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

Raising a moral child

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 159 posts

Re: Raising a moral child

#91

Post by Loughla »

nevinera wrote: post #39

Modern parenting literature seems largely to be about manipulating your child into being who and what you want them to be. 'Tricks' and 'techniques' abound, and every other article is about 'teaching' your child to achieve/empathize/compete. You know what works extra- extra- well? Be the kind of person you want your kids to be. Treat them like a decent person treats other decent people and that's the behavior they wi…

That's exactly right. All this parenting 'help' is just fueling our thoughts that kids aren't really people, and need to be bent to our will.

That's not accurate. Kids are little people. Ignorant of many things, but they're little people. My wife reads these 'how to raise your kids' posts and books and crap, and all it does is make her feel as if she is a terrible parent because he wasn't signing at 10 months and isn't using full sentences at 12. She feels guilt that he may be behind other kids already, because he's not doing things that these posts and books suggest (and are mostly ridiculous).

Let kids be kids, let them climb trees and ride bikes and be alone. But, spend a lot of time with them and have them watch how you treat people, what you say about people and how you interact with the world. Take him/her with you when you work on the yard, just have them help by carrying rocks around. Take him/her to the store to get the fuel filter you're fighting right now. Talk to them as if they're capable and they'll be capable. Have boundaries that are firm, but reasonable.

And always, always remember that you can say whatever you want about their character being great, or their traits being great, but if you show malice and spite, they'll be malicious and spiteful as well.

Re: Raising a moral child

#92

Post by smtddr »

lightyrs wrote: post #82
vectorpush wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

Because a child cannot give consent.

Note that in reality, all parents are experimenting. Nobody _knows_ the right way to raise a child. I'm the father of a 3yr daughter but I dare not claim that my way is the right way...

Re: Raising a moral child

#93

Post by lightyrs »

smtddr wrote: post #92
lightyrs wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a child cannot give consent.

Note that in reality, all parents are experimenting. Nobody _knows_ the right way to raise a child. I'm the father of a 3yr daughter but I dare not claim that my way is the right way...

There's a difference between 'experimenting' and experimenting. The explicit variation is what I'm referring to — and I don't think it's a matter of semantics. It's the intention that I'm taking issue with.

Re: Raising a moral child

#94

Post by gohrt »

jawns wrote: post #4

The experiments this op-ed describes are really neat. I especially like the one that demonstrates the importance of "practice what you preach." Here's another cool experiment related to social/moral development, which you can perform on your own kid: Have two grown-up friends each show your baby a toy. The first friend should offer the toy to your kid but then retract the offer and keep the toy to himself. The second…

That book has interesting experiments, but suffers psychology's common problem (especially baby psychology): massively over-extending the experimental data into unsupportable conclusions that ignore loads of confounding factors.

Example, quoted from the website:

""" The babies in the unjustified group spent more time looking at the adult's discordant expression and exhibited more checking behavior. Additionally, the babies' facial expressions only displayed empathy for the adult when a negative emotional response fit the scenario.

The takeaway:

Parents, take note: Your toddler can see through your "stiff upper lip" routine.

"""

The "takeaway" is completely unsupported. In no way does the experiment suggest that hiding pain is useless.

For one thing, "stiff upper lip" (aka "faked neutrality") is different from faked happiness.

For two, the experimental methodology only applies to cases where the baby knows that the experience's standard emotional response. That applies to hammer strikes on a finger, but not something like divorce or losing a job.

For three, "spent more time looking at the adult's discordant expression" shows that the babies learn from their parents reactions, as they expend effort to understand counterintuitive behavior. "Counterintuitive" is not the same as "fake" or "wrong".

So the "takeway" may in fact be the opposite of what the data suggests!

Re: Raising a moral child

#95

Post by gohrt »

MarkPNeyer wrote: post #80

i had to learn the opposite message here. our society tells us so much stuff about being kind and caring, and there are very few messages about being able to stick up for yourself, being able to make reasonable requests and being able to say no to people who are not treating you fairly. i had a roommate who didn't pay rent. i couldn't bring myself to confront the roommate because i felt like i "made of lot of money"…

Don't go so far as to say "fuck being a good person", but understand that not everyone deserves unlimited trust and good faith. --which is I think what most of your comment is expressing.

