isolation negatively affects people, so anybody who spends time creating connections between people is serving the greater good.  

[fraidycat]

One person's idea of "greater good" is another person's idea of detriment to society. 🤷🏻‍♀️

[Jaybee]

One of the most influential people I know is now in her 90s. She has just been a good person in her simple small-town life. She married, raised two children, worked for years in social services, taught a young couples' Sunday School for years that grew older as they did, retired. But any time something comes up to honor her, scores of people show up or make mention of her, because she has loved, cared for, and encouraged people so well. Her kids' friends were all welcome in their home. And their friends. They brought scores of other college kids home for the weekend over their college years. I was blessed to have them as my parents' best friends. Their kids were a little older than we were, but all of us loved going over to their house or having them in ours. Maybe I need to give her a call this afternoon...

[Frances]

6 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

It’s an interesting thought. Moral obligation to society to do the greatest good one is capable of vs. personal fulfillment

 

 I have a friend who parents are both doctors, one was involved in research and one child psychology. Her son is exceptional, intellectually speaking. Her father had hoped he would go into medicine. 
The obvious and quick answer is that each person has the freedom to choose where their passion lies. However, while we have made a push towards STEM to open doors and we make it exciting and lucrative, we also *need* the “best and brightest” in STEM careers. It’s part of the reason schools try to identify gifted children - to shape  the outcome. 
 

Discuss. 

My son’s orthopedic surgeon told him he considered it his moral duty to convince him not to go to medical school when he heard about his career plans. He said in good conscience he could not recommend the career to any young person because his experience was that even as a top orthopedic surgeon (the procedure he did on our son is quite new and only two surgeons in the state perform it), he was not allowed to practice and treat patients as he thought best, due to the involvement of insurance companies and hospital administration.

My son has been a certified volunteer long term care ombudsman for almost five years now and continues this work long after he turned down medical school slots and despite being extremely busy with his career, another business he co-owns, a long commute, board membership for a non-profit, etc. He is definitely making a difference in the life of some of his residents despite not being a doctor. 

[Tanaqui]

6 hours ago, freesia said:

I think the basic problem here is deciding who gets to define the greatest good. I have a friend who keeps pushing her dd into STEM bc STEM needs more girls.  It’s obvious to all of us that she is more creative/arts minded. My friend feels she just lacks confidence. When the dd said she wanted to be a high school science teacher, friend discouraged that bc dd just had one bad research experience and needed to be encouraged to go the research route. ( The dd is a junior in university.)

It's not too late for your friend to go back to school and go into a STEM field. It'll be hard, but worthwhile, if that's what she wants.

The greatest good is not in living vicariously through your children, egads.

[freesia]

8 minutes ago, Tanaqui said:

It's not too late for your friend to go back to school and go into a STEM field. It'll be hard, but worthwhile, if that's what she wants.

The greatest good is not in living vicariously through your children, egads.

The thing is after years of saying she wished she’d gone a STEM direction, she did go back—but studied special Ed. I’ve given up trying to figure her out. My family is in agreement that even if the dd does end up in research, she’ll eventually (within 10 years) quit and head another direction. 

[Rosie_0801]

I think we have a moral obligation to ourselves and everyone around us to be as healthy as we can manage to be.

[Pam in CT]

Interesting topic.  It reveals as much about how we start with different PREMISES as much as how we then go off in difference directions.

 

For example, the bolded in the OP really jumped out at me

7 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

It’s an interesting thought. Moral obligation to society to do the greatest good one is capable of vs. personal fulfillment

 

...while we have made a push towards STEM to open doors and we make it exciting and lucrative, we also *need* the “best and brightest” in STEM careers. It’s part of the reason schools try to identify gifted children - to shape  the outcome. 
 

which I read (maybe wrongly?) as resting on a premise that STEM practitioners have greatest positive impact on society.

Which, of course, medical and technological advances, yes of course, ginormous positive impact. 

