Innate Satisfaction and Reward are not symbiotic

Last class really made me think about privilege in a different way. We were talking about how setting proximal goals and doing something for the pure satisfaction of it could warrant for a higher chance of success as opposed to the presence of extrinsic rewards that allow other people to dangle motivation before us and define how we come to perceive success. What is this intrinsic motivation that we need on our way to the distal goals that we set for ourselves? Well, we need to say that the bottom line or the distal vision we see is something that comes from an innate desire to achieve it. While Bandura does say that intrinsic motivation is extremely important towards achieving something in the purest sense, he doesn't go as far as saying that feeling good from getting an extrinsic reward is wrong.

Now, we were talking about how these extrinsic rewards are what keep people who are miserable with their lives going. We were discussing how some people, who are fed up with their jobs or absolutely dissatisfied with their lives work for the money. But, then again, what if they're doing this for another end in view viz. supporting their family? That seems to look like something that borders along intrinsic motivation, but is fulfilled by extrinsic reward. We have to remember that Bandura doesn't say that wanting an extrinsic reward is absolutely wrong. All that he's saying is that these are not as long lasting, and may lead us to be like Amy Sutherland's new animal subjects, constantly desiring a simulated reward system.

All of this raises an extremely circular argument about how there is a web of interrelated phenomena within our lives that often vicariously dictate our actions within other realms. When we take this into perspective, however, we might understand that despite the fact that the desire for extrinsic rewards may link to another intrinsic end in view in another domain, the incidence of pure intrinsic drives leads to a better result. Someone doing a dissertation just to get it published may benefit from it initially, but how do we gauge whether the satisfaction they had while doing it affects how they use it later? In my personal opinion, we've come to teach students that they need to be sure of what they have to do to gain extrinsic rewards rather than have mastery experiences within the classroom. Most high school careers are fueled by reward systems. Maybe that's why, as educationists, we sometimes tend to put the mastery experience of critical reflection that theorists like Mezirow lament the lack of back in a corner.

I feel like whatever we spoke about last class really led me to think about why I am in this degree program. Am I in it for the money? No, the road is long and the effort is huge. But, does it bring me satisfaction? Maybe I have the privilege to do things for my satisfaction because of the background I come from. But, why would I ever want to let someone dangle a reward before me just for it to fade away within a short span of time? Wouldn't being innately satisfied with what I'm doing lead to a higher likelihood for me to succeed with both my proximal and distal goals, and use the incidental rewards to achieve my extrinsic goals?