How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019) • Hacker News Board

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#131

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 7:48 AM UTC

shard wrote: post #123

dragonwriter wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To deceive someone is to tell them an untruth for personal gain. No, it's to cause someone to believe something that is not true. Personal gain is a common goal served by deceit, not part of it's essential character.

Causing someone to believe something that is not true is too weak of a definition for deceive. Consider the difference between telling someone a falsehood versus deceiving someone. There is a malicious intent behind deception, which is not present in falsehood.

> Causing someone to believe something that is not true is too weak of a definition for deceive

No, it's literally the definition of the word.

> Consider the difference between telling someone a falsehood versus deceiving someone.

The difference is intent; if you don't know that it's false, or you don't intend it to be believed, it's not deception.

> There is a malicious intent behind deception,

It certainly is a matter of intent, but aside from the sense in which a false belief itself is a harm, and any intentional element of harm even if not a net harm is “malice”, I wouldn't say it is necessary malicious.

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#132

Post by nix23 » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 9:11 AM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #116

nix23 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>your claim that this parenting style doesn't work, if anything, it refutes it: What claim? But this is what we have ATM: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/23/canada-indigen...

Your parent comment in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23930146

That's not a claim but rather questioning the efficiency.

But sure it's not that easy, if you destroy one's culture, trow them into another world and let them barely "survive" other factor's play into the hole thing.

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#133

Post by dmos62 » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 10:04 AM UTC

shard wrote: post #94

NortySpock wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a citation for that last claim?

Not the OP, but in the book Impro, Keith Johnstone strongly lamented the suppression of imagination in and by grown-ups. He wrote: "Most children can operate in a creative way until they are eleven or twelve, when suddenly they lose their spontaneity, and produce imitations of 'adult art'." He cites schools suppressing imagination as a factor, saying that, "The research so far shows that imaginative children are disl…

Thanks for that response. It's funny that you mention Keith Johnstone, because I'm rereading him now. The suspension of disbelief v. suspension of belief concept comes from a writing pedagogue named Peter Elbow (highly recommended if you enjoyed Keith Johnstone).

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#134

Post by wnscooke » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 10:56 AM UTC

gooseyard wrote: post #84

The Briggs book referenced in the article is a really interesting read. I tracked down a copy after several articles like this one appeared shortly after her death. I assumed that the book primarily focused on child-rearing, but while that aspect of their culture is certainly an aspect of the book, her study of the concept of "ihuma" and how it applies to interactions between her host family and other adults in the s…

This isn't "Native American", it is Inuit. I am actually not sure which Inuit, but it is unhelpful to use such a blanket designation as "native american". Using that term would be like reading a book about Irish dancing and then telling someone you read a book about "European dancing", or reading a French cook book and declaring your love for "European cuisine". One day the same awareness, knowledge, and respect afforded to the nations and people groups of Europe will be afforded to those on Turtle Island. Not using the label "native american" when the focus or topic is a specific nation is a good start.

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#135

Post by tasogare » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 11:47 AM UTC

Der_Einzige wrote: post #49

tasogare wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m always amazed at how English speakers took some loanwords from French, then derive their meanings up to the point they became offensive (examples: problematic, oriental). The issue is that for non-English native speakers those overloads are easy to miss (and usually absent from dictionaries), and a post can be made pretty trollish accidentally.

We have so much french in this language. Ever wonder why it's called a "vending machine"? Look up the french verb for "to sell" It's everywhere. English usually has a competing french and German derived word for each experience.

Yes and even some like factory that sounds totally English actually come from French too. One day I’ll work harder on my French language merhod for English speakers that is based on cognates. There is so much that can be shortcuted with little etymology thrown in.

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#136

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 5:11 PM UTC

wnscooke wrote: post #134

gooseyard wrote: post #84

The Briggs book referenced in the article is a really interesting read. I tracked down a copy after several articles like this one appeared shortly after her death. I assumed that the book primarily focused on child-rearing, but while that aspect of their culture is certainly an aspect of the book, her study of the concept of "ihuma" and how it applies to interactions between her host family and other adults in the s…

This isn't "Native American", it is Inuit. I am actually not sure which Inuit, but it is unhelpful to use such a blanket designation as "native american". Using that term would be like reading a book about Irish dancing and then telling someone you read a book about "European dancing", or reading a French cook book and declaring your love for "European cuisine". One day the same awareness, knowledge, and respect affo…

[deleted]

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#137

Post by yencabulator » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 6:08 PM UTC

hnick wrote: post #121

opwieurposiu wrote: post #119

One Inuit parenting technique that works on my kids. If a child hits you or bites you, don't yell at them. Instead pretend to cry in an exaggerated way. I have found this to be way more effective than yelling or timeouts. My oldest is almost 4, so this might not work on older kids. But then older kids do not bite very often anyway.

