I say we failed because I don't see many adhearents to this. We don't live in a society of prudence, justice, restraint and fortitude. I also don't know of any explicit planing to pass these on to our kids explicitly. We might _hope_ they pick up a few of them along the way, but do we as a society actively try to teach our kids these things ?
And I am not saying what you personally as a parent do. As I know that I plan on explicitly trying to teach moral principles to my kids, but I don't think we as a society teach them.
Here's an example of an explicit plan to pass on a similar list of virtues: "A Boy Scout is Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent." Not as good as Franklin's list in my opinion, but it's exactly the type of thing you're saying we need, there are many boy scouts, and there are other organizations with similar goals and explicitly taught virtues.
Perhaps you should take a look around outside your echo chamber and join or start the type of movement you're complaining doesn't exist.
>Not as good as Franklin's list in my opinion, but it's exactly the type of thing you're saying we need, there are many boy scouts, and there are other organizations with similar goals and explicitly taught virtues. Perhaps you should take a look around outside your echo chamber
The boy scouts are a far smaller echo chamber --and not only they are not that many, but they have almost zero influence to modern society and kids.
Plus the issue is not about some specific private club or organisation catering to the matter, but for societal norms in general.
I actually agree with you about the boy scout echo chamber, and I shouldn't have taken the conversation in that direction in the first place, because it's irrelevant.
What is relevant is that you say that we need to teach lists of virtues like this to future generations, and there are plenty of examples of that very thing. I'm not sure how you think "societal norms" work besides groups of like-minded individuals (a.k.a. "organisations") getting together and propagating their belief systems. Are you suggesting there is some sort of over-arching group representing our society that should be defining these sorts of norms?
>Are you suggesting there is some sort of over-arching group representing our society that should be defining these sorts of norms?
Yes, exactly. I suggest that "society" itself is that very "over arching group".
So what I mean by this is that schools, parents, the media, the overall societal fabric that is, should teach this things, and not just some individual group.
I think people admired lists of virtues in Franklin's time for the same reason we admire them now; we think "Gee, if I could do all those things I would be as good as (whoever)". Then, when we have children, we say "god, if only I had followed (whoever's) way to live, my life would be better. I want my child's life to be better than mine. I am going to make sure my kids follow all these rules."
Truth is not even the people who write such lists are much good at following them--and if you can't follow them yourself, even when you try your hardest, why do we assume that children just need to be taught harder? Maybe there's something wrong with lists altogether.
And I am not saying what you personally as a parent do. As I know that I plan on explicitly trying to teach moral principles to my kids, but I don't think we as a society teach them.