To answer questions about
The Courage to Be Disliked: The Japanese Phenomenon That Shows You How to Change Your Life and Achieve Real Happiness,
please sign up.
Rebecca
I understood this to mean that he took care of his father because of who he is, not because of what was expected of him or to win his father's approval. He took care of his father because his father didn't have the capacity to take care of himself at that level anymore. His was a task of love. Whether or not his father thanked him was irrelevant, but it was about focusing on his own task of love. IF his father was to reject his care, then it would be his task to withdraw from this task as to not intervene with his father's chosen path of his own life.
Matthew John
Good question! :)
Based on what I understood, the task of taking care of his father was indeed identified as a life task by the philosopher. However, it was not to gain a sense of status / recognition or because of any persuasion by external factors (living to satisfy others' lives). The presence of his father with him, by virtue of his father's being (and not tasks or contributions) was important to the philosopher and hence he wanted to invest effort into building that interpersonal relationship with his father and contribute by helping him in his old age. The whole experience also gives the philosopher a feeling of being 'useful to the community'. Hope this perspective helps!
Based on what I understood, the task of taking care of his father was indeed identified as a life task by the philosopher. However, it was not to gain a sense of status / recognition or because of any persuasion by external factors (living to satisfy others' lives). The presence of his father with him, by virtue of his father's being (and not tasks or contributions) was important to the philosopher and hence he wanted to invest effort into building that interpersonal relationship with his father and contribute by helping him in his old age. The whole experience also gives the philosopher a feeling of being 'useful to the community'. Hope this perspective helps!
Joseph
Taken to an extreme if everyone went along with what I think your question is asking , then no one would do anything for anyone else. And the world would likely be in such disarray with so much selfishness. I understand where your question is coming from but I don't think that's what separation of tasks means, though i acknowledge it's not an easy concept to grasp. The author and by extension Adler, wrote a lot about the larger community and making a contribution to others. If we view others as comrades then we will want to help others when we can. That he helped his father who he wasn't close to for much of his life was a choice he made out of his volition.
Penney
Because he was also living by the ‘northern star’ he also discussed which was ‘contributing to others’ and community. I think when he talks about separation of tasks it is a caution against taking on tasks in a way that is dominating that other person or preventing them from taking on their life tasks themselves. If his father was in a palliative state he genuinely wasn’t able to perform basic self-care tasks and his way of contributing to others would be via the ways of being (not action).
yumi
no it's his task to choose whether to take care of his father, it's not his task to decide how his father reacts to that
Josh Clement
you might be taking the term 'task' a little too literally. His fathers health is more or less out of his control. So worrying and becoming consumed by fear is not appropriate. But you can still love your dad, and help where you can. It's more a seperation of thoughts that aren't entirely useful. Helping with something like this ultimately should have no other motive aside from compassion and love.
Florian
Let me try to answer this in a bit roundabout way: When I met my ex-wife, I was already doing well as a freelancer and she was in her master's year.
So I felt obliged to share my knowledge and experience with her. Later, she freelanced herself but needed a lot of support, for example, she spent more time in restaurants than dealing with the necessary paperwork.
Our marriage turned out very lousy for me because I had the feeling that I needed to protect her from herself as I had set her on the path to being a freelancer and it is my fault for doing so before she was ready.
With the "separation of tasks" in mind, consider: I felt it was the right thing to share my knowledge with her, and later I felt responsible for what I felt I did. Would I have acted differently, would both of us have had a better time together, if I had not followed up on my "feeling" what should be the right thing?
- If she wanted to freelance, she could have asked me.
- If she is trying and failing, it´s not my task to keep her afloat.
The whole point behind the "separation of tasks" is not to promote egoism, but to move away from feeling pressured into doing something (and being unhappy), to things being a choice.
My mother is old, frail, and nearly blind by now. My dad was an alcoholic and both were stuck in your typical co-dependent relationship that left not much room for anything else. The aforementioned ex-wife came from a similar background, but now look at the differences:
She always struggled to be "seen" and "recognized" by her mum, therefore she spend a huge amount of time and money on taking care of her mum when her dementia started to be a serious problem. She cursed and complained, but at the same time sunk a lot of time in research and care, being stressed and unhappy.
For me, it was a choice to support and care for my mum. We sat down and talked about what is needed, what she can accept, and what I can do for her within my limits.
So I felt obliged to share my knowledge and experience with her. Later, she freelanced herself but needed a lot of support, for example, she spent more time in restaurants than dealing with the necessary paperwork.
Our marriage turned out very lousy for me because I had the feeling that I needed to protect her from herself as I had set her on the path to being a freelancer and it is my fault for doing so before she was ready.
With the "separation of tasks" in mind, consider: I felt it was the right thing to share my knowledge with her, and later I felt responsible for what I felt I did. Would I have acted differently, would both of us have had a better time together, if I had not followed up on my "feeling" what should be the right thing?
- If she wanted to freelance, she could have asked me.
- If she is trying and failing, it´s not my task to keep her afloat.
The whole point behind the "separation of tasks" is not to promote egoism, but to move away from feeling pressured into doing something (and being unhappy), to things being a choice.
My mother is old, frail, and nearly blind by now. My dad was an alcoholic and both were stuck in your typical co-dependent relationship that left not much room for anything else. The aforementioned ex-wife came from a similar background, but now look at the differences:
She always struggled to be "seen" and "recognized" by her mum, therefore she spend a huge amount of time and money on taking care of her mum when her dementia started to be a serious problem. She cursed and complained, but at the same time sunk a lot of time in research and care, being stressed and unhappy.
For me, it was a choice to support and care for my mum. We sat down and talked about what is needed, what she can accept, and what I can do for her within my limits.
Aenea Jones
I understood it like this:
It is not your task what other people think about you, so don't concern yourself with it. Only concern yourself with the things that are your task. Focus on your own behaviour and make the first step in treating other people well, even though you won't always get it back, find peace in having done your task of being good.
So basically, the philosopher took care of his father because he found joy in being of use to someone.
It is not your task what other people think about you, so don't concern yourself with it. Only concern yourself with the things that are your task. Focus on your own behaviour and make the first step in treating other people well, even though you won't always get it back, find peace in having done your task of being good.
So basically, the philosopher took care of his father because he found joy in being of use to someone.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more