meritocrat

Most when they are children are told 'it's wrong to lie' or it's wrong to steal. Why is it right or ethical to force children to accept these absolute standards?

Sabine Grant

Salut Meritocrat... first I do not believe it is about " forcing" any children to accept ethical values. It should be about demonstrating by personal example the productivity of not stealing or lying etc...
IMO demonstrating those ethics is as valuable to society as motivating children to adopt non prejudicial thinking and grow to be adults who will accept differences without a need to demean who and what is different.
If parents pertain to guide their kids in contributing positively to society, ethical values are a necessity rather than the " do as you please".

meritocrat

Children may possess 'prejudices', but don't adults? Can't adults be racist, mysoginistic, homophobic, etc.? Why not let children develop their own ethics and personalities?

My point is that whilst lying and stealing may be considered unethical by a good majority of people, why portray these concepts to children as being 'absolute'?

fatherphil

i've never understood how folks cling to the concept that it is wrong to hurt other people. could someone justify that one to me.

beth

It is moral and right to instil our moral code into our children. I think it is more harmful to deny them this instruction.

meritocrat

Define 'our' moral code. Do you mean a parents' specific moral code? If so I agree to an extent.

Infinity Lover

Even if there are exeptions to a rule, it's better to learn the rule (as though it were an absolute) first I think.

ps.: If you don't want your kids to become liars, not being too authoritarian and harsh is the best way to go i.m.o.

Nostalgic Pushhead

I don't get the issue. "Don't steal" is a good rule to live by. Why would a kid ever need to steal? Why shouldn't the parent tell him its bad? The kid will learn the nuances of morality as he grows up.

I *really* hope you're being sarcastic or doing some Devil's Advocate thing.

fatherphil

i definetly have certain beliefs and codes that i live by. they are based on sources that are not really held in high regard on the forum.

i know we all pick and choose what to hold as true to a certain extent, but i always see folks use the phrase "as long as it does not hurt anyone" as some sort of ultimate moral litmus test. i don't understand why it is presented as some sort of "given". there are people in this world that do not ascribe to it at all.

so why hold to this one and reject others as absolutes?

Sabine Grant

Because we live in a society where we all have the responsibility to promote harmony rather than contention... or do not we? Of course if I lived isolated on an island, I would have no concern for anyone else than myself. But I do not. My interaction with others can produce negative results. I have a choice to make.
There are consequences by ignoring the responsibility to not hurt others. I kill someone... I will face human laws.
It is profoundly justifiable to make the choice to not hurt others if we pertain to have a positive role in society.
The human ability to make that choice is what makes us different from many other species... I would not give up that part of my humanity, the ability to make choices.