The Giving Tree has quite a bit to offer to
a philosophical discussion on happiness, love, giving, and receiving.
The question
sets for the book encourage children to explore what it means to
be happy, what it means to love someone, what kinds of things we
do for people we love, the value and the consequences of giving,
and
the concepts
of
selfishness and selflessness. Because these terms are so simplistic,
they offer a vast range of possibilities for discussion and curiosity,
which may or may not
lead to a consensual definition. The issues raised by The Giving
Tree are based on simple topics, yet these are some of the
great issues philosophers have pondered for years. Children may
find
that the questions are not as easily answered as they had thought.
Many of the themes run throughout the book, but the
questions for each theme are clustered together in order to ensure
the depth of the discussion.
Since the issue of giving is more prominent and salient than the
other two themes in the book, it is presented first. The aspect of
giving
is loaded with potential conversation because there are so many
different situations and conditions under which we give. Altruism
is closely
intertwined with giving since the tree in the book gives itself away
until there’s only a stump left. Altruism is an important philosophical
issue into which the children may find a world of insight. Mystic
and social theories regard altruism as the only right way of being.
According
to them, serving others is the only reason of our existence and the
highest moral value. On the other hand, objectivist ethics favors
rational selfishness – the idea that humans are traders who
give only to get in return, and who neither make sacrifices nor obtain
them.
The questions in this set should spark a discussion about these
two extremes. For example, the questoins explore what
happens and how it feels when we keep on giving without getting anything
in return,
and if
this
kind of giving can be justified with anything. Also, this discussion
might
bring up a question of how likely it is (or whether it is even possible)
to give without expecting anything in return. After all, if
we look from the perspective of objectivist ethics, it could be argued
that the tree gives itself to the boy because she loves him, and
being able to make him happy not only gives her pleasure, but gives
her hope
that he will love her back.
As love is so closely related to giving, it is discussed
next. The question set explores love in its presentation, function,
and nature.
The first few questions invoke curiosity about how we recognize and
express our emotions as well as how we justify them. The discussion
of these questions is supposed to ease children into the
more abstract question of defining love. Again, philosophers have
proposed
different explanations of love: some believe that we love others
because of their essence and that love should be selfless. Others
think that we love others because of their properties, and in this
sense
love is not selfless. We choose to love people with certain
attributes that we value, and if they lose those attributes we are
no longer obligated to love them. The Giving Tree offers
both of these concepts – the tree loves the boy selflessly
while boy loves the tree because of its properties – so discussing
these issues with children will be a fun and fruitful process that
will bring
many interesting ideas. The last three questions are aimed to deepen
children’s ideas about love and challenge some concepts
that they might have (e.g. they might say that loving someone is
being close
to them, or that loving someone includes only positive actions and
emotions).
The next set brings up an entirely new subject - happiness,
which is closely entwined with the other two issues in the book.
The tree loves the boy, and thus wanting to see him happy, is giving
him all of herself. However, in this giving process the tree is sometimes
happy and sometimes not. Thus, The Giving Tree reflects
on the role of others as an important piece in our happiness. Aristotle
was perhaps
one of the first philosophers who recognized this role when proposing
that although happiness is the chief good and as such is self-sufficient,
even a happy person needs to live with others and to have friends.
The discussion questions are designed to lead children
into thinking about these issues, as well as to try and define happiness.
A lot of them will probably be inclined to say that happiness is
a feeling. This can be further explored by asking them what
contributes to that feeling, and if those contributing things may
be the essential “parts” of happiness. Some of them might
say that happiness is having fun. This idea can be further examined
by asking them if there are instances when they happen not to be
doing anything fun, or anything at all for that matter, but are still
happy.
If they cannot come up with experiences of this sort, an illustration
of a Buddhist monk, for an instance, might be used to show that happiness
might be achieved when one is not doing much.
Continue
to question set for this story
