dk

Its wrong to teach a child to lie, and it is wrong to rationalize a child's lies with blame. The problem is that children learn to tell a lie, and rationalize lies without any instruction. A child needs to be taught who lies serve, and who the truth serves.

Jinto

Actually, I think that's the last thing you should teach children. After all, if you teach them that other people want them to tell the truth because it serves their own purposes, the child will never tell the truth again.

Or were you making a biblical reference?

joedad

I've seen very rational people speak about "perfection," some on this forum, as if it actually exists. Absolutes, ultimate this, ultimate that, god this and god that – all these notions have their beginning in this prejudice for "perfection." I think that encouraging this prejudice is harmful, and takes serious deconversion time. Perfection doesn't seem to exist to me, and isn't logically necessary .

Of course, that depends on how one defines "perfection."

joe

dk

Kids know its wrong to lie, but lie to avoid discomfort or gain some benefit. Kids need to learn truth leads to freedom, friendship and understanding and lies lead to tyranny, animosity and fear. Its not clear telling the truth serves the purpose we intend, but it does allow us to know, understand and learn from our mistakes.

Chiron

I don't think that lying and stealing are absolutely wrong (I think that the whole idea of the existance of absolutes is questionable), but it is very useful to present the issue as black and white to young children. It's sort of how basically everything you learn in Physics 1 class is wrong: like, F=ma, E=mc^2, F=GMm/r^2, Q=mc?t, and KE=.5mv^2, and also like Chemistry's Ideal Gas Laws. Though incorrect, these equations work just fine for the conditions you're going to encounter, and when you're starting out in a subject, you should start with the basics and progress.
Take morals, then: a young child doesn't have the higher-level, more complex decision-making skills that people 18 and older have, so this young child wouldn't be able to reliably and accurately assess whether or not lying or theft is permissible. For the situations they are most likely to encounter, though, lying and stealing are probably wrong, so presenting them as definitely wrong works fine.

As to the "do no harm and it's okay" thing, my views on this are longer and more complex than I would be able to coherently express right now. Basically, though, I think that the way society has come about and the fact of humanity being a social species means that harming other people is just bad, m'kay?
And though I recognize that there are people who don't agree that doing harm is bad, I don't think I'd want them to be my neighbors.

-Chiron

fatherphil

if we are to determine right & wrong based on societal harmony, does that not mean enforcing some social codes and mores some of which certain individuals would find restrictive, offensive or even against their belief system?

Chiron

(By the way, the ?t in "Q=mc?t" is supposed to be delta t.)

fatherphil: "if we are to determine right & wrong based on societal harmony, does that not mean enforcing some social codes and mores some of which certain individuals would find restrictive, offensive or even against their belief system?"
As it currently stands: well, look what happened to the Mormons. I believe the Supreme Court ruled that while the US does have the establishment clause, a religion is not sufficient reason to violate laws. Similarly (they said), one cannot viably protect oneself from a murder charge by saying that one's religion demands an unwilling sacrifice every Saturday at half past eight.
Short answer: yes, we already are doing this.

dk: "Its wrong to teach a child to lie, and it is wrong to rationalize a child's lies with blame."
I just re-read this, and I can't understand the second half of the sentence. Could you explain?

-Chiron

fatherphil

thanks for the short answer, i agree

Guillaume

IMO it is very harmful to teach a child any kind of absolute truth, especially absolute moral standards. Here are some of the negative effects of teaching absolute moral standards to your child :

1. It teaches that logical justifications are unnecessary and that it is ok to accept something just because your family and friends believe it.
2. It destroys creativity: the child no longer imagines new possibilities and merely settles with what people around him think.
3. It teaches that blindly agreeing with someone viewed as “superior” is desirable, effectively making innovation impossible.
4. While teaching absolute morals, parents openly condemn and show contempt those who do not follow their standards. This teaches the child that he should hate those who do not agree with him, effectively leading him to intolerance and bigotry.
5. It teaches the child that thinking for yourself is a waste of time: you just need to ask others for answers.
6. Asking question is viewed as a mark of inferiority, as a lack of “knowledge”, so the child no longer question and merely accept pre-made answers.
7. It forces children to view the world in a simplistic black and white way : good vs evil, us vs them, etc.

meritocrat

I agree.