But STEM practitioners also design and deploy advancing weaponry to a catastrophic scale; and develop the capacity to modify genetic that as a species we arguably lack the ethical capacity to handle; and develop technologies that then level the mountains and render the rivers toxic and drain the water tables; and etc.  STEM tools are just tools; like any other tools that can be and are used for noble purposes, evil purposes, financial gain purposes; ego purposes.  Not necessarily the "greatest good" or even, any particular good.  Would be my own premise.

 

As opposed to a different premise, that social good necessarily entails a degree of self sacrifice

5 hours ago, Grace Hopper said:

This is a philosophy that I think was taught by John Piper. Give yourself away. I remember reading Don’t Waste Your Life and coming away with the message that a person might be wasting their life if they didn’t become either a doctor/nurse or pastor/missionary. 
 

I do believe that a life well lived is in many ways sacrificial. But after personal experience with one of my now adult children and her interactions with others  espousing this concept (church staff and members, and admittedly misguided parents), I believe it’s wrong to generate guilt in someone based on the choices they may make to live in a way that allows for more soul nourishment and delight-driven activity. I’m not talking about hedonism - but some freedom to rest, create, have a vocation that allows for relationship building, and a sense that one has space to move as directed by the spirit rather than the need some other person may be pointing them towards. 
 

Which, again, I dunno.  Different souls are "nourished" in different ways; and the correlation between material rewards/ ego affirmation don't persuasively demonstrate to me that medical and pastoral fields are "sacrificial" either.

There are plenty of doctors in my area who get a good deal more financial reward/ affirmation than, say, schoolteachers or home health aides.  Is Joel Osteen really "sacrificing" or giving himself away?  There are folks in both medical and pastoral fields who get as much material and ego-stroking affirmation as in finance or consulting or professional sports or music or whatever.

 

Like, this point:

4 hours ago, Brittany1116 said:

Well, if covid showed us anything, it was that doctors were not the only "essential workers". Grocery store employees, delivery drivers, and others were suddenly critical to society. And who knows how many of those were considered "wasted potential".

And yet though as a society we were very quick to designate such workers as "essential," we were not willing to invest money into making their workplaces safer (ventilation, reconfigured workspaces to enable further spacing) or, more to the point, to PAY THEM MORE for the substantially higher risks they were exposed to.

 

We (rightly) thank those who serve in the military for their sacrificial service. We need nurses and teachers and home health aides who empty the bedpans too. Those roles are also self-sacrificial and -- to use a word that doesn't get a lot of usage these days -- noble. 

 

 

[bookbard]

I think it's a bit of a cliche to consider only doctors are helping society. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who are actively destructive of society (thinking of the whole banking crisis in 2008/9). I do believe we have a moral obligation towards society, that is, to one another. In some ways I feel like being involved in the arts is one of the most powerful ways to do this - great art, even good art, lasts longer than fixing one person's broken ankle. Supporting my kids towards ethical employment isn't about dissuading them from the arts, but dissuading them from unethical practices such as participation in modern slavery, resource theft and destruction, abuse and discrimination etc. 

[TechWife]

7 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

…

However, while we have made a push towards STEM to open doors and we make it exciting and lucrative, we also *need* the “best and brightest” in STEM careers. It’s part of the reason schools try to identify gifted children - to shape  the outcome. 
 

Discuss. 

We need the best & brightest in all careers. To steer them all to STEM careers is misguided. We need them to be social workers, attorneys, police officers, business managers, banking & finance careers, teaching (at all levels), logistics professionals, authors, interpreters, translators, policy makers - it’s endless. The “best & brightest” have the same obligation to the rest of society that we all have. Your intelligence doesn’t change that. 
Right person in the right career, at the right time, on the right place, paid the right compensation. 

[Melissa Louise]

50 minutes ago, Rosie_0801 said:

I think we have a moral obligation to ourselves and everyone around us to be as healthy as we can manage to be.

This. 

Plus, I would say we have a moral obligation to our own Self/soul. 

Not quite follow your bliss but not quite follow someone else's idea of the common good either. 

 

 

[ikslo]

7 hours ago, City Mouse said:

from a difficult culture

Did you mean difficult? Or was it autocorrected and you meant different?

[City Mouse]

2 minutes ago, ikslo said:

Did you mean difficult? Or was it autocorrected and you meant different?

