|
|
Post by Dju on Jul 16, 2011 19:52:00 GMT -5
I believe that personality can't be changed...this person can at least pretend to be someone else, but trust me they'll never get bitter just because told them to. And they'll never be loyal because they were told to, too! :/ Just the way I see things...also how i see growing up, we find out who we really are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stal on Jul 16, 2011 20:02:25 GMT -5
Also, what "right" do children have to be their own person. You may want to clarify that. It is a natural right that every person is born with. That's my question. Where is this right found? As a 'natural right' is it found in nature? Nature shows that for some animals, a child doesn't even have the right to exist if the parents feel threatened by it. Other animals show that a child doesn't have a right to stay within the community. As a natural right, is it granted or protected by a legal document somewhere? I don't see that either. Where does this natural right come from? Where can it be found? Where can it be shown to be granted? Does this right actually exist? |
|
|
|
Post by Komori on Jul 16, 2011 20:03:31 GMT -5
They'll find themselves alienated, and one day something will cause their entire reality to be shaken to the core, as the world they came to believe existed is shown not to. Now, many can argue religion is no different in that it's irrational and based off of no evidence (beyond annecdotal and non-scientific). But to that point, religion is still something generally accepted by society. Yeah, religion is one of those tenuously-held belief systems that can totally shake you to the core and turn your reality on its head if you suddenly decide/discover that your beliefs were wrong. So, even if it's a more socially-acceptable set of beliefs, I agree it's definitely similar. And actually, to that end, I suppose, Sae, your beliefs sound like they line up a little bit with Shintoism. ^^ I thought we were arguing the point of "should parents try to change their children into someone they aren't?". I dunno. As an artist, I'm quite familiar with familial pressures to be something else, like a lawyer or a doctor. And I think it's a shame that so many potential-creative types get quashed with the idea that it's not feasible to be an actress/artist/novelist, etc. It's not an untrue reality, though, and I don't blame parents for trying to spare their children from an obviously difficult life path. But consider, even a parent fighting against what a child wants will shape that child's personality. You could probably argue that the teenage years are almost all opposing forces anyway. XD So yes, I support parents trying to make an impact in their child's lives. It's almost always done with the intent for bettering that child, and who else better to make those decisions than the parents? Who am I to tell someone that my view of how they should raise their kid is better? |
|
|
|
Post by Gav on Jul 16, 2011 20:05:05 GMT -5
Also, what "right" do children have to be their own person. You may want to clarify that. It is a natural right that every person is born with. Well... if we're going to go into that, every child has their rights, true, but they aren't legalised to take care of themselves. They need to be able to eat, earn money, and many other things that their parents or guardians can do. And the tradeoff is that those people have to have a say in how they are brought up. And I think a personality is moulded. Whether you're 'programmed' or influenced, your traits really affect how you percieve what's happening around you and adjust accordingly. A kid might be brought up with ain alcoholic father, but if he's sharp enough to see the abuse by the father, he might just not end up drinking or decide to avoid hitting his own children. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2011 20:19:54 GMT -5
It is a natural right that every person is born with. That's my question. Where is this right found? As a 'natural right' is it found in nature? Nature shows that for some animals, a child doesn't even have the right to exist if the parents feel threatened by it. Other animals show that a child doesn't have a right to stay within the community. As a natural right, is it granted or protected by a legal document somewhere? I don't see that either. Where does this natural right come from? Where can it be found? Where can it be shown to be granted? Does this right actually exist? Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? Also, Komori, one, that's very interesting about Shintoism, I'll have to look that up. Two, as a teenager I find that my parents aren't battling me. They're letting me be who I want. |
|
|
|
Post by Avery on Jul 16, 2011 20:24:04 GMT -5
