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

How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 263 posts

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#251

Post by Retric »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #249
Retric wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IQ tests are proxies for intelegence but not direct measurements. They are fairly good at that from around 60-140, and less useful at the top and bottom. As to low IQ scores people with an IQ of 60 generally don't have anything that they preform very well. The problem is everything we think of as takes even something as simple as holding your hand steady is really complicated. Getting better at even simple motor func…

An IQ of 60 isn't difference, it's indicative of either malnutrition, severe neglect, or some form of developmental disorder. In fact, I'd be surprised if there are many people of below average intelligence that don't suffer from one of those things. I'd even wager that if you took any random infant that didn't have a developmental problem and raised them in a loving affluent western family with good food and an enri…

That's your own bias talking, genetics and environmental toxins can both cause significant issues. But, so can non genetic birth defects resulting from disease or what amounts to bad luck.

Further sub 110 IQ's don't indicate a problem. Natural variation is simply much wider than you assume.

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#252

Post by Retric »

walshemj wrote: post #226
Retric wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2) This falls into the just world fallacy. Intelligence does not seem to come with real drawbacks. Highly intelligent people often have upper end reflexes, are unusual attractive, highly creative, social, and or content. They are more often taller and live longer as well. The trappings of intelligence are different, but very high raw intelligence is seen across most walks of life including actors, athletes, and sales…

As a hi IQ Dyslexic id have to disagree

People of average or below average intelegence can also be Dyslexic, so what's you point?

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#253

Post by luca_ing »

smackingly wrote: post #78
replicatorblog wrote: post #63

In adulthood, many prodigies become experts in their fields and leaders in their organizations. Yet only a fraction of gifted children eventually become revolutionary adult creators. My daughter is being treated for Leukemia by some amazing doctors at Boston Children's Hospital. To my knowledge, none of the health care professionals at this world-class institution have won Nobel Prizes in medicine. All the same, for…

Maybe I'm biased because I'm a no-name physician at a community hospital, but the "best doctors" in my eyes are the ones with the best outcomes, lowest utilization, highest efficiency and highest patient satisfaction. These measures don't correlate well with the physician's credentials. I learned this in residency, which I did just down the street from a "top" university hospital. We out-performed that place on every…

As the son of an excellent surgeon (and that assessment seems to be more than a son's pride), I think there's another paramount quality that should be mentioned: empathy.

I think that this is truly what made my father be not just "technically good", but a physician who could solve his patients' problems: he made an effort to understand their perspective, and adjust his treatment accordingly.

I've observed him interact with patients sometimes, and his effort at creating empathy was quite noticeable. It's particularly fascinating to watch with children.

I agree with you though that efficiency, and also just honing one's internal sense of what's going on inside a patient's body is important. My dad was department head at a first-world hospital. But every year he would go on a charity mission to some third-world place for two weeks and treat patients there. With essentially no modern technology (in fact, operations might have to performed in the shine of a flashlight), you are really forced to work with your instincts. I think these trips benefited his first-world patients just as much as his third-world ones.

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#255

Post by lsaferite »

lsaferite wrote: post #156
smackingly wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm biased because I'm a no-name physician at a community hospital, but the "best doctors" in my eyes are the ones with the best outcomes, lowest utilization, highest efficiency and highest patient satisfaction. These measures don't correlate well with the physician's credentials. I learned this in residency, which I did just down the street from a "top" university hospital. We out-performed that place on every…

> wild things like ECMO, which makes everyone feel they're making more of a difference even though the outcomes are the same without it Knowing that my daughter wouldn't be here today without ECMO, I take issue with this assertion. Edit: She was born with severe MAS and her lungs were practically non-functional. ECMO was the only way she had time to fight the infections and start breathing. She spent 12 terrifying da…

My wife corrected me. ECMO for 10 days, ventilator for 3, then 7 more days on a nasal oxygen feed. Time gets fuzzy when you're in the NICU.

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#256

Post by hueving »

Retric wrote: post #108
hueving wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>are unusual attractive Source? I've never heard of intelligence being correlated with visual attractiveness.

Like height the link is probably though health and generally freedom from birth defects. It's not a 1:1 correlation, but it is a positive one. Consistent with such views, meta-analyses (Jackson, Hunter & Hodge, 1995; Langlois et al., 2000) show that there is a small but significantly positive correlation between intelligence and physical attractiveness https://personal.lse.ac.uk/kanazawa/pdfs/I2011.pdf That said, sel…

>That said, selected populations may show a negative correlation such as when more attractive people are more easily given a job etc.

