Is "delayed gratification" really a good way of education?

I just saw a story about the CEO of a startup today. The key word of his life is "delayed gratification". I didn't know this word before. After reading the article, I suddenly feel that this word is quite new.

If we regard delayed gratification as a way of education, I think it still has two sides.

The so-called delayed gratification, according to our own understanding, is actually our old saying "bitter first, then sweet". Only by enduring short-term bitterness can we enjoy long-term sweetness. From the children's experiments where the word comes from, it can be seen that those children who don't eat sugar within 15 minutes can get two pieces of sugar, while those who eat sugar within 15 minutes can only get one piece of sugar. For children, their suffering is to restrain themselves from eating sugar and learn to control themselves. Their sweet spot is that 15 minutes without eating sugar can get one more candy.

It's really a good idea to be bitter before sweet, but it's strictly anti-human. Isn't it more important for young children to make their childhood grow up happily? If everything delays their satisfaction, they will not get timely feedback and rewards, and will they lose their childhood happiness over time?

On the other hand, whether the so-called delayed satisfaction can effectively achieve the goal depends on the accuracy of the goal. If even the goal is incorrect and unreasonable, it is not satisfied at all. As parents educate their children, they should set a good goal and set those goals that can be achieved with a little effort according to their actual situation. This is the basis of delayed gratification.

Finally, delaying gratification is not suitable for every child. Some people's nature is to eat, drink and be merry. If you delay your satisfaction blindly, you may lose your nature, or you should consider your child's personality and character.

Delayed gratification is a good way of education, but we should not blindly emphasize this way, but should treat it dialectically.