What a way of seeing things. The well-being of our child is of paramount importance to both my wife and myself. I really can't imagine being disappointed at learning that they had survived a horrible war. I can imagine a lot of things that I have never experienced (like being under artillery fire, or seeing friends killed) things way beyond my actual experience, and I know I would be terrified, horrified, saddened and traumatized by these things, but I cannot imagine being disappointed that my child didn't die in a war my country lost. On the contrary, it would be one of the sole positive things to cling to in such a situation. I'm glad the grandfather came around.
A Japanese youtuber (channel is Watch Shogo) who lived in America during his teens and is fluent in English with exposure to both cultures, currently living in Kyoto and focused on preserving traditional Japanese culture put it this way, that because Japan is an island nation which experiences many natural disasters (hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes, and of course tsunamis) the importance of being group-minded is more prominent than in mainland (or anywhere not as naturally dangerous) societies. In emergency situations if everyone put themselves first you're likely to have a worse outcome than a combined and concerted effort. Naturally the towns and people that tended toward the group-first mentality survived disasters better, and so became the dominant social group. This leads to the wider society needing to detect and ostracize those who aren't group-minded, so as to keep the group from being vulnerable to me-first mentality in the event of disaster. This leads to all kinds of knock-on effects we can see through the change of what makes a person "good". A good person does not make changes that disrupt the current order because it could bring chaos. They do not differ from the group simply because they think differently, they understand many minds are better than one. Basically, a "good" person understands their ineptitude and the groups supreme position over the self because the division of self from group is "evil" itself. To think one is special, and above the group must entail that the group is lesser than them, and if they are lesser, they deserve less. Its dehumanizing to all others to fancy oneself a better human, in any way. If you are indeed better in some way it comes from without, not from within. What right then, did this soldier have to not die a death that many of his comrades suffered for the group, or POWs who suffered even worse shame that would have traded places with him; what right did he have to put himself above all that? So after all in the avoidance of dehumanization of others, the group-first mentality dehumanizes the self. The self is evil because it was weak and afraid and therefore could not put the group first. Military groups in general employ this morality, the unit is superior to the individual. Japanese civilian society mirrored its military society during the war, so the same rules applied even when you were with friends and family. Western civilian society is individualistic in stark contrast (you should only do what YOU want to do) and I think its part of why so many veterans have a hard time adapting back, and why not everyone is mentally prepared to serve. Bootcamp is Bushido. From this perspective (that I'm not advocating for) you putting your child above everything is villainous behavior, for what would you do if 2 people kidnapped them and you couldn't get outside help? Could you snuff out 2 lives for 1? That's capital W wrong. This seems absurd but when you're a Diamyo and your son gets kidnapped its a serious consideration to make, and Diamyos that chose their son over their men's lives wouldn't be Diamyos for very long. A samurai that chose to run off and go get back some kidnapped loved one wouldn't be alive for very long. If the whole cultural system is working well though, the men will clamor to save the Diamyo's son simply because he is who is, and love towards him is "good". Even today, if a captain of squad is captured, you'd be hard-pressed to find a member of his unit unwilling to try to rescue him, especially if he feels the rest of the group wants to. This is by design. Hope you can see that the grandfather "coming around" wasn't a monster returning to decency, it was the zeitgeist around him that changed (occupation and restructuring of Japan) and allowed his "selfish" feelings of love for his son shine through, overcoming the shame he was taught. Shame may overcome his and all our "selfish" feelings again, should the wind blow the right way.
What a way of seeing things. The well-being of our child is of paramount importance to both my wife and myself. I really can't imagine being disappointed at learning that they had survived a horrible war. I can imagine a lot of things that I have never experienced (like being under artillery fire, or seeing friends killed) things way beyond my actual experience, and I know I would be terrified, horrified, saddened and traumatized by these things, but I cannot imagine being disappointed that my child didn't die in a war my country lost.
On the contrary, it would be one of the sole positive things to cling to in such a situation. I'm glad the grandfather came around.
The chrysanthemum and the sword - the two sides of Japan. "Being young" - he could've added "being American." You're a true hero sir!
Hero
A Japanese youtuber (channel is Watch Shogo) who lived in America during his teens and is fluent in English with exposure to both cultures, currently living in Kyoto and focused on preserving traditional Japanese culture put it this way, that because Japan is an island nation which experiences many natural disasters (hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes, and of course tsunamis) the importance of being group-minded is more prominent than in mainland (or anywhere not as naturally dangerous) societies. In emergency situations if everyone put themselves first you're likely to have a worse outcome than a combined and concerted effort. Naturally the towns and people that tended toward the group-first mentality survived disasters better, and so became the dominant social group. This leads to the wider society needing to detect and ostracize those who aren't group-minded, so as to keep the group from being vulnerable to me-first mentality in the event of disaster.
This leads to all kinds of knock-on effects we can see through the change of what makes a person "good". A good person does not make changes that disrupt the current order because it could bring chaos. They do not differ from the group simply because they think differently, they understand many minds are better than one. Basically, a "good" person understands their ineptitude and the groups supreme position over the self because the division of self from group is "evil" itself. To think one is special, and above the group must entail that the group is lesser than them, and if they are lesser, they deserve less. Its dehumanizing to all others to fancy oneself a better human, in any way. If you are indeed better in some way it comes from without, not from within.
What right then, did this soldier have to not die a death that many of his comrades suffered for the group, or POWs who suffered even worse shame that would have traded places with him; what right did he have to put himself above all that? So after all in the avoidance of dehumanization of others, the group-first mentality dehumanizes the self. The self is evil because it was weak and afraid and therefore could not put the group first. Military groups in general employ this morality, the unit is superior to the individual. Japanese civilian society mirrored its military society during the war, so the same rules applied even when you were with friends and family. Western civilian society is individualistic in stark contrast (you should only do what YOU want to do) and I think its part of why so many veterans have a hard time adapting back, and why not everyone is mentally prepared to serve. Bootcamp is Bushido.
From this perspective (that I'm not advocating for) you putting your child above everything is villainous behavior, for what would you do if 2 people kidnapped them and you couldn't get outside help? Could you snuff out 2 lives for 1? That's capital W wrong. This seems absurd but when you're a Diamyo and your son gets kidnapped its a serious consideration to make, and Diamyos that chose their son over their men's lives wouldn't be Diamyos for very long. A samurai that chose to run off and go get back some kidnapped loved one wouldn't be alive for very long. If the whole cultural system is working well though, the men will clamor to save the Diamyo's son simply because he is who is, and love towards him is "good". Even today, if a captain of squad is captured, you'd be hard-pressed to find a member of his unit unwilling to try to rescue him, especially if he feels the rest of the group wants to. This is by design.
Hope you can see that the grandfather "coming around" wasn't a monster returning to decency, it was the zeitgeist around him that changed (occupation and restructuring of Japan) and allowed his "selfish" feelings of love for his son shine through, overcoming the shame he was taught. Shame may overcome his and all our "selfish" feelings again, should the wind blow the right way.