Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rhymes With "Brass Seagull"'s avatar

And now we see parentarchy coming back with a vengeance after it seemed to be on the wane. Exhibit A: Australia's social media ban, along with Florida's and others too.

Expand full comment
Steven Yates's avatar

Hi Jack. My comment, as promised, based on notes I jotted down to prepare for yesterday.

As noted during our live session, trusting our children and saying they have rights isn't the same claim. Does trust work this way? Francis Fukuyama wrote a definitive work on social trust entitled, simply TRUST and depicted social trust as the "glue" that holds societies together. How does social trust come about, in that case? Through observations of consistent interactions over a long period of time. We don't have that with children, obviously, but we can educate them in the traditional morals that have passed the test of time ("don't hurt people" "don't steal" "treat others as you'd prefer to be treated" and so on).

We all come into this world the same way: naked, helpless, crying. As small bundles of unrealized potential. What are the immediate conditions of life, or needs, that an infant must have if it is to live? Food and water; protection from harm; early nurturing that provides a sense of belonging and safety. I'm not sure what it means to say that the infant has a "right" to these. I wonder if our "rights" language is confused somehow.

Coming to where my discussions of such topics generally land these days: the *intrinsic value* of all persons. Since all persons have intrinsic value and all children are persons, then all children have intrinsic value (the AAA syllogism I mentioned during our talk). I would argue that intrinsic value applies to the unborn, since the unborn have the same human DNA as the born. If we separate intrinsic value from possessing a full set of human DNA, we start to get into trouble because we can exclude entire groups out of the moral community by fiat. Germany did that with the Jews; Chinese Communists with the residual "bourgeoisie" in their midst; America does it with the unborn.

To my mind, intrinsic value implies some do's and don't's:

- don't neglect an infant or a child.

- do no harm, physical or verbal.

- respect the child's personhood in an age-appropriate fashion

- do allow children to *explore their surroundings* assuming as much safety as possible

- don't allow them to come to harm, e.g., from wandering into a busy street.

I came up with a few more "oughts" I thought I'd share: parents *ought* to encourage:

- learning: including allowing children to do things with their hands, teaching them to read and giving them books (this was done with me), allowing regular interactions with adults assuming the adults are always trustworthy.

- learning what? Real states of affairs (e.g., the Earth goes around the Sun; crops grow in the spring, etc.) How A causes B. How actions have consequences. How discoverable natural principles govern the workings of the universe. All age-appropriate, of course.

- giving children chores to do, starting perhaps with simple things like helping to set the table for supper or drying the dishes afterwards, progressing to cleaning one's room, cleaning one's bathroom, as this teaches responsibility.

- teaching them to set goals, and how to organize objectives around them (objectives being day-to-day commitments that go in a particular direction such as doing one's math homework; goals being longer term, such as making an A in the course). How important is consistency, and developing good habits that are internalized and become automatic.

- teaching them to see all others as selves, like themselves, so they can better process and internalize the rule to treat all others as they'd like to be treated. (This is actually more basic than 'do no harm'.)

- consistent behavior, passed from parents who need to set examples as do other adults who interact with children and adolescents, will enable children to build trust by being trustworthy, because they're now on a path to responsible adulthood:

- able to care for themselves healthwise (I advocate primary prevention)

- able to seek out the necessary education to achieve goals (be lifelong learners)

- able to sustain their lives monetarily, assuming the money political economy lasts

- able to work with, and alongside, others even if those others disagree with them about some things, because they understand the distinction between what they can control and what they can't control.

That'll do it for now. Lengthy comment, I know. Responses welcome.

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts