The Whole Concept of Upbringing& Morality

I knew there was bound to be a discussion about upbringing & morality today. To begin with Ishana is indeed wrong in lashing out at Om but I do think it is wrong in questioning someone else's upbringing. It becomes very personal when in a fight people bring up parents & upbringing and while I understand why Om brought it up, it is natural for any child to lash out.

Intresting topic. I have always hated this 'mummy-daddy ne yahi sikaya hai tumhe' since childhood and also I dislike the concept of parents background being the major decision factor for marriage alliances. How can a grown up individuals character can be solely attributed to the upbringing of parents is still a question for me. It's true that we learn a lot from our parents and imitate them but as we grow up some tend to imply those learnings in life and some divert from it. By this I don't mean to say that all bad people have good parents and they haven't absorbed anything from their parents, there do exist people who are bad as a result of bad upbringing but one can't generalize or trivialize this. There are traits which are carried genetically but there are lot of traits which go beyond genetics.
Regarding Ishana and Om, both are wrong and right in their place. Om is ought to be furious at her for fooling him, conning him he is totally right in lashing out at her, but bringing in her upbringing isn't right even though he knows her father is also an equal shareholder in the con, specially since Om himself had argued with Shivaay a few days ago that a person is what he is and not because of his family or upbringing. And now in the heat of the moment he turns away from his own ideals. Ishana is right in retaliating by relating him to his upbringing, in the heat of the moment but is totally wrong to defend her action, conning.

I had the same question about dadi, why her 3 children are like this? But her grandsons are opposite? Well in this topic I agree to a great extent that family and parents are the biggest influence in a persons life not that they define every thing but definitely play a big role.

Om is the sufferer here but he shouldnt have badmouthed her upbringing... She deffo has a reason behind conning people.

Om's anger is justified.

Originally posted by: Actomyo

Intresting topic. I have always hated this 'mummy-daddy ne yahi sikaya hai tumhe' since childhood and also I dislike the concept of parents background being the major decision factor for marriage alliances. How can a grown up individuals character can be solely attributed to the upbringing of parents is still a question for me. It's true that we learn a lot from our parents and imitate them but as we grow up some tend to imply those learnings in life and some divert from it. By this I don't mean to say that all bad people have good parents and they haven't absorbed anything from their parents, there do exist people who are bad as a result of bad upbringing but one can't generalize or trivialize this. There are traits which are carried genetically but there are lot of traits which go beyond genetics.
Regarding Ishana and Om, both are wrong and right in their place. Om is ought to be furious at her for fooling him, conning him he is totally right in lashing out at her, but bringing in her upbringing isn't right even though he knows her father is also an equal shareholder in the con, specially since Om himself had argued with Shivaay a few days ago that a person is what he is and not because of his family or upbringing. And now in the heat of the moment he turns away from his own ideals. Ishana is right in retaliating by relating him to his upbringing, in the heat of the moment but is totally wrong to defend her action, conning.

Originally posted by: Actomyo

Intresting topic. I have always hated this 'mummy-daddy ne yahi sikaya hai tumhe' since childhood and also I dislike the concept of parents background being the major decision factor for marriage alliances. How can a grown up individuals character can be solely attributed to the upbringing of parents is still a question for me. It's true that we learn a lot from our parents and imitate them but as we grow up some tend to imply those learnings in life and some divert from it. By this I don't mean to say that all bad people have good parents and they haven't absorbed anything from their parents, there do exist people who are bad as a result of bad upbringing but one can't generalize or trivialize this. There are traits which are carried genetically but there are lot of traits which go beyond genetics.
Regarding Ishana and Om, both are wrong and right in their place. Om is ought to be furious at her for fooling him, conning him he is totally right in lashing out at her, but bringing in her upbringing isn't right even though he knows her father is also an equal shareholder in the con, specially since Om himself had argued with Shivaay a few days ago that a person is what he is and not because of his family or upbringing. And now in the heat of the moment he turns away from his own ideals. Ishana is right in retaliating by relating him to his upbringing, in the heat of the moment but is totally wrong to defend her action, conning.

Agree with u bt O n shivay had an argument over Khandan n parvarish!shivay said ache khandan se ache parvarish mil te hai bt Om said khandan doesnt matter n he said d exactly same thing here Amiri karibi kisiko bure ya chor nahi banate its one's upbringing!

Om is not wrong to question ishana upbringing when her father himself involved in all her con acts.she retaliated as she love her family.that is understandable.but question is that does om deserve her poor rich lecture and anger on being questioned her parvarish by her con dad.if being poor is excuse to be get involved in conning then this every poor man should follow advice.i dont know y everyone here avoiding calling spade a spade.

Originally posted by: -PhoenixD-

Agree with u bt O n shivay had an argument over Khandan n parvarish!shivay said ache khandan se ache parvarish mil te hai bt Om said khandan doesnt matter n he said d exactly same thing here Amiri karibi kisiko bure ya chor nahi banate its one's upbringing!

As I said before neither Om nor Ishana is wrong here, both are right on their place. Family is family even a murderer, terrorist has the right to defend his family because upbringing isn't solely responsible for one's actions, it isn't right to blame one's upbringing for their bad doing. There are so many righteous parents who have evil children.
Om is absolutely right in saying lie is a choice regardless of poor or rich, but making upbringing responsible for one's choice isn't right. I know he spoke about Ishaana's upbringing because he knows her father is also a con and supports her in conning but in general holding upbringing responsible is illogical.!Just like Om has the right to question her upbringing Ishana has full right to defend it, just like Om knows her father is bad she too knows Om's father is bad too, it's just a reaction for the action in the heat of the moment.
About khandan/family and parvarish/upbringing being diffrent, I don't think they are much diffrent, family is the one which brings up children with certain morale, good or bad, so khandan is who does the parvarish, so if he isn't considering the khandan as responsible for one's action how can he consider parvarish as responsible.