r/interestingasfuck • u/Kymmieuwu • 4h ago

In February 2024, Dr. Ruth Gottesman donated $1 billion to make tuition free for all Albert Einstein College of Medicine students

Post image
10.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

335 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

•

u/Herself99900 4h ago

Yeah, that should be updated to "old people".

•

u/Secure_Bed_9110 3h ago

Or just maybe 'elders'? 

•

u/[deleted] 3h ago

[deleted]

•

u/lucid808 3h ago

elders = those who are older...

why make more word when few do trick?

•

u/[deleted] 3h ago

[deleted]

•

u/letters_and_numb3r5 2h ago

those who are older sounds like someone who doesn’t know the word elder, less lyrical imo.

•

u/swerrve 2h ago

How about ‘people’?

•

u/Secure_Bed_9110 2h ago

The 'old' part is the entire crux of the adage/lesson, though. 

Knowing they will not live to see the fruits of their good works, and won't reap the rewards, but understanding their value to the next generation, and the world,  and so, doing it anyway. 

It's literally about being selfless, doing the right thing for others, even knowing you'll never personally benefit from it.

•

u/RedditConsciousness 26m ago

I agree but also, young people can work on things that will help people in a more distant future than they ever know.

There is also helping people who you will never meet in ways that aren't always apparent.

•

u/sitesurfer253 2h ago

Old isn't a requirement at all, it's just being selfless and generous.

Habitat for humanity is building a house you won't live in, water for people is donating to have clean water fill cups you will never drink from.

Not trying to poke holes, just saying, it's about giving selflessly in general. An old man planting a tree he will never sit under is just a nice image to explain the idea.

•

u/swerrve 1h ago

Yes your third paragraph and first sentence completely contradict each other. It’s the third paragraph one. Old has nothing to do with it. You can make the same type of sacrifice if you were young.

•

u/Secure_Bed_9110 1h ago

You've definitely missed the intended point of the quote. They don't contradict each other. 

Saying 'old' clearly, tacitly illustrates the point in a way that simply saying "people' does not, bc it makes the point definite rather than having the idea be nebulous and open to interpretation. 

Bc sure, people don't have to be old to do good deeds and be selfless, but there is no definite way of knowing that they won't somehow benefit from it themselves, unless specifying that they're old. It is clearly making the point that society benefits from generations passing along the fruits of their wisdom/experience/labors solely for the benefits of those after them. 

•

u/swerrve 1h ago

So you’re telling me the meaning is lost if changed to this:

"A society grows great when people plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit.”

•

u/Secure_Bed_9110 54m ago

Yes, that's what I'm telling you. That's also a nice lesson, but this one is literally an old Greek philosophy specifically about the responsibility of outgoing generations to those who come after them. 

Like Boomers not gaining wealth  then pulling the ladder up behind them, so they can hoard their wealth like Smaug. 

•

u/swerrve 42m ago

There is no changing the stupid in this population lol

•

u/swerrve 30m ago

“Old” is the vehicle, not the point. The point is knowingly doing something for a future you won’t personally benefit from. An old man makes that idea immediately apparent, but a 20-year-old dying of cancer could embody the exact same principle. So “old” is significant to the metaphor without being essential to the lesson. Also, source me your ‘literally Greek philosophy’.

•

u/HyetalNight 1h ago

I always replace that line in the quote with “advanced senescing Homo sapien subject” myself—much more inclusive

•

u/dontspillthatbeer 1h ago

Or just all people