What do you think of this story?

[Banh Mi]

Yeah, great idea. You shouldn't value and cherish something you work hard for. Next time I save up for a car, I should just drive it off a cliff to quit silly obsessions.

[Lucre]

Yeah, great idea. You shouldn't value and cherish something you work hard for. Next time I save up for a car, I should just drive it off a cliff to quit silly obsessions.

Oh well, drug addicts too might go to extreme methods to obtain the drugs they craved for, and 'cherished' it, but concerned people around them will not even reconsider to take away the drugs from them, disregarding the fact that they might have paid a heavy price to obtain these drugs.

The point is, if you're saving up to buy a car and use it for functional purposes and nothing more it's not a problem. But the reason to save hard and get that car and then start to care for the car more than it's worth then its a different issue already,

But far too many people failed to see it, that's why the world is filled with cynics, criticizing anything and everything.

[kidd]

i dont find the story heartwarming actually...but put it this way...
this little girl is too obsessed with a cheap string of pearls. the fact that she could offer anything BUT that pearl, and not to mention isn't she a tat too obsessed with it?

Maybe she was 'obsessed' because this was the first thing she work hard for and save up to buy? That it has sentimental value?

Oh well, drug addicts too might go to extreme methods to obtain the drugs they craved for, and 'cherished' it, but concerned people around them will not even reconsider to take away the drugs from them, disregarding the fact that they might have paid a heavy price to obtain these drugs.

Equating the relationship between the little girl and her pearls and Banh Mi and his car with drug addict and the drug is hyperboling.

So, we shouldn't cherish anything we have?

[remember_Cedric]

Maybe she was 'obsessed' because this was the first thing she work hard for and save up to buy? That it has sentimental value?

Ok, maybe she 'work hard' and hence, she valued that item so much. But sentimental value...? I think the rest of the items in her possession have more sentimental value then that pearl because they come from the people she (supposedly) loved with memories and times she wouldn't be able to get back to. So, she can give up the rest of them instead?

Equating the relationship between the little girl and her pearls and Banh Mi and his car with drug addict and the drug is hyperboling.

It's not that hyperboling.

So, we shouldn't cherish anything we have?

But, that's not the point. The point is - for instance me, I would give up something I value very much to exchange for someone who truly loves me (which can be in form of kinship too). Would you?

[Lucre]

Maybe she was 'obsessed' because this was the first thing she work hard for and save up to buy? That it has sentimental value?


Equating the relationship between the little girl and her pearls and Banh Mi and his car with drug addict and the drug is hyperboling.

So, we shouldn't cherish anything we have?

Cherish the people, seriously, what are things?? Not to say we trample things, surely you cannot see that it's my point to 'not cherish' but rather, to not become overly attached. In fact, becoming overly attached to other people xan be dangerous too, that's where you get stalker behavior.

[kidd]

Ok, maybe she 'work hard' and hence, she valued that item so much. But sentimental value...? I think the rest of the items in her possession have more sentimental value then that pearl because they come from the people she (supposedly) loved with memories and times she wouldn't be able to get back to. So, she can give up the rest of them instead?

Why is the item given by other people should have more sentimental value than the item she worked hard for by herself? Things she work hard for herself wouldn't have sentimental value, wouldn't have memories to it?

So, if she refused to give up an item that is given by say her grandma, you will view her reluctance more favorably because this means she cherish her grandma (a human relationship)?

It's natural for people to cherish the thing they worked hard for especially if it's the first time.

[kidd]

But, that's not the point. The point is - for instance me, I would give up something I value very much to exchange for someone who truly loves me (which can be in form of kinship too). Would you?

This is not even exchanging. Is the dad kidnapped and the kidnapper want her cheap necklace as payment? No. Her dad just go 'if you love me, give me your necklace'.

[remember_Cedric]

So, your priority list is better than hers?

???? You're doing it again - Your strange misinterpretation.

I'm simply taking something I would do for an example only. Please assess others' POV with a broader view. There's no 'mine list is better than hers' made in comparison.

Why is the item given by other people should have more sentimental value than the item she worked hard for by herself? Things she work hard for herself wouldn't have sentimental value, wouldn't have memories to it?