Oops, thanks for pointing that out. I’ll go fix it now.

[Clarita]

8 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

However, while we have made a push towards STEM to open doors and we make it exciting and lucrative, we also *need* the “best and brightest” in STEM careers. It’s part of the reason schools try to identify gifted children - to shape  the outcome. 

Yes STEM has some careers that are easier to make a good living. In terms of do the schoolwork, get the credentials, then there may be a higher likelihood of getting a job that can pay the bills. The chances are lower for someone to go into acting and becoming an avenger.

The "best and brightest" aren't the only people capable of making a difference.

Plus other fields do well and need the best and brightest too. Having an HR person who is charismatic, warm and organized can elevate the productivity and morale of an entire company. I'd argue that has a bigger impact than one engineer who can invent a great widget.

I thought a large part of why we fight for schools to identify gifted children is so they don't drop out of school or be disruptive, not so that we can steer them into certain professions?? We offer different tracks of math and language arts so kids can pursue those earlier if they like/can. That's not limited to children with higher IQ, they can also be hard working or just above average. 

[bookbard]

13 minutes ago, Clarita said:

I thought a large part of why we fight for schools to identify gifted children is so they don't drop out of school or be disruptive, not so that we can steer them into certain professions??

I studied gifted ed and the "why" was always an interesting discussion. Mostly it was an equity thing, but yes, the risk of problems due to unengaged kids was a big one. When I look at my state, there are a lot of academically selective schools in the wealthier suburbs, very few in the western suburbs, and none in more rural areas. They do now have a virtual selective school you can attend if you're rural. 

[Clarita]

1 minute ago, bookbard said:

When I look at my state, there are a lot of academically selective schools in the wealthier suburbs, very few in the western suburbs, and none in more rural areas.

That inequity is terrible. I was just idealistically speaking, I suppose.

[gardenmom5]

9 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

It’s an interesting thought. Moral obligation to society to do the greatest good one is capable of vs. personal fulfillment

 

 I have a friend who parents are both doctors, one was involved in research and one child psychology. Her son is exceptional, intellectually speaking. Her father had hoped he would go into medicine. 
The obvious and quick answer is that each person has the freedom to choose where their passion lies. However, while we have made a push towards STEM to open doors and we make it exciting and lucrative, we also *need* the “best and brightest” in STEM careers. It’s part of the reason schools try to identify gifted children - to shape  the outcome. 
 

Discuss. 

I think the "moral obligation" is to be the best person we can be. - that doesn't mean we have to invent the latest and greatest life-saving device.  I think how we treat other people, is more important than what field we work in.  Sometimes - just a kind word can have a profound effect upon someone.  We need more kindness in this world right now.

I encouraged my kids into STEM because life costs money.   Families cost money.  I encouraged my girls too, because they can't rely upon one paycheck. unemployment happens. disability happens, death happens. . . and sadly, divorce happens.

One is in the medical field - and yeah, she HAS saved at least one life. (of which I know.) However, that wasn't why she went into this field.

However, our souls need to be fed too.  We need art, we need music.  We need beauty to cheer our hearts.  We need people in other fields, who are also their best and brightest.

 But ultimately - kids have to go where their talents and interests lie.   (Those are not necessarily the same place.)

 

[katilac]

I think grandpa needs to get over himself.

[Scarlett]

9 hours ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

As a Christian, my obligation is to God, not society. (Not that the two are mutually exclusive). Btw- society needs garbage collectors as much as research scientists. Think of what would happen if garbage was never collected. 
 

I think that people in general do their best work if what they do fits their personality, interests or needs in some way. 

This.

[Scarlett]

When I was a teenager a woman told me I was morally, religiously, financially, socially, culturally, and intellectually inferior to her and not suitable for her son.  He and I married anyway…..but her words haunted me.  I tried very hard to prove her wrong and to please her for many years.  One day it hit me… she was crazy.   I was never inferior….she just had some sort of twisted vision of what her daughter in law should be.