Your story is the topic of one of the most famous West End /Broadway songs of recent years:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6h1eBEmY6U

    Even if you find that life's not fair, it
    Doesn't mean that you just have to grin and bear it
    If you always take it on the chin and wear it
    Nothing will change
    Even if you're little you can do a lot, you
    Mustn't let a little thing like little stop you
    If you sit around and let them get on top, you
    Might as well be saying you think that it's OK
> homeless people asking for money ... i see them as predators who use negative emotions to try and take my positive feelings away.

Or they are asking for money who using asking for money as a way to get money. Your "predator" description fits panhandlers with manipulative stories, but not all "homeless people asking for money". Also, it's worth considering , if someone is telling you a story that upsets you, but is a true story, maybe the negative feelins you feel are appropriate, and there is something wrong with economic inequality.

Re: Raising a moral child

#96

Post by ldubs16 »

I find this article very interesting because it suggests that the effects of moral attribution to the self vs. the event has the opposite results of achievement attributions. There are numerous studies that show when you praise a child for being smart instead of working hard, they become less curious and motivated. Perhaps this dichotomy is because of the commonly-accepted distinction between talent and work ethic, whereas being good and doing good are largely the same.

Re: Raising a moral child

#97

Post by hyp0 »

saraid216 wrote: post #63
hyp0 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if they controlled the effect of the actresses own response. Although they might be excellent actresses, being mean to a baby is probably going to make you feel pretty rotten, at a level it might be hard to control, and the baby could be picking up on that. Animals can pick up subtle cues that are not apparent to adults; I'd be amazed if babies weren't at least as good. I'm thinking of Clever Hans http://en.…

Both actions seem to qualify as "mean to a baby" to me. Assuming the actresses agreed with me, this would cancel out the variable.

I was thinking about that, and the thing is people are often deceptive to children for their own good, as a way to handle them without upsetting them (arguably not ideal parenting but let it pass). So that, if you convince the child you really did drop it, you won't feel bad. But if you are overtly mean - it's unmistakeable that you deliberately the toy back, then it's hard to kid yourself that the baby didn't realize. Now did the baby realize? That's the whole thing we're trying to determine! I'm just saying that the actresses' model of what the baby will understand and won't will affect how they feel about it.

This of course all depends on the actresses having a particular model of the baby's ability to model them.

Re: Raising a moral child

#98

Post by tunap »

gohrt wrote: post #95
MarkPNeyer wrote: post #80

i had to learn the opposite message here. our society tells us so much stuff about being kind and caring, and there are very few messages about being able to stick up for yourself, being able to make reasonable requests and being able to say no to people who are not treating you fairly. i had a roommate who didn't pay rent. i couldn't bring myself to confront the roommate because i felt like i "made of lot of money"…

Don't go so far as to say "fuck being a good person", but understand that not everyone deserves unlimited trust and good faith. --which is I think what most of your comment is expressing. Your story is the topic of one of the most famous West End /Broadway songs of recent years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6h1eBEmY6U Even if you find that life's not fair, it Doesn't mean that you just have to grin and bear it If…

Quote: Your "predator" description fits panhandlers with manipulative stories, but not all "homeless people asking for money."

The genuinely needful have long been run out of the public spaces/territories that have the most pay-out. The 'predators' in traffic making more than working at 7-11 don't abide threats to their income and will defend it unscrupulously. Stop and walk on that center median sometime and see what response you get.

Edit: I'm referring to occupied PH zones, I'm also half kidding. Be prepared for a confrontation if you do that.

Re: Raising a moral child

#100

Post by Xcelerate »

Taek wrote: post #78
gohrt wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, your father had trouble because we was trying to sculpt you without actually being a role model, and you noticed the different between his words and actions. The article discusses this phenomenon.

He was trying to be an actual role model. In many ways, he did a good job. In places where he wasn't perfect though, he hid that fact instead of being upfront. I don't know what would have been best, but especially as I got older I would have preferred complete transparency. He was a good man, but I wish I had known more about his flaws. It would have given me more insight into my own.

There's certain opinions that my parents hold that I do not. As one (fairly non-controversial) example, I don't believe in the death penalty, but my dad does.

We were having a debate about it one time, and I asked my dad how it was that we disagreed on these topics. He replied that he raised my sister and I to have what he felt were more ethical viewpoints on various issues than what his own perspectives were.

I was astounded when he told me this. He doesn't hide what his real thoughts are, but he recognizes that some of them aren't the most kind or moral and has actually raised me to have different views than himself.

Post reply on HN