And why is it not?

IMO, something that I worked hard for, I can always get it again since it is within my power to control, whereas something given to me by a person whom is closed to my heart especially under special occasion, I may not have the chance to have it again. Does that make sense to you? Of course, I'm not implying that your wrong or rubbish if you insist that 'anything from yourself' is more worthy to cherish.

Ok, let me make another more realistic example: For instance, I get my bonus - on top of what I gave my mum monthly, I would give her more to spend/keep or treat her to somewhere. My needs would come in second because:-

1) she worked hard for me in the past, and that's the least I could do for her
2) she's getting old and so I may not have more chances to do that for her.

I hope you don't start reading that I'm using money to compensate or anything superficial. I could do anything for her in return of her love and care for me all these while - for now, that is my 'token of appreciation'.

So, if she refused to give up an item that is given by say her grandma, you will view her reluctance more favorably because this means she cherish her grandma (a human relationship)?

Yes, she could be. And provided the story also gives a background or run-through that shows she trully appreciates the relationship with her grandma and she is a person like that.

This is not even exchanging. Is the dad kidnapped and the kidnapper want her cheap necklace as payment? No. Her dad just go 'if you love me, give me your necklace'.

Errr...... 'in exchange' is meant as an expression. Yes, I read that.

[Lucre]

The story itself is kinda dull, but the responses of various people can be very interesting. Says alot about our frame of minds when we looked at the passage.

A self-centered person is twice as likely to see the 'robbing and emotional blackmail aspects because the person immediately identifies the 'you are snatching my thing' emotion. The focus isn't about what does think of the pearl but Me factor rubs in strongly; the emotions of others is secondary.

Also, that person is less likely to question WHY the person wanna snatch your possession. Did he need it more or he's just out to make you miserable. But obviously, one who focused on self will fail to see that because others are less important.

The passage isn't offending, but the frame of mine of am individual affects alot on how one sees things.

[kidd]

The story itself is kinda dull, but the responses of various people can be very interesting. Says alot about our frame of minds when we looked at the passage.

A self-centered person is twice as likely to see the 'robbing and emotional blackmail aspects because the person immediately identifies the 'you are snatching my thing' emotion. The focus isn't about what does think of the pearl but Me factor rubs in strongly; the emotions of others is secondary.

Also, that person is less likely to question WHY the person wanna snatch your possession. Did he need it more or he's just out to make you miserable. But obviously, one who focused on self will fail to see that because others are less important.

The passage isn't offending, but the frame of mine of am individual affects alot on how one sees things.

No, it's not the 'you are snatching my thing' emotion. It's the 'if you love me, you should give this to me' emotion. That is what emotional blackmail is.

It's not the dad taking away the girl's necklace that is the problem. It's the dad giving the message 'If you love me, give me the necklace. If you don't, that means you do not love me enough' night after night until the girl give up the necklace. It's putting a condition on love.

I read the passage until the end and I know that the dad is wanting to teach the girl some lesson. But, I'm still not agreeing with the emotional blackmail method.

Very nice of your to label a whole group of people as self-centered because they see the action of the dad as 'emotional blackmail'. Simplistic labeling. There are many reasons that people can come to this conclusion and not just 'you are snatching my thing' reason.

[Candide]

While we're hyperboling...

This is a classic church brainwashing tactic. Give God (the Church) your unworthy earthly possessions (money and jewelry) and we promise you God will give you back the genuine treasures (nothing, haha suckers!).

How Churches Get Rich 101.

Find me an example in the Bible that is the same as this story. You won't be able to.

On a related note, as a kid, I remember hearing Buddhist monks and nuns try this same BS trick on religious-minded grandmothers.

[kidd]

IMO, something that I worked hard for, I can always get it again since it is within my power to control, whereas something given to me by a person whom is closed to my heart especially under special occasion, I may not have the chance to have it again. Does that make sense to you? Of course, I'm not implying that your wrong or rubbish if you insist that 'anything from yourself' is more worthy to cherish.

Yes, I can see your point there.

No, I will not insist that 'anything from myself' is more worthy to cherish, because I don't thing so.