That sort of elitist superior thinking is very dangerous.  All of us should do our best and be kind and helpful to others.  To treat all—regardless of how they make their living with dignity.  I am VERY grateful that I have indoor plumbing but someone is somewhere working in a sewer or water treatment plant.  I am very grateful for the men who carry away our household trash each week.  And some of what I do in my job is mundane and considered lowly by society….but it is appreciated by the single dad I work for.   
 

Also, enjoying one’s job is great if that is possible. That isn’t always possible but one can take great comfort in knowing they are supporting themselves and/or their families. And work is just work to some people…..it is a means to living the important parts of their life. 

[lewelma]

5 hours ago, Pam in CT said:

But STEM practitioners also design and deploy advancing weaponry to a catastrophic scale

This made me think of the chemist who arguably had one of the biggest impacts of the 20th century - Thomas Midgley Jr.

He created leaded petrol which causes brain damage in children, and CFCs which created the Ozone hole. 

[prairiewindmomma]

Ooof, this thread title rubs me the wrong way. It reminds me of when I was in my 20s and getting married:

the church leaders told me my place was in the home, creating godly children and building up His eternal kingdom

the greater community told me the work I was doing as an attorney with children in need of care and other vulnerable people was too important to give up (even though it came with a side of death threats from abusive persons)

 

I married my husband because he told me I could do what I wanted and that people telling me “shoulds” were people trying to control me. He was right. Your obligation is to yourself. You hold the power to know yourself, to talk with divinity (if you believe in it) and to make choices for yourself because everyone else is likely running an agenda to control power, money, or life (which cycles back to power and money, generally). Be true to yourself.

Someone needs to tell grandpa to apologize.

[easypeasy]

The "greatest good" is multi-faceted and there are ways for people from all careers and interests to give back to society in a fantastical way. Definitely not just through STEM careers.

This reminds me of an old friend whose son was genius-level smart. He was intellectually several grade-levels ahead of his peers and his family worked with the school for a homeschool/in school hybrid to accommodate his educational needs. Everyone jumped through hoops, envisioning this kid becoming the next Doogie Howser or inventor of something that would cure world hunger.

The kid? Decided to go to an arts college and major in music production on the West Coast. He hangs out in nightclubs and emcees parties.

Annnd, he brings music into the world that would not otherwise exist. He produces music for people who are doing the same thing.

No, it's not rocket science but he is, without a doubt, making the world a better place.

Edited October 13, 2022 by easypeasy

[Murphy101]

On 10/12/2022 at 7:53 AM, BlsdMama said:

It’s an interesting thought. Moral obligation to society to do the greatest good one is capable of vs. personal fulfillment

I would say instead…

Personal fulfillment is found in doing moral good.

There’s many moral goods to do every day, regardless of job or person. 

On 10/12/2022 at 7:53 AM, BlsdMama said:

I have a friend who parents are both doctors, one was involved in research and one child psychology. Her son is exceptional, intellectually speaking. Her father had hoped he would go into medicine.

meh. Free will sucks and children are not carbon copies of parents.  I have no idea why that keeps being profound news to parents. 🤷‍♀️

On 10/12/2022 at 7:53 AM, BlsdMama said:

The obvious and quick answer is that each person has the freedom to choose where their passion lies. However, while we have made a push towards STEM to open doors and we make it exciting and lucrative, we also *need* the “best and brightest” in STEM careers. It’s part of the reason schools try to identify gifted children - to shape  the outcome. 
 

Discuss. 

The purpose of all STEM is to create arts.

Engineers don’t become engineers to be engineers. They do it because they want to make something. Be it pipe lines for transporting gas or bridges or chemical compounds or flavors.

Doctors don’t become doctors just to be doctors. (Well good ones don’t imo.)  they become doctors to practice the healing arts.  To put bones and organs back together. To make sick people well again. To help others.

The end purpose of all science and mathematics end in some kind of arts.

Bridges and buildings are arts

Cooking is arts

Medicine is an art

Chemistry is an art

Agriculture is an art

We need to stop the nonsense that “arts” is a dirty four letter word for lazy or dumb people who don’t contribute to the good of society. That unspoken attitude is how we end up with a box-shaped cookie cutter world that stagnates instead of grows.

All that aside…. “Where their passion lies” is an entirely different question. One can have a profession that is not actually where their passion lies. In fact, this is the case for the vast majority of people historically and the world over currently. Most of them manage to still lead mostly happy enough lives. 

Edited October 13, 2022 by Murphy101

[SKL]

I dunno, I don't think I felt "pushed" to do the greatest good; it was something I felt from inside.

I feel like telling kids they "should want to" do xyz substitutes obligation for passion, (external vs. internal motivation), watering down their natural desire to do good.

As for STEM, in my observation (where I live anyway), STEM programs are basically all robotics, rockets, and computer programing.  I think it's a turn-off for kids who are interested in, say, life sciences.  When I was a kid, a common "goal" was to find a cure for cancer or AIDS.  Such desires don't seem to be valued as much nowadays.

I have one kid who appears to have a high aptitude for engineering, but it annoys her to hear that.  She says she wants to be a lawyer.  My other kid wouldn't appear to be stemmy, but her aspirations are in the life sciences.  As mom, I feel like it's my job to help equip them to choose what they feel led to do ... not to lead or guilt them into what I think will make the world a better place.

[marbel]

51 minutes ago, SKL said:

When I was a kid, a common "goal" was to find a cure for cancer or AIDS. Such desires don't seem to be valued as much nowadays.

I see that too, in general. most people I come across who want/ed their kids to go into STEM fields wanted it because those were the lucrative fields. People need to make money, for sure. I don't dismiss that. But so many people seem to be motivated only by money.  When I would tell people my kids' college plans (fine arts and history) many were very vocal with their opinion that it was stupid, because they would never make any money. Well, they may not; we knew that going into it.  Neither of them was inclined at all toward math, engineering, coding, etc. So, they studied what they wanted most to learn. 

(Of course I am speaking generally; obviously there are people for whom "making a lot of money" is not the primary goal, and others who truly have a passion for engineering, medicine, etc. But I don't think that's the majority anymore, at least in my observation. YMMV as always.)

[vonfirmath]

I think its very interesting that most people do not mention farming as a role of greatest good. yet without food, no one is available to do any of these other fields. Its the most basic need of all that used to take up the time of a large percentage of the population.

 

[Melissa Louise]

35 minutes ago, vonfirmath said:

I think its very interesting that most people do not mention farming as a role of greatest good. yet without food, no one is available to do any of these other fields. Its the most basic need of all that used to take up the time of a large percentage of the population.

 

This is why I love Wendell Berry - farming + art (poetry/prose). 

[Grace Hopper]

1 hour ago, vonfirmath said:

I think its very interesting that most people do not mention farming as a role of greatest good. yet without food, no one is available to do any of these other fields. Its the most basic need of all that used to take up the time of a large percentage of the population.

 

I believe gardening - the art of maintaining various types of gardens both for sustenance and beauty - should be a part of every child’s education. Soil plots, small pots, hydroponic… I think it’s a vital life skill not unlike swimming. JMO of course but I love when I drive by a school and see both vegetable and pollinator gardens. 

[freesia]

I have a total brown thumb and really dislike gardening. I am so thankful for farmers and dh who grows us veg to help the budget. Those who farm for distribution are doing a greater good. 
 

I can think of few jobs that aren’t ultimately for the good of society. That’s kind of the point of community and economy, right? We are all pitching in for each other. I know that’s not really everyone’s goal/motivation but it’s what is happening. 

[Scarlett]

3 hours ago, Grace Hopper said:

I believe gardening - the art of maintaining various types of gardens both for sustenance and beauty - should be a part of every child’s education. Soil plots, small pots, hydroponic… I think it’s a vital life skill not unlike swimming. JMO of course but I love when I drive by a school and see both vegetable and pollinator gardens. 

This really takes me back.  My mom was a 5 th grade teacher and her students had a garden on school grounds……they had so much fun and learned so much.  My 10 grade class had one but all I remember are the boys.  

[SKL]

Farming used to be a course of study at my high school.  😛  It was called "vo-ag" (vocational agriculture).  It was fairly popular.