That's my question. Where is this right found? As a 'natural right' is it found in nature? Nature shows that for some animals, a child doesn't even have the right to exist if the parents feel threatened by it. Other animals show that a child doesn't have a right to stay within the community. As a natural right, is it granted or protected by a legal document somewhere? I don't see that either. Where does this natural right come from? Where can it be found? Where can it be shown to be granted? Does this right actually exist? Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? Ah, but that's an extremely improbable hypothetical. I seriously doubt any sane parent has ever literally told their kid to discard their entire personality and become a carbon copy. I mean, that's beyond an extreme. It's just implausible. No parent in their right mind views their kid as a robot who can just become their exact copy. And if someone isn't in their right mind, they probably aren't relavant to the general discussion, because they'd be an outlier, an anomaly, not part of the sample, so to speak. |
|
|
|
Post by Gav on Jul 16, 2011 20:24:07 GMT -5
That's my question. Where is this right found? As a 'natural right' is it found in nature? Nature shows that for some animals, a child doesn't even have the right to exist if the parents feel threatened by it. Other animals show that a child doesn't have a right to stay within the community. As a natural right, is it granted or protected by a legal document somewhere? I don't see that either. Where does this natural right come from? Where can it be found? Where can it be shown to be granted? Does this right actually exist? Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? Also, Komori, one, that's very interesting about Shintoism, I'll have to look that up. Two, as a teenager I find that my parents aren't battling me. They're letting me be who I want. That's a very extreme case, and I can't think of any parent that would even say that in the first place. xD Maybe they'd want you to do something like take over the family business and learn how to run a business like him, but I don't think anyone wants another person to BE them. |
|
|
|
Post by Gelquie on Jul 16, 2011 20:25:28 GMT -5
Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? I have never heard of that happen. o_0 I think most parents know that their kids are not them. A big part of them, yes, but not them. And genetics is a pretty funny thing, really; there are all sorts of different combinations for what's determined in a kid. The chance of getting a carbon copy of the original parent is pretty impossible. Or maybe I'm just not understanding the perspective. ^^; |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2011 20:27:00 GMT -5
That's my question. Where is this right found? As a 'natural right' is it found in nature? Nature shows that for some animals, a child doesn't even have the right to exist if the parents feel threatened by it. Other animals show that a child doesn't have a right to stay within the community. As a natural right, is it granted or protected by a legal document somewhere? I don't see that either. Where does this natural right come from? Where can it be found? Where can it be shown to be granted? Does this right actually exist? Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? Also, Komori, one, that's very interesting about Shintoism, I'll have to look that up. Two, as a teenager I find that my parents aren't battling me. They're letting me be who I want. Too broad, and unrealistic at that. Unless you provide some context, it's hard to judge the situation. Is he telling her to stop being goth, liking rap music, playing sports, or being modest, in which case he's being intolerant? Is he telling her to stop slacking off on grades, making fun of others, or doing drugs, in which case he wants her to use him as an example? |
|
|
|
Post by Dju on Jul 16, 2011 20:30:51 GMT -5
nah, at fourteen most kids already have their personalities figured out! ^-^ I think it's implausible, no parent can change their kids, even if they want to. A girl at my class is a great video editor, like...extremely good for her age, and her dad really wants her to take over his business, but she decided she wants to edit videos for her life and even though her dad is not in love with the idea, he is going with it!  Same goes for my parents, they're not in love with the 'digital artist' thingy, but they are okay with it. XD |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2011 20:30:54 GMT -5
That's my question. Where is this right found? As a 'natural right' is it found in nature? Nature shows that for some animals, a child doesn't even have the right to exist if the parents feel threatened by it. Other animals show that a child doesn't have a right to stay within the community. As a natural right, is it granted or protected by a legal document somewhere? I don't see that either. Where does this natural right come from? Where can it be found? Where can it be shown to be granted? Does this right actually exist? Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? Also, Komori, one, that's very interesting about Shintoism, I'll have to look that up. Two, as a teenager I find that my parents aren't battling me. They're letting me be who I want. That... doesn't really answer the question. It doesn't feel good, but I don't see how the right to "be yourself" stems from that. :I |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2011 21:02:37 GMT -5
Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? Also, Komori, one, that's very interesting about Shintoism, I'll have to look that up. Two, as a teenager I find that my parents aren't battling me. They're letting me be who I want. That... doesn't really answer the question. It doesn't feel good, but I don't see how the right to "be yourself" stems from that. :I I think my answer would be that if people weren't themselves, then this world would probably still be prehistoric because whoever thought of the agriculture idea would have kept it to himself because he knew if he told he would be being himself. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2011 21:07:16 GMT -5
Look, let's put it in perspective. Imagine you're...fourteen or so. Your father tells you you have to stop being you and start being him. How does that make you feel? Also, Komori, one, that's very interesting about Shintoism, I'll have to look that up. Two, as a teenager I find that my parents aren't battling me. They're letting me be who I want. That... doesn't really answer the question. It doesn't feel good, but I don't see how the right to "be yourself" stems from that. :I Agreed. A lot of things feel bad but are actually good ... like exercise, or like learning to ride a horse. xDDD The same can be said of, say, weaning a child off childish behaviours. (note, not 'childlike' behaviours. I'm talking irrational things) That... doesn't really answer the question. It doesn't feel good, but I don't see how the right to "be yourself" stems from that. :I I think my answer would be that if people weren't themselves, then this world would probably still be prehistoric because whoever thought of the agriculture idea would have kept it to himself because he knew if he told he would be being himself. Cue my train of logical thought. Here is the argument I believe you are trying to propose: Premise 1: All children are born with the right to be themselves Premise 2: Forcing someone to be someone/something they're not would violate this right Conclusion: Forcing a child to be someone/something they're not is wrong. I believe that's about the sum of it, but correct me if I'm wrong. Now, let's take each premise in turn. Premise one: All children are born with the right to be themselves In formal logic, if you want to draw a conclusion from a set of premises (which is exactly what an argument is) you need to make sure your premises are based on sound evidence. This premise is, I think, the one most of us are having trouble with, because a) it is not based on any known evidence, and b) it is too vague. It does not define what it means to be oneself, nor what aspects constitute "self". Your premise here makes the assumption that a) everyone inherrently knows about this right of all children and b) anything a child wants to do or be is being themself. These two assumptions must therefore be backed up by evidence and definitions. The first assumption falls flat on it's face because I personally don't emperically know or believe that such a right exists, nor is a right recognized by any law or statue. The second assumption is fairly unreasonable, because the child could use it to do whatever they wanted, a lot of which would be highly unhealthy. To use Nat's example, they could quote doing drugs as being themself, and if parents were to respect this right, they would have no choice but to let their kid get high. Premise 2: Forcing someone to be someone/something they're not would violate this rightIf we assume that your first premise is utterly and totally true, then there isn't actually anything wrong with this premise except for the fact that it remains too vague. What, exactly, constitutes "forcing" and how do you define where the limit of "being yourself" begins and ends? Does this right of all children extend to eating vegetables or to wanting to learn to use firearms? Basically, Sae, no one is saying that your arguments are not true, what we're asking is for you to expand on them and justify them in a way that makes logical sense. Provide some evidence to back up your ideas and define the parameters of the concepts you're using so we all know we're on the same page when we talk about "being yourself", because right now everyone here will have a different definition of what that means. |
|
|
|
Post by Gav on Jul 16, 2011 21:23:14 GMT -5
That... doesn't really answer the question. It doesn't feel good, but I don't see how the right to "be yourself" stems from that. :I I think my answer would be that if people weren't themselves, then this world would probably still be prehistoric because whoever thought of the agriculture idea would have kept it to himself because he knew if he told he would be being himself. Or more likely, he'd have tried it out for himself, people'd have noticed it and go, 'hey, that looks promising!' and go try it out.  They didn't really have that many societal pressures when their most pressing concern is to survive. |
|
|
|
Post by Stal on Jul 16, 2011 21:24:18 GMT -5
My question hasn't been answered. All I'm wanting to know is where the "right" that a -child- has comes from. That hasn't been established with anything to support it... Just stated. So I'm hoping for a further explanation on why this right exists and children have it.
Edit - what sarn said
|
|
Furgo 
Michael. 
They didn't really have that many societal pressures when their most pressing concern is to survive.