Ok, let me make another more realistic example: For instance, I get my bonus - on top of what I gave my mum monthly, I would give her more to spend/keep or treat her to somewhere. My needs would come in second because:-

1) she worked hard for me in the past, and that's the least I could do for her
2) she's getting old and so I may not have more chances to do that for her.

I hope you don't start reading that I'm using money to compensate or anything superficial. I could do anything for her in return of her love and care for me all these while - for now, that is my 'token of appreciation'.

No, I would not read that you are using money to compensate. I would also do that for my mom and dad. They are the most important people in my life.

But, I can I also identify with why the girl's necklace is important to her.

[remember_Cedric]

The story itself is kinda dull, but the responses of various people can be very interesting. Says alot about our frame of minds when we looked at the passage.

A self-centered person is twice as likely to see the 'robbing and emotional blackmail aspects because the person immediately identifies the 'you are snatching my thing' emotion. The focus isn't about what does think of the pearl but Me factor rubs in strongly; the emotions of others is secondary.

Also, that person is less likely to question WHY the person wanna snatch your possession. Did he need it more or he's just out to make you miserable. But obviously, one who focused on self will fail to see that because others are less important.

The passage isn't offending, but the frame of mine of am individual affects alot on how one sees things.

The same feel as you I get, throughout this thread -- but you have noted and lay the words out better than I did. It is the responses you get in this thread, that makes the grounds of this thread an interesting one.

No, it's not the 'you are snatching my thing' emotion. It's the 'if you love me, you should give this to me' emotion. That's is what emotional blackmail is.

It's not the dad taking away the girl's necklace is the problem. It's the dad giving the message 'If you love me, give me the necklace. If you don't that means you do not love me enough' night after night until the girl give up the necklace. It's putting a condition on love.

I read the passage until the end and I know that the dad is wanting to teach the girl some lesson. But, I'm still not agreeing with the emotional blackmail method.

Very nice of your to label a whole group of people as self-centered because they see the action of the dad this as 'emotional blackmail'. Simplistic labeling. There are many reasons that people can come to this conclusion and not just 'you are snatching my thing' reason.

That's an over-interpretation. Hence, you see the 'condition' to the Dad's love. And, how did you know the Dad's love worth less than the pearl? Hey, think again, isn't it amazing when you think back - That is exactly the response I see when you (and few others) question the faith.

Thank God, He is giving us this opportunity to reflect back, and first, by leading our friend, kidd, to chance upon such a story. (no sarcasm) Just that, she still hasn't see to it....

If you disagree with the method, how would you intend to do it... to test?

Is that your part of sarcasm? Why the need for that? >> Quoting: "very nice....."

Food for thought: Real Gold need not fear of the heat of fiery red fire - the Chinese proverb "Zhen Jin bu pa hong ru huo". Why does one need to mind if it is a test? In life process, we been through all levels and kind of tests, don't we?


P/s: Don't mind the shabby quoting as I'm running out of time.

[remember_Cedric]

Yes, I can see your point there.

No, I will not insist that 'anything from myself' is more worthy to cherish, because I don't thing so.

Ok.

No, I would not read that you are using money to compensate. I would also do that for my mom and dad. They are the most important people in my life.

I'm glad.

But, I can I also identify with why the girl's necklace is important to her.

I can too, and I know people having the mentality often: "If he/she love me, he/she wouldn't ask that of me". And, people's emotional tower began to collapse when they've been 'asked'.

[remember_Cedric]

While we're hyperboling...

This is a classic church brainwashing tactic. Give God (the Church) your unworthy earthly possessions (money and jewelry) and we promise you God will give you back the genuine treasures (nothing, haha suckers!).

How Churches Get Rich 101.

Find me an example in the Bible that is the same as this story. You won't be able to.

On a related note, as a kid, I remember hearing Buddhist monks and nuns try this same BS trick on religious-minded grandmothers.

I thought you dislike having someone preaching to you. Don't be lazy, go read the Bible yourself And, to answer your previous Qn (OT from this), one of the better Bible story for me, is Prince of Egypt.

[kidd]

And, how did you know the Dad's love worth less than the pearl?

Sigh, that is not even the point.

But, never mind. I don't think you will ever get my point. I'll just stop here instead of repeating myself.