This works on puppies too. If they get a bit nippy, overreact to the biting. There's probably a lot of similarity between what works on very young kids and puppies, at least until they learn to use that brain of theirs better.

That's the reaction a puppy would get from a sibling or its mom. The fake yelps immediately stop rough play, everyone looks around for a few seconds trying to figure out what happened. Then they bow to invite to play / signal no intent to harm, and continue playing with less biting.

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#138

Post by yencabulator » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 6:16 PM UTC

wil421 wrote: post #86

raincom wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Western culture, lying is primarily connected to deception. In cultures where Semitic religions have not influenced, lying and deception are not same: one can lie, without intending to deceive. That's how one has to look at. One can lie for multiple reasons. For instance, to avoid conflict; or because one is not in a mood. Deception is one among many reasons. Why the western culture focuses so much on the unit…

That’s untrue. Kids in western cultures are taught to lie. It’s white lies, for example your mom baked your a cake and it didn’t taste good. Parents still say you need to say it was good no matter what. A white lie is told to “avoid “conflict” as you stated above.

I wouldn't generalize that to all western cultures. America, for sure -- that goes along with the superficial "How are you?" questions where nobody actually even wants an answer. Superficial politeness for the sake of superficial politeness, even if that means deceit, lies, and laying down groundwork for later disappointment.

But many places that would be considered poor form because you are setting up for disappointment later (when the truth comes out), and the thinking is "why would you do that to someone?". In those places, kids might be forced to say thank you, but not that they enjoyed it.

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#139

Post by shard » Sat, Jul 25, 2020, 7:55 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #131

shard wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Causing someone to believe something that is not true is too weak of a definition for deceive. Consider the difference between telling someone a falsehood versus deceiving someone. There is a malicious intent behind deception, which is not present in falsehood.

> Causing someone to believe something that is not true is too weak of a definition for deceive No, it's literally the definition of the word. > Consider the difference between telling someone a falsehood versus deceiving someone. The difference is intent; if you don't know that it's false, or you don't intend it to be believed, it's not deception. > There is a malicious intent behind deception, It certainly is a mat…

If you are referring to the dictionary definition of the word, then let me refer you to my experience learning different languages. The dictionary never fully captures the nuances of a word. I've had to get detailed explanations of different words where they all have the same definition, but are all used in different contexts. So technically deception means telling an untruth, if you limit yourself to dictionary definitions. But we live in a world where the nuances make or break kingdoms, and nobody reads text with only the dictionary definitions in mind.

Of course, based on your exposure to various literature, you might have a different feel for what the nuances of the word deception are, and maybe it matches exactly with the dictionary definition. But based on my experience, deception is a heavily negative word with malicious intent behind it.

Re: How Inuit parents teach kids to control their anger (2019)

#140

Post by moate » Sat, Aug 01, 2020, 9:31 PM UTC

fireattack wrote: post #111

moate wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? This is the "hard skills are real, soft skills aren't" dynamic I see so often (Hello, I'm the PM in a room full of Engineers). Your first mistake is that teaching itself is very personalized and varies wildly from family to family. If we're willing to accept the premise that there are some commonalities among families from the same culture, then how they teach social skills important to that culture would likely…

> there are some commonalities among families from the same culture My exact point is this: I can't think of any commonalities for "(teach the kids) how to control anger", not for my culture at least. Maybe Inuit people are different.

A little necro-posty on my part, but I think this is worth mentioning:

I'm an American from a white Midwestern family born in the mid-80s. I can tell you that in my upbrining things like "time out" or being sent to my room or being forced to apologize when I hit someone were part of the techniques used to help teach me how to control my anger and be pleasant to people. From my observations, these things were being taught in school as well as reinforced at home. This is part of how my culture taught me how to control my anger.

However, I know that other people with different backgrounds may have had other punishments (physical abuse, being made to write out their feelings, etc). There are all sorts of social skills that cultures value and try to pass on. "How to behave when you're angry" is at the very top of that list.

I promise you, there are cultural differences between how you were taught to handle anger as a child and those of people raised in different backgrounds. They just don't seem novel to you. Without knowing more, I can't point to specific examples but the larger point is that cultures pass on social skills, not just language.