Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Philosophy of School Design - Was: Long Beach CA

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Bruce,

I think the answer is Yes! A child's life is of more value than older
people. 

The short explanation is that no parent wants to outlive their children.
It is unnatural and the grief is exponentially greater than that of a
child losing a parent. For this reason, we place a value on our child
exceeding our own.

>From a philosophical point of view, our child represent purity and
idealism - the things in life that we begin to take for granted or that
reduce over time - giving way to realism. We always hope  that our
children will have better, richer lives than our own. In the eyes of a
child, there are no limitations in life. Nothing is beyond the dreams of
a child. 

Last week my granddaughter (who lives with us) had to deal with her best
friend who lost her friend to AIDS. This was the experience with death
that both girls had to contend with. The friend directly of someone she
loved, my granddaughter in the recognition of the grief her friend
experienced. Life was unfair. Unfortunately, my granddaughter realized
the hardships of life earlier from an abusive father (the reason for her
living with us) and the frustration of her mothers indecision to protect
her children first. While my granddaughter may have been somewhat
hardened by life's unfairness, she never dealt with the final unfairness
- death.

Philosophically, I could only comfort my granddaughter and her friend by
confirmation that, although life IS unfair, we have an opportunity to
leave our mark for future generations. We are born into this world with
nothing in hand and we leave the same way. The difference is that what
we do between those two events, regardless of the adversity, is what
adds value to our existence, but this is not value that we necessarily
benefit from. Rather, it is value that we can leave our children to pass
on - our immortality so to speak.

For this reason in my mind, there is no question that a child's life is
more valuable than those who are older. For all the above reasons, there
is an opportunity, a potential that is abounding in that child's mind. 

Sorry, but this did turn out to be a philosophical discussion. While I
answered this without reading the subsequent posts, I believe that if I
am repeating the thoughts of others, it bears repeating - Parents should
never outlive their children because this becomes our greatest tragedy.
Adults are most appalled by the death of a child. Why? Because of the
loss of innocence and the potential that there is a chance of idealism
attaining "the" goal.

Dennis S. Wish, PE  

Subject: RE: Philosophy of School Design - Was: Long Beach CA -- March
10, 1933
From: "Bruce Holcomb" <bholcomb(--nospam--at)brpae.com>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
I agree with you Eric... I get so tired of hearing "do it for the =
children". Are people over 21 less important than under 21? Or is the =
cutoff at 18... or 25? Now, I do understand that we need to be =
protective of people who can't protect themselves (including children) =
but that has little to do with the safety factors used for design of a =
school or office building.



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********