Singapore Expats Forum

Filial Piety Revisited

Discuss about the latest news & interesting topics, real life experience or other out of topic discussions with locals & expatriates in Singapore.

User avatar
Mary Hatch Bailey
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Location: Bedford Falls

Postby Mary Hatch Bailey » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 6:35 am

I'm afraid you've missed k1w1's point completely tyianchang :roll:

I think perhaps it is this disassociation that got you into hot water in the first place.

If you could just extend your thought processes to accommodate other perspectives (your opening, original post stating that filial piety was unknown in the West) and simple cause and effect (the article k1w1 posted is directly related tot he concept of Chinese filial piety) you might piss less people off. Just a thought.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 6:45 am

tyianchang wrote:The link you provided says, "Chinese parents asked for extra..." which is not the same as your interpretation of ," tThe arrogance of assuming only Chinese kids support their parents..."

So why do you think the Chinese government are conveying Chinese parents demands for more compensation than other parents? On what basis, oh hang on..

'Lei said there was a notable difference between Chinese families and other foreign families which needed to be taken into consideration when providing compensation to families who lost their only child.

"You can expect how lonely, how desperate they are ... not only from losing loved ones, but losing almost entirely the major source of economic assistance after retirement," he told Radio New Zealand
.'

The loss of lives in such natural disasters must be really tragic for any parents. It shocking that such deep seated grudges can be whipped up with the number of very harsh words used.

Whipped up by the Chinese themselves, leaving everyone else bewildered (and frankly disgusted)


I should think that the NZ govt's compensation or the students' private life insurances have nothing to do with the parents' retirement plans.

Well you might have thought so. But that appears not to be the case. That is the whole point being made.

My OP focuses primarily on FP as a family matter?

Filial Piety, pah more like dressing up 'Filial-Pension' in some noble tradition.


TyiangChang: from the OP...
"But FP is unheard of in the West where the individual reigns supreme, even within the family structure. With the current crisis on pensions, annuities and other financial shortfalls faced by the retireds, FP might be a jolly good idea. I mean, imagine getting such returns from your children - all of which goes without saying. A good culture to continue?"

Yep they really do think they're different!

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 35180
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 6:59 am

Nothing like reality to lay a big turd on all the original arguments is there. Crude, but there you go.

tyianchang
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue, 25 Jan 2011
Location: uk

Postby tyianchang » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:03 am

Mary Hatch Bailey wrote:I'm afraid you've missed k1w1's point completely tyianchang :roll:

I think perhaps it is this disassociation that got you into hot water in the first place.

If you could just extend your thought processes to accommodate other perspectives (your opening, original post stating that filial piety was unknown in the West) and simple cause and effect (the article k1w1 posted is directly related tot he concept of Chinese filial piety) you might piss less people off. Just a thought.


Some of you like to take umbrage for what is truly expressed. FP is not a familiar term in the West today. There might be some mention about it , in RE ( in the school curriculum ) as late as the 80s when some schools include teachings of Confucius and the Dao De Ching as Chinese philosophy, but that has stopped. As I said, FP is also not a term that crops up in Chinese writings or speeches; but for me to see it being practiced in some of my family was a nice surprise for me. So tough if you want to keep on haggling over the facts presented.
PS This was a respone to a different post which mysteriousy vanished.
Last edited by tyianchang on Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
tyianchang

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:20 am

tyianchang wrote:
Mary Hatch Bailey wrote:I'm afraid you've missed k1w1's point completely tyianchang :roll:

I think perhaps it is this disassociation that got you into hot water in the first place.

If you could just extend your thought processes to accommodate other perspectives (your opening, original post stating that filial piety was unknown in the West) and simple cause and effect (the article k1w1 posted is directly related tot he concept of Chinese filial piety) you might piss less people off. Just a thought.


Some of you like to take umbrage for what is truly expressed. FP is not a familiar term in the West today. There might be some mention about it , in RE ( in the school curriculum ) as late as the 80s when some schools include teachings of Confucius and the Dao De Ching as Chinese philosophy, but that has stopped. As I said, FP is also not a term that crops up in Chinese writings or speeches; but for me to see it being practiced in some of my family was a nice surprise for me. So tough if you want to keep on haggling over the facts presented.
Oh yes, there's a revealing article in the press about the characteristic behaviour of trolls in the press today. Not surprising you're still around with your RUDENESS and BIAS. Tant Pis. I don't have the ;east respect for you now and I take back all my words abouyt you. So bcak off and talk to others.


Now you're saying Filial Piety is not a familiar term. Your original point suggested that it is not a familiar concept. 100% difference.


Image


p.s. Suggest that you're less aggressive towards people, you might pick up enemies along the way (ancient Confucian expression)

User avatar
Mad Scientist
Director
Director
Posts: 3459
Joined: Thu, 03 Dec 2009
Location: TIMBUKTU

Postby Mad Scientist » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:30 am

sundaymorningstaple wrote:Nothing like reality to lay a big turd on all the original arguments is there. Crude, but there you go.


