The question is, who is the true voice of the 20 Somethings? Sociologists? Psychologists? A state's legislature? If the five milestones for becoming an adult are a linear progression that has been founded on a materialistic culture, then what happens to this structure when a culture becomes more spiritual in nature? Is this truly what New York Times author Marantz calls "the byproduct of cultural and economic forces" or "a deep, durable, and maybe better suited to our (human's) neurological wiring?" Yes to both questions; however, even as Marantz explores many perspectives and insights, does it truly answer the questions posed? Marantz begins to get close to the target when the idea of "people can pursue a more elevated life after their basic needs of food, clothes and shelter have been addressed." I am not in my 20's but I have experienced similar "non-commitment" to jobs and homes, and have also acquired many degrees that gave me skills but necessarily wisdom. So this cultural shift is more like a shift in consciousness. "Emerging Adulthood" may be redefined as an "Emerging Consciousness." Getting to a goal later in life, may mean that the goal has been redefined. Perhaps we are meant to live longer and fuller lives in a spiritual community. If we lived to the age of 200, then the 20's would just opening up to life.
Our world is changing from a materialistic age to a spiritual age. The lack of commitment is exhibited in the 20-Somethings because they are youth, and youth are our future. To an age that was focused on material progress and wealth has a completely different point-of-view, than a generational that is searching for a higher calling, a higher purpose, and who has been presented with the mistakes of their forefathers that pursued material progress at the expense of social injustice, environmental degradation, GMO food and more. Perhap's these 20-somethings are realizing that our life here is about living a life of service, and that would account for the high competition in unpaid internships and being a participant in Teach for America. These "kids" may be bright and are looking for ways to make a big difference, and also may be part of this huge shift on earth. A shaman once told me that children really understand what is important - more than adults. I believe he was referring to emotional intelligence, and Marantz article is showing a shift in consciousness. They are redefining what commitment is in the experience of life. It is the kind of commitment that is about emotional intelligence and service to others; it is not about degrees, status and material things to celebrate one's glory. It is connected to service to the planet and to people, and this ties in to having their basic needs of food, clothing and shelter met as well as being in harmony with the neurological activity of the brain. The lack of commitment is real but the underlying reasons may be that they are part of a generational shift that is detaching from a materialistic world of faux prosperity and GNP into a world that is based on a happiness GNP. Do they want to grow up? Maybe they find security in their ability to be creative and youthful. In a spiritual culture being creative and youthful are valued; however, do these 20 somethings have a discipline to be of service in a high way? And do we have a system in place that nurtures and challenges the emotional intelligence of youth? The author's suggestion of social, civic and financial responsibilities is a great beginning. I have a brother-in-law that was diagnosed with schizophrenia in his mid 20's. When my newly married husband and I moved in to the family house, we have been mentoring him for about 10 years. Before he could not take care of himself and was very co-dependent on the mother. However, through coaching him to offer service at his church, develop a spiritual community outside the home and focus on service to God and community, his mental illness has improved dramatically. Now he has friends, activities and is becoming a mentor in his youth group, as well as acquiring basic accounting skills for a future job.
I never really entertained the possibility of feeling secure in the ability to be creative and youthful, and I think your on to something. I suppose "responsibilities" aren't for everyone, just like kids aren't for everyone obviously there are many couples and singles that don't desire.
ReplyDeleteAnd I really like your question about what our culture nurtures. I do not think our culture could really be said to educate emotional intelligences. At all. I think school systems are obsessed with grades, despite them really only indicating that they are good at tests and commitments. Theres a book a read last year called Social Animals by David Brooks and it speaks mostly of the systems focus on non-social aspects of human nature despite so many other factors that define being successful and advancing in life.
It was a good analysis I think, he has a video on youtube/ TED-ED summarizing his ideas in it.