In response to my history of Western Civilization class. We discussed the fact that before the Industrial Revolution, the social pressure to "rise" did not exist. People were content to be born, live, and die occupying the same social "niche" as their parents, and expected their children to do the same. The key statemend here is that people were content. Imagine (as my teacher explain this) that all the pressure to get into a good school, earn a good job, all that good stuff, was gone. Imagine that you AND your parents would be content to let you just be you. Not only do you have a profesion already chosen for you, but you are happy to join that profession because it is and has always been your entire life. To today's society, this idea sounds oppressive, almost evil. Yet, how truly *happy* is our society?

I tend to associate everything that I learn to everything else that I've ever come in contact with. The all-knowing psychologists call this "learning my association." Whatever it is, this process usually churns out your average, run-of-the-mill Monday misery, some society whatnot or personal relation stories. However - and I can almost hear you say that this is often the case - in "processing" Friday's lesson, I'm completely lost. I did have a revelation in the shower, though (the best kind!), so what follows is what I would have written in a journal if I kept one.
It literally has never once occurred to me to just be content. I continually seek, if not improvement, at least change of some kind. In my rush to become a responsible adult, I had decided that wisdom comes from experience: a constant state of flux allows me to experience different situations. Taken that way, I think change makes sense. I'm not yet ready to "settle down," but if I'm always looking for something else, I can never learn to appreciate what I have.
I've always prided myself on being able to recognize the potential of any person (including myself), country, program… anything. I thought that was an optimistic way of thinking. Yet here I run into the same problem as before, not being able to appreciate the present in looking too far into the future. You see, by concentrating on potential, you only find faults in the present, rather than accepting the "status quo."
I recognize my own faults and attempt to correct them. I try to be the best person possible. In fact, my ultimate goal can best be described as "becoming perfect." Personally, I find nothing wrong with this goal. (and don't go pen-happy with me here because I'm not finished! :o) ß that's a smile). Becoming perfect sets me in a constant state of personal growth and (hopefully) improvement. So you can imagine my goal in life is not only to be the best piano player possible, but also the best writer, best student, most well read, best EVERYTHING. Therefore, even if I don't reach perfection, I'll at least be somewhat closer.
Now (and this was my shower revelation) I've decided to become the best ME possible. Personal improvement, yes, but not material, if you follow me. I've decided that it's okay if I'm not the best everything, but as long as I can be the best me, as in more patient and responsible (and yada-yada-yada), that makes more sense. Because God has created me to be the daughter of my parents, to fill this particular niche in the world, I don't need to try to fill someone else's - like become a better piano player than Chelsea, or sing like my friend Whitney Emmons.
~*~
Now, on an entirely different line of thought, I considered my earlier question from class: Does this system work because people are naturally unequal? I've decided that inequality is not the reason, and I'll use you as an example to explain. You, being a doctor (of history? Of what, pray tell?), are obviously a very intelligent man. You could be teaching at an extremely prestigious school, earning plenty more money and gaining more recognition for less effort. Yet you occupy a "lesser" social niche, and settle for less money and prestige for it. BUT, are you less intelligent, a lesser person than the man who does work at Harvard? No. You are his equal in every way except social status. Now, my mother, for example, (or even myself) is just as clearly less intelligent than you. Yet this doesn't make her your inferior, because I'm just as positive that you could not massage like her, or play tennis, or just be a simple housewife. Similarly, the peasants are not inferior to the dukes in any respect except social standing. They work just as hard and take their lives just as seriously. Everyone depends on the work of a peasant for food and custom just as everyone depends on a duke for protection and administration. Neither is more or less vital, and therefore all are equal. The system worked because people were content being the best Joe-blow they could. Instead of trying to move ahead, constantly improve, they are content to fill their niche as best as possible. All their attention was on their work, as opposed to today when our attention is divided. My new goal is to focus my attention on self-improvement and to "do my duty." If I just practice piano, and do my work (so on and so forth) without constantly trying to improve, I can devote all my attention to the task at hand. Meanwhile, the area I should be concerned with is my own personality.