"Many possessions, if they do not make a man better, are at least expected to make his children happier; and this pathetic hope is behind many exertions"
About this Quote
Santayana captures the moral ambiguity of material ambition. Possessions rarely improve a persons character, yet the drive to acquire them finds an alibi in filial love: if not for me, then for my children. He calls this a pathetic hope, not to sneer, but to register pathos. There is sadness in the way noble impulses become harnessed to a treadmill that seldom yields the promised happiness.
The sentence pivots on two contrasts: better versus happier, and present self versus future heirs. Better points to virtue, wisdom, and the cultivation of the soul. Happier, as commonly imagined, points to comfort, opportunity, and pleasure. The shift exposes a retreat from ethical aspiration to pragmatic consolation. If moral betterment proves elusive, at least, the reasoning goes, prosperity can be bequeathed. Santayana recognizes how this logic animates many exertions: long hours, competitive striving, anxious saving, and the quiet sacrifice of leisure and attention that might have enriched both parents and children in a different register.
There is also a cultural observation at work. Writing in an age of industrial expansion and rising consumer culture, especially in the United States where he taught and observed keenly, Santayana saw how the ideal of progress narrowed into accumulation. The intergenerational promise of wealth provides a socially acceptable justification for private acquisitiveness. It lets individuals feel altruistic while pursuing goals that may erode the very goods they seek, such as time, affection, and moral example.
Calling the hope pathetic underscores its fragility. Happiness does not reliably track possessions, and inherited wealth can burden as much as it frees. Children may receive comforts but also inherit the anxiety and instrumentalism that produced them. Santayana invites a reconsideration of ends and means: whether energy poured into acquisition could be redirected toward forms of excellence that actually make one better, and from which children might draw a deeper, more resilient happiness.
The sentence pivots on two contrasts: better versus happier, and present self versus future heirs. Better points to virtue, wisdom, and the cultivation of the soul. Happier, as commonly imagined, points to comfort, opportunity, and pleasure. The shift exposes a retreat from ethical aspiration to pragmatic consolation. If moral betterment proves elusive, at least, the reasoning goes, prosperity can be bequeathed. Santayana recognizes how this logic animates many exertions: long hours, competitive striving, anxious saving, and the quiet sacrifice of leisure and attention that might have enriched both parents and children in a different register.
There is also a cultural observation at work. Writing in an age of industrial expansion and rising consumer culture, especially in the United States where he taught and observed keenly, Santayana saw how the ideal of progress narrowed into accumulation. The intergenerational promise of wealth provides a socially acceptable justification for private acquisitiveness. It lets individuals feel altruistic while pursuing goals that may erode the very goods they seek, such as time, affection, and moral example.
Calling the hope pathetic underscores its fragility. Happiness does not reliably track possessions, and inherited wealth can burden as much as it frees. Children may receive comforts but also inherit the anxiety and instrumentalism that produced them. Santayana invites a reconsideration of ends and means: whether energy poured into acquisition could be redirected toward forms of excellence that actually make one better, and from which children might draw a deeper, more resilient happiness.
Quote Details
| Topic | Parenting |
|---|
More Quotes by George
Add to List