How is that possible? If intelligent people are attractive, wouldn't they be the ones getting the jobs?

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#257

Post by hueving »

bane wrote: post #128
hueving wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like phony pop psychology. I was raised with strict rules and was able to derive what to do in other circumstances because I was still taught moral principals. I know plenty of people raised with strict rules but nobody that was raised with completely unexplained rules so it's a bit of a strawman comparison.

I'm not a psychologist, but my understanding from people I've spoken to in various psych disciplines is that this is a fertile area of research and there are fairly regularly published papers on this topic. There appear to be deep connections between derivation of behavior based on principles and other-oriented empathy and punitively enforced or superficial behavior training and tendencies towards authoritarianism an…

>Typically strict rules are given punitive reasons as motivation for following, not some intrinsic rationale within the rule -- and that's precisely the difference.

No, that's the strawman. Rules without explanations. It has nothing to do with punitive enforcement.

>"Wash the dishes or you'll be sent to your room" doesn't teach why you should wash the dishes, only that you'll be punished for not doing so.

Strawman again. The unexplained reasoning is the problem, not the punitive action.

>The punitive approach requires no brainpower to follow, there's no specific reason why the effect (punishment) follows from cause (not washing the dishes)

Ugh, I hope I made the point clear above, but I'll state it one last time: punitive punishments are not the same as unexplained rules.

The rest of your comment is based on this strawman assumption that all parenting using punitive actions follows this stupid method of not explaining rules. It's just as dumb as assuming the opposite (i.e. parents that don't punish children don't teach their children any morals).

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#258

Post by throwmeaway1 »

arkades wrote: post #205
77pt77 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Feynman realized this when he tried to teach his children and discovered that what worked for his son did not work for his daughter. Feynman's son was his biological offspring, while the daughter was adopted. I think this is relevant information that was left out. Edit: Also, Feynman's son chose to pursuit philosophy, much to Feynman's dismay.

In an article discussing the dispensation of advice to the parenting community as a whole - which includes the whole variety of genetic heterogeneity - her being adopted isn't relevant.

Care to explain how? I understand the original comment didn't really add any other information but surely the differences in nature and nurture account for something, when considering Adoption Studies are a thing. [1] Perusing the results of a quick search bring up loads and loads of differences between adopted and non-adopted children, across many different metrics. I'm sure the "parenting community as a whole" doesn't exclude adoptive parents. Almost all of these studies show differences, such as with social skills or behavioral problems [2], and with these differences might the parent have to adapt? There are many things that come into an adopted child's mind about their own adoption too, and challenges specific to adoption [3]. Is this particular information relevant?

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoption_study

[2] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/10/the-adopt...

[3] https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubpdfs/f_adimpact.pdf

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#259

Post by gosheroo »

jackvalentine wrote: post #247
gosheroo wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with lacampbell that we're not responsible for other people's kids. In western society the individual is sovereign and our only responsibility is to do no harm. It is equally important to note however that the individual is missing out if he foregoes the pleasure of friendly interactions with other people, and is free to be a good neighbour and to give where he chooses. He is also wise if he aligns his ambiti…

Hmm, I think I can see where we're failing to connect here. I'll reply to you by replying to lacampbell. > All of your post hinges on the premise that you feel responsibility for individual problems should be collectivised, by force presumably, and that I am required to morally feel obliged to help any and all strangers by virtue of being born or living in roughly the same area. I categorically reject that this is my…

Yes there are such things as social problems, and the keeping the peace (which is the government's responsibility) entails addressing them. Sometimes keeping the peace will even entail looking after other people's children. For example, children evacuated from London in WW2.

But problems are solved by individuals. So part of the gauge of the strength of a society is how receptive it is to knowledge originating in the minds of rare individuals. Does it protect them? Or does it shut them down with censorship, disemployment and so on?

It's vital that people realise that they are not responsible for the fall of every sparrow, lest they be burdened with undue guilt. Their minds are then at least capable of remaining free and creative.

Re: How to Raise a Creative Child – Step One: Back Off (2016)

#260

Post by rexf »

simonh wrote: post #234
gls2ro wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What books did you read? I am interested in books recommendation for parenting.

The one that stands out is Raising Happy Children. It brings together a lot of information and advice and isn't one of these 'weird trick' type single author books where someone claims to have discovered the one true way. Just practical down to earth stuff.

I'm late to this discussion, but if you could please drop a link to the book? There are many with that title. Thanks!
Post reply on HN