If you disagree with the method, how would you intend to do it... to test?

I don't test people. Like ByTmE said. I don't like it when people test my character. So, I won't test other people's character either.

[kidd]

I'm happy that this thread bring out many different POV. That's my intention. To see how different people see this story.

There are some points being brought u that I didn't see while reading the story like how Lucre saw the child as being too obsessed with the necklace.

[Lucre]

So, if she refused to give up an item that is given by say her grandma, you will view her reluctance more favorably because this means she cherish her grandma (a human relationship)?

It's natural for people to cherish the thing they worked hard for especially if it's the first time.

Just my input,
1) I guess the whole point was that the little girl was obsessed with the pearls (wearing it anywhere and everywhere etc, and failed to see anything beyond that ~ illustrated by her willingness to give away anything BUT the pearls); there's nothing wrong with holding onto things with sentimental value, but greater is it if one can see the thing as just a thing itself, and willing to give it away for a 'greater cause'. Like say, a jewel from a grandma who passed on.. but years down the road when in order to survive, or feed other people, you pawn away the jewel, especially for another person's sake, then greater the virtue it is than the one who clung onto it. Much as there's no 'apparent wrong' in the girl's behavior ~ which is one of the biggest problem with us humans due to our flawed judgement; but greater is she if she sees that there are other things more worthy of her affection than a cheap string of pearls.

2) I'd never a chance to experience that. I guess I gained things too easily. =\

This is not even exchanging. Is the dad kidnapped and the kidnapper want her cheap necklace as payment? No. Her dad just go 'if you love me, give me your necklace'.

Well, the dad saw that the pearls is creating unneccessary obsession to which he wanted her daughter to quit because he loved her, but he didn't want to punish her or took it away by force, so he tries to make her do so willingly. He said, "if you love me, give me" but not, "If you want me to love you, give me". Note the difference. =) If there's any 'guilt-trip' involved, it stemmed from the fact that the little girl hadn't love her dad enough actually. But most of us humans who say "Oh I love you", usually don't love the person as much as we thought we did. =)

Maybe she was 'obsessed' because this was the first thing she work hard for and save up to buy? That it has sentimental value?

In life, how many things we obtained are 'freebies' that dropped from heaven? Isn't that to say, if we are obsessed because we 'work hard and save up', it inevitably means we are very very attached to our material wealth (since unless you have a sugar daddy out there or something similar) chances are you bought most of the things you own yes? Are you going to get super attached to them all since you 'work hard' for it? It's an illustration of how we justify that it's ok yadda yadda, but failed to see that there is more beyond getting obsessed at the 'seen'.

No, it's not the 'you are snatching my thing' emotion. It's the 'if you love me, you should give this to me' emotion. That is what emotional blackmail is.

i know what emotional blackmail is, cos im replying on mobile earlier on, i tried to save up on the text, and just sum it up in two words.

It's not the dad taking away the girl's necklace that is the problem. It's the dad giving the message 'If you love me, give me the necklace. If you don't, that means you do not love me enough' night after night until the girl give up the necklace. It's putting a condition on love.

the second statement of "if you don't" is a defense mechanism that was put up by 'guilt' though the father didn't say it. But it's true that if you didn't love enough, you'll be twice as likely to think of the second statement.

Very nice of your to label a whole group of people as self-centered because they see the action of the dad as 'emotional blackmail'. Simplistic labeling.

Oh thank you...I didn't know I'm nice, but yes, I'm striving to be simplistic. It's strange that people often want to complicate matters. It's a homo-sapien thing I guess?

I'm happy that this thread bring out many different POV. That's my intention. To see how different people see this story.

You're most welcomed. =)

[mi do ri]

If the story is to teach a lesson then it sucks to ever be in that girl's position because you have the mother who told her to earn and save up to buy the necklace by herself because it's more worthwhile only to have the dad trying to have her give it up to prove that she loves him. This makes me not want to have children because there's just too many ways of seeing things.

[Lucre]

Well different people learned different things from the story; it's a story but if one wanted to take that in the negative light and blamed it for ruining ones life due to negative teachings, that's the responsibility of the individual. After all humans are intelligent, too much for their own good. Lol.