Different Perceptions of the Responsibility of Children to Their Parents

Background

A family is a place where a special bond is established between relatives. An ideal relationship model has no room for anger, aggression, or other negative feelings. They are replaced by care, sincerity, devotion, and love. One of the most controversial gestures of wholesome family relationships is the presumption that children held some responsibilities to their parents. There are many philosophies and ideas on this topic, from the most radical to the more sensual and flexible. Some sociologists and philosophers consider responsibility to parents as a form of obligatory social duty. Others rely on emotional attachment and the individual details of upbringing. All opinions are critical and fully applicable to the current inclusive model of society. This work brings more precise attention to the ideas of Jane English and Lin Yutan.

Emphasis on Emotions in Jane Englishs Ideas

Jane English views family relationships more from an emotional and moral side. She considers the childs responsibility to the parents to be something that cannot be owned. This word is applicable but not appropriate in the context of an intimate relationship. Any action should come from the heart and have solely genuine intentions. Otherwise, people may mistakenly perceive responsibility to loved ones as a way of rational compensation for the efforts and sacrifices expended by the parents. Jane English sees any bond between relatives or friends as a manifestation of love and friendship (English, 1992). The actions of children and parents can be uneven and solely depend on the capabilities of both parties. However, they are equally valuable and should not be perceived in the form of duty since this concept does not reveal the main features of any intimate relationship: sincerity and disinterested good intentions.

Lin Yutangs Opposite View of Family Responsibility as a Duty

Lin Yutang has a fundamentally different view of family relationships. Many statements reflect the unique culture of China, where the younger generation was always brought up in absolute respect for their older relatives. Lin Yutang says that debt to friends can be numbered and calculated, but debt to parents is endless and indeed fundamental. This system is not perceived as something dubious or obsolete, even within the current global pattern of striving for ultimate independence. Eastern philosophy demands a thoroughly new level of reverence for children before their parents. Its beliefs do not see the difference between the concepts of sincere responsibility and debt regarding family relationships. Children undoubtedly owe their parents a peaceful, happy old age. This idea is indisputable in the minds of young Chinese people and circulates through time as an essential social concept (Lin Yutang, 1947). In this case, a sense of duty and responsibility is highlighted more than personal attachments and emotions.

Application of Moral Theories to Different Perceptions of Responsibility

Various philosophies and ideas can be viewed through the critical lenses of distinctive moral theories. Jane Englishs views represent strong virtue-based grounds, as they mainly cover the topic of emotional attachment and sensual fulfillment of relationships. Lin Yutangs philosophy is quite close to the Kantian components. It gives rise to a transparent illustration of duty and a sense of responsibility to the family and society in the form of a social construct. This model reveals the dominant position of not the emotional side but the rational one. Utilitarian philosophy can be applied to both of the different views presented above. The ultimate goal of a fair person in any culture is to bring nothing but happiness to their parents. It can be named in different words and explained through the prism of numerous theories, but the sincere love of the parents should always return.