@SMS, pardon me for asking. As I understand your wife is an Indian. You have said it before that you are the patriach of the family. Does FP being inculcated in Indian Family? I am just curious. I do not mean to disrespect anyone here.
The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible.Yahoo !!!

tyianchang
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue, 25 Jan 2011
Location: uk

Postby tyianchang » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:31 am

Mary Hatch Bailey wrote:I'm afraid you've missed k1w1's point completely tyianchang :roll:

I think perhaps it is this disassociation that got you into hot water in the first place.

If you could just extend your thought processes to accommodate other perspectives (your opening, original post stating that filial piety was unknown in the West) and simple cause and effect (the article k1w1 posted is directly related tot he concept of Chinese filial piety) you might piss less people off. Just a thought.


The fact is FP as presented in the op is purely contained within the Chinese families I met. All the discussions after the op pointed out the different attitudes people have towards it. Demanding, as you put it, 'individual thought processes to accommodate other perspectives ' sounds clever with words but is hardly what discussions about. Similarly, only politicians are good at speaking for 'the people.' Tant pis.
tyianchang

User avatar
Mary Hatch Bailey
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Location: Bedford Falls

Postby Mary Hatch Bailey » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:40 am

tyianchang wrote:Some of you like to take umbrage for what is truly expressed.


Yes, we 'choose' to (new age, namby-pamby double speak if you ask me) take umbrage because some posters post mean-spirited, offensive sentiments.

tyianchang wrote:FP is not a familiar term in the West today.


Filial piety is a very familiar term in the West today.

tyianchang wrote:There might be some mention about it , in RE ( in the school curriculum ) as late as the 80s when some schools include teachings of Confucius and the Dao De Ching as Chinese philosophy, but that has stopped. As I said, FP is also not a term that crops up in Chinese writings or speeches; but for me to see it being practiced in some of my family was a nice surprise for me. So tough if you want to keep on haggling over the facts presented.


It is practiced, for a variety of motivational factors, by children all over the world. I am not haggling over facts, merely explaining why you seem to stumble into every pitfall.

tyianchang wrote:Oh yes, there's a revealing article in the press about the characteristic behaviour of trolls in the press today.


What article are you referring to? The one k1w1 posted (since that was our topic)? Another? Then why not refer to it by name instead of 'a revealing article in the press about the characteristic behaviour of trolls in the press today.' Your posts are very confusing since you talk around the issue and never directly. What trolls are you talking about? Do you realize that in this scenario, that you'd be considered a troll?

tyianchang wrote:Not surprising you're still around with your RUDENESS and BIAS.


I have not been rude, simply direct and everyone has a bias, that's human nature. And with thousands of posts to my credit, my presence here should not be surprising.

tyianchang wrote:Tant Pis. I don't have the ;east respect for you now and I take back all my words abouyt you. So bcak off and talk to others.


You're too much Annie! A little self-awareness goes a long way. I'd ask yourself some tough questions about why and how you've found yourself backed into your corner and you just may learn something.

User avatar
Mary Hatch Bailey
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Location: Bedford Falls

Postby Mary Hatch Bailey » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:45 am

tyianchang wrote:
Mary Hatch Bailey wrote:I'm afraid you've missed k1w1's point completely tyianchang :roll:

I think perhaps it is this disassociation that got you into hot water in the first place.

If you could just extend your thought processes to accommodate other perspectives (your opening, original post stating that filial piety was unknown in the West) and simple cause and effect (the article k1w1 posted is directly related tot he concept of Chinese filial piety) you might piss less people off. Just a thought.


The fact is FP as presented in the op is purely contained within the Chinese families I met. All the discussions after the op pointed out the different attitudes people have towards it. Demanding, as you put it, 'individual thought processes to accommodate other perspectives ' sounds clever with words but is hardly what discussions about. Similarly, only politicians are good at speaking for 'the people.' Tant pis.


You completely misinterpreted and then re-wrote what I said. This is the crux of the issue.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:52 am

It is an interesting point that I have been pondering for a while, regarding trolling.

An amateur troll turns up, rabble rouses, is easy to spot and gets canned pretty quickly.

A good troll, turns up, rocks the boat without undue attention brought to themselves, and then watches others fight out their battle.

The ultimate trolls, create civil war amongst the majority of users, and yet still come out of it wearing the 'main-victim-here' badge themselves.

Hmmm.

tyianchang
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue, 25 Jan 2011
Location: uk

Postby tyianchang » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 7:54 am

ksl wrote:
ev-disinfection wrote:
sundaymorningstaple wrote:So you are saying the Chinese government also has this warped sense of FP as well!!! :o :roll:


Nope, IMHO they are just trying to act superpowerish and ask.... nothing of FP there.
Perhaps 1 of them are their gang member..... hmmmm.


Actually it's the Chinese saying that we are not accepting liability just because we made the one child law, that's how I see it. Of course the parents are devastated and demanding restitution by the Chinese government. I see it as a normal demand from any parent to blame the Chinese government.

It is typical of any government not to accept liability, and families will have difficulty claiming anything at all individually, unless they are covered for acts of nature.

The case depends on who's responsible for sending the individual student to NZ. Claims for death insurance lie in the hands of those sending the particular student to that particular country where natural disaster struck. If the pranets sent their children to study in NZ privately, then the onus of making the claim falls on them.

I know that soldiers going into combat will also have difficulty getting insurance cover, for a reasonable fee and the payout by MOD is insulting, to say the least, in fact the enemy are more likely to benefit through claims, sounds ridiculous but it's true.

So either way one wants to look at the situation New Zealand is right in paying out equally, and it's quite normal for a country to lean on another Country for more, if you don't ask you don't get! It is mainland China that should compensate of course, as they made the one child law!


Except that the natural disaster, and thus the death took place in NZ, This is an inescapable accountability. It also lies with the Chinese govt to add to the compensation as they decreed the 1 child policy, agreed.
But as natural disasters are outside any one nation's control, it might be a good idea to have a collective funding or special insurances to deal with them.
In either case, such cases go beyond the realm of FP in the same way as 'retirement plans' is not about FP which money can't buy.
tyianchang

User avatar
k1w1
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon, 30 May 2005

Postby k1w1 » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 8:02 am

tyianchang wrote:The link you provided says, "Chinese parents asked for extra..." which is not the same as your interpretation of ," The arrogance of assuming only Chinese kids support their parents..."


:???:

Where did I say it was the same?

tyianchang wrote:The loss of lives in such natural disasters must be really tragic for any parents. It shocking that such deep seated grudges can be whipped up with the number of very harsh words used.


It is tragic indeed. It is tragic for the many Filipina families who lost their children in the medical centre in the same building as the language school. (Some of these children were supporting their families too.) It is tragic for the kiwi mums who lost their only children. It is tragic for the Japanese parents who are still waiting for their sons/daughters bodies to be dug from the rubble that was the same language school as the Chinese kids. The person's nationality or culture is not what makes this a loss! It is someone's child and it is therefore always a tragedy. The Chinese parents have crossed a line by openly claiming they think they lost more than everyone else.

tyianchang wrote:
I should think that the NZ govt's compensation or the students' private life insurances have nothing to do with the parents' retirement plans.
My OP focuses primarily on FP as a family matter?
To be perfectly honest, when I posted the op, I was not aware that it is still such an important facet of Chinese lives in mainland China, or that the MOE in SG is flagging up what I thought is now history.
In whatever way you look at it, you're talking about parental claims for the loss of their children's lives which is entirely different from what I said of children practising FP within some family groups.


But they are claiming they should have had more compensation *because* due to filial peity they lost more MONEY than other parents... Can you really not see just how descpicable that is?
Last edited by k1w1 on Tue, 15 Mar 2011 8:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 8:09 am

k1w1 wrote:
tyianchang wrote:The link you provided says, "Chinese parents asked for extra..." which is not the same as your interpretation of ," The arrogance of assuming only Chinese kids support their parents..."


:???:

Where did I say it was the same?

tyianchang wrote:The loss of lives in such natural disasters must be really tragic for any parents. It shocking that such deep seated grudges can be whipped up with the number of very harsh words used.


It is tragic indeed. It is tragic for the many Filipina families who lost their children in the medical centre in the same building as the language school. (Some of these children were supporting their families too.) It is tragic for the kiwi mums who lost their only children. It is tragic for the Japanese parents who are still awaiting their sons/daughters bodies to be dug from the rubble that was the same language school as the Chinese kids. The person's nationality or culture is not what makes this a loss! It is someone's child and it is therefore always a tragedy. The Chinese parents have crossed a line by openly claiming they think they lost more than everyone else.

tyianchang wrote:
I should think that the NZ govt's compensation or the students' private life insurances have nothing to do with the parents' retirement plans.
My OP focuses primarily on FP as a family matter?
To be perfectly honest, when I posted the op, I was not aware that it is still such an important facet of Chinese lives in mainland China, or that the MOE in SG is flagging up what I thought is now history.
In whatever way you look at it, you're talking about parental claims for the loss of their children's lives which is entirely different from what I said of children practising FP within some family groups.


But they are claiming they should have had more compensation *because* due to filial peity they lost more MONEY than other parents... Can you really not see just how descpicable that is?


No she can't. Rather she sees it as a personal attack.


(Sorry to cut to the quick, but no point dicking about eh?)

User avatar
k1w1
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon, 30 May 2005

Postby k1w1 » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 8:12 am

:lol:

User avatar
x9200
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9320
Joined: Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Location: Singapore

Postby x9200 » Tue, 15 Mar 2011 8:17 am

ev-disinfection wrote:
x9200 wrote:Sorry EV, I do not know and don't want to know, but for sure I would not think about financial compensation and retirements plans.


Well, to that i say - To each his own, you never know when your time is gonna be up, all we can do is to be prepared.
Be safe guys... Word to your mother.

I feel emotional weight of the situation and surely agree nobody can tell how one would behave but then there are some limits in the behaviour and this is a natural disaster, not a revenge seeking case and this is not like a one parent but a group of them. What do you think about their motives?


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
  • The tips thing, revisited
    by Brah » Sat, 17 May 2014 10:59 pm » in Staying, Living in Singapore
    47
    7774
    by zzm9980 View the latest post
    Sun, 08 Jun 2014 3:24 am

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest