A participant, who is a parent of a 12-year-old daughter and a 17-18-year-old son, asks why the current generation does not listen to their parents and argues so much. Acharya Prashant responds by reframing the question, suggesting that instead of asking why children are the way they are, one should ask why they themselves (the parents) do not have answers to their children's questions. He states that people who ask questions often do so about others, never about themselves, asking why others are so wrong. Acharya Prashant explains that arguing is not necessarily a bad thing in itself. If a child, teenager, or young person is saying something or raising questions, it is not inherently wrong. He questions the parent, asking why they don't have the answers to their child's questions. He points out that parents also have a tongue, and it should be more articulate, mature, and experienced. He asks why words that could satisfy this generation are not flowing from the parents' mouths. He suggests that when parents have no answer, they call the child rude and argumentative. He asserts that everyone, including the younger generation, is in search of truth and wants to stand in support of what is right. No one, even in childhood or adolescence, becomes so corrupt that they completely stand on the side of falsehood. He further elaborates that the difference between the generations is not that the previous generation was obedient, humble, and dedicated, while the current one is rude and unwilling to learn. The real difference is that the previous generation was hypocritical; even when they didn't agree, they wouldn't say it to your face, but would murmur internally. Today's generation is free from that hypocrisy; if they don't find something right, they say it to your face. He emphasizes that the issue is not that today's children are disobedient, but that they are less hypocritical. He advises parents to engage in a clean, healthy dialogue with their children. The purpose of a debate is not to win, but for the truth to prevail, which is beneficial for both parties. He encourages parents to test the strength of their own beliefs, using the analogy of wrestling with a guru or a scripture before accepting them. He concludes that the goal of dialogue is to arrive at the truth together.