Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lies We Tell Kids

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 433 posts

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#51

Post by brlewis »

Xichekolas wrote: post #28
brlewis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "sprawl" might be a more descriptive term for what you're reacting negatively to. Boston has lots of suburbs that don't fit your description. (BTW, suburb's etymology is not tree-related.)

Yeah to me suburb means tract housing. Does Boston have suburbs that aren't tract housing? (I said tree related because every suburban neighborhood I can think of has a tree related name... "Willow Springs" "Lone Elm Estates" "Pine Ridge" etc.)

Suburb means a city or town near a large city.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suburb

Those names sound like housing projects, not cities or towns.

Boston has a lot of suburbs accessibly by public transportation that have walkable city centers.

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#52

Post by hugh »

dgabriel wrote: post #39
mynameishere wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turkeys are not very smart, and have no concept of "wanting to die." Turkeys are very smart birds and their behavior is very finely geared around not dying.

Exactly. There aren't suicidal turkeys; they get slaughtered and cleaned and cooked. Why is that so horrifying for a child?

Perhaps because children tend to assume animals are a lot smarter than they actually are (I remember that I used to), and that their experiences are more equivalent to human experiences.

I wonder whether this is natural, or whether it comes from the fact that children spend all their time watching movies and reading books about intelligent anthropomorphic animals.

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#53

Post by j2d2 »

astine wrote: post #22

Does it count as a 'lie' if it is believed by the parent? The reason that parents don't want kids to swear is because they genuinely believe that it is wrong for some reason. The don't know the reason themselves, and so break the rule and become hypocrites, but they still believe that it is wrong and want their children to do better than they did. With regard to group identity (and religion,) most parents actually ad…

I am having a hard time deciding if that counts. I think whether or not a lie might be believed by a parent is what makes it universally recognized as something all adults answer with "ask your parents".

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#54

Post by cia_plant »

jamess wrote: post #26
dgabriel wrote: post #4

My least favorite pg essay. It's too easy to generalize about parenting, and so little of this essay applies to me. 1. Raising a kid in the city, and quite happily. 2. No prohibitions on swears in my house. Just at Grandma's, and only because it would offend her, not because swearing is inherently bad. 3. He goes to a school where they only teach you how to read, write, and do basic math. Everything else is a child-l…

For their own sake, don't let your kids be vegetarian until they're at least 16, that's the worst disservice you could ever do them. I speak as a vegetarian myself, but you've got to be pragmatic. Your kids need animal protein right up until their brains are done developing. It doesn't have to be very much animal protein, as little as a teaspoon a day does the trick, but there is no artificial or vegetable substitute…

The American Dietetic Association, at least, disagrees:

"Well-planned vegan and other types of vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood and adolescence."

http://www.eatright.org/cps/rde/xchg/ada/hs.xsl/advocacy_933...

Can you at least offer a source for your shocking claims?

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#55

Post by hugh »

robg wrote: post #29

I'd love to see the sequel: Lies We Tell Ourselves. Seems like many of the things discussed have their origin in lies we continue to tell ourselves. Kids just get special versions. But if anything those instances provide a window into what we don't discuss honestly - sex, death, identity, formal education, and obeying authority.

I dunno, "lies we tell ourselves" doesn't sound like a very good essay.

Since we don't know about the lies we tell ourselves, it would have to be "lies I see other people telling themselves".

And that pretty much translates to "Things that other people believe that I disagree with", which is a fairly boring topic for an essay.

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#56

Post by glymor »

Stephan Pinker has argued that swear words cause a involuntary negative emotional response similar to the slight of an angry face: http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/books/stuff/media_articles/TNR...(1%20of%203)%20(print).htm

So parents not wanting there children to hear taboo words would seem to be better considered as another example of not wanting their children to exposed to negative/frightening experiences.

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#57

Post by jamess »

astine wrote: post #22

Does it count as a 'lie' if it is believed by the parent? The reason that parents don't want kids to swear is because they genuinely believe that it is wrong for some reason. The don't know the reason themselves, and so break the rule and become hypocrites, but they still believe that it is wrong and want their children to do better than they did. With regard to group identity (and religion,) most parents actually ad…

I don't think this is true. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone under the age of 40 (that is, approximately of breeding age) who is genuinely offended by most words that are designated taboo. Any offence that is publicly displayed is most likely a put-on to illustrate they are more cultured that the offender.

What's worse is that it's entirely subjective what words a culture counts as taboo. I've seen US TV shows aimed at teenagers for 5-6PM time slots that repeatedly use the word 'bollocks' when portraying a stereotypically British person. In the US, 'bollocks' is just a funny word, but in Britain it is considered a swear word albeit a fairly mild one that I'm not averse to muttering when I walk out of the supermarket having forgotten to buy something.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with saying these words, it's simply taboo because someone hearing them might take offence. but we've lost the people who might be offended and still kept the taboo. It's brain dead.

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#58

Post by sanj »

byrneseyeview wrote: post #38
sanj wrote: post #35

Does PG have kids? I'm not advocating ignoring the essay if he doesn't. But just as I'm leery of taking startup advice from someone who hasn't done one, I'd be tempted to discount this a bit. The issue is that there are forces afoot in your brain when you have kids which are deep, powerful and extraordinarily difficult to ignore. Pre-mammalian lower-reptilian brain stuff. Wanting to protect them is one of those.

You think his lack of kids would bias him when observing parents? Isn't this more or less the opposite of what courts argue -- that e.g. a judge who owns Microsoft stock should not be ruling on a Microsoft antitrust case, even if he is the only one who really knows what it would feel like for the shareholders were they walloped with a giant fine?

That's a very interesting point! But it seems like you'd want a judge who had at least been a stockholder, though not one in this particular company. Would either side consider a judge that stored his life savings in his mattress and disagreed with the right of corporations to be valid?

The different (and I'll admit I'm on thin ice here) is that kids have a visceral component that is difficult to ignore.

If I drop a brick on my bare foot and yell loudly, would it be more appropriate for someone else, who has never dropped such a brick, to judge whether or not I should have yelled?

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#59

Post by mrtron »

pg wrote: post #32
epi0Bauqu wrote: post #5

PG: what does suburbia mean to you? You paint it in an extremely negative light, and so I'd just like some more detail of how you define that term. I know it means different things to different people.

I mean post-war neighborhoods of tract houses build on spec by developers. I don't mean places that are merely geographically suburban, in the sense that they're less densely settled areas on the perimeters of cities. (In the US, practically all the less densely settled area on the perimeters of cities are neighborhoods built by developers, but in Europe there are older cities where this isn't true.)

A friend of mine works building these suburbs; they actually now use a portable factory to build a completely finished house (even painted, all fixtures installed, etc). They roll it down the street and drop it on the foundations, connect the plumbing and electrical and it is ready to be moved into.

So now they are literally cookie cutter neighbourhoods.

Re: Lies We Tell Kids

#60

Post by mynameishere »

brlewis wrote: post #46
mynameishere wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When something is falsifiable, that means it is suitable for examination by science. When something is not falsifiable it should be considered false, in most contexts.

"When something is not falsifiable it should be considered false, in most contexts." Is the above sentence falsifiable? How do you examine the "should be" question with science? If it is not falsifiable, should it be considered false, or is it an exception? How do you pick exceptions? My two assertions about your sentence: (1) It is not falsifiable. (2) You consider it very useful.

Notice I tacked on a weasel phrase "in most contexts." I don't think there is a consensus about falsifiability, and I wasn't the one who brought it up. The person who did seemed to understand it backwards. Since Aristotle and Newton operated without the concept, I'm willing to shelve it.

Grandma going to heaven can be reduced to absurdity, and isn't very important, except as a typical line of bull.

Post reply on HN