Ah, it comes off sounding that way, Kriston. But really, it's that I feel *exceedingly* unsatisfied with what I have done with what I was "gifted" -- although by most standards it looks as though I've done just fine for myself. In my own mind, I haven't -- because I feel like I could have been so much *more.* And not just gone farther in school or done something far more productive with my brains. I mean that even making the same life choices that I have, I could have learned more. And been a better person by having learnt it.
Does that make any sense at all?
It absolutely does! I think many/most/all of us who floated along in school feel that kind of disappointment in ourselves. And I confess that I'm still struggling against my own inner sloth. I was always the "teacher's pet" sort of gifted kid, so if I have an external authority to please, I work hard. If not, I'm a slacker. It's not good.
It does seem to be serving me reasonably well in home schooling, happily, since I rarely get too controlling with DS6's work. It makes for much more student-directed learning. But in all other aspects of life, I tend to have a pretty crummy work ethic, at least according to my own personal expectations if not the expectations of the rest of society.
I just feel like I could have *known* more than I do, and been wiser for it.
You seem pretty wise to me. Honest!
I *wish* that I'd read all the books I'd been assigned in my first stint in college -- I was one class away from a double major in English, and I'd really only completely read about a third of all the books assigned! I could have learned so much, and I just didn't, because I didn't have to.
I *wish* that I'd had to study more than a few hours to pass my nursing boards. While my peers were putting in literally full weeks to study for the thing, I looked over my notes and a few flashcards the day before I took the test, and I finished it in the minimum allowed questions and in 49 minutes -- they give you up to three hours to pass the test. I actually sat at my computer for a few extra minutes because I was embarrassed to be done so quickly! I didn't have to study, and I feel like I'd be a better RN if I *had* needed to. I certainly would have known a lot more, in a lot more detail than I do now!
In not having to try for anything, I don't feel like I'm the entirely the person I could have been. I feel like I would be a *better* person if I'd had to work hard and learn everything completely and well. And that really bugs me.
Of course, even those who have to work hard rarely learn all the stuff they're supposed to learn completely. I think that's pie-in-the-sky, you know?
Here's a thought for you, to consider or ignore, as you like: Perhaps the issue here--or at least a part of it--is the assumption that people who have to work hard to learn are better prepared than you are. Could you have learned more? Sure. But you probably know just as much as your peers even though you didn't work nearly as hard. I realize a big part of what you're talking about is the feeling you have about yourself, not in comparison with others. But you're also comparing, so I don't think it's irrelevant.
The phrase "Work smart, not hard" comes to mind. I get that part of this is "What if I had worked hard *and* smart," but it seems like part is just comparing hard to smart, and that's apples to oranges. You didn't work hard because you didn't have to. Some would say that instead of being wise, you'd have been foolish to do more if you could do less and still attain your goals. It's human nature.
And I'd still say that using that feeling of...insufficiency? unfulfilled promise? inner slacker?...to make sure your child does have to work hard at something is good and noble. Wrenching for you, sure. I don't mean to minimize that! But, really, that's a good and noble goal for all of us.
FWIW...little though it might be...
