I am a parent and I have to disagree with you. The worst case scenario is not that it is worthless. If a child learns to question the “order” given out loud, it would suggest that the child is also questioning the “order” internally. This leads to the internal debate whether to ask for a justification for the “order” or internally decide if it is justifiable or not.
Now you have a situation where the child does not stop up and ask for the justification, but in stead decides that some situations cannot be justifiable and thus will not ask for said justification.
When the parents are around, this is problematic, but when no authoritative figure is close this leads to the child questioning already given “orders” and possible overruling any preexisting justification. They are children after all.
Now you have a child who actively disregards (or might disregard) “orders” given—with or without justification. Sure, you told your daughter not to go with strangers, but the stranger had candy and instead of seeking out parents to gain a justification for the rue of not going with strangers, the child will examine the justification itself and given an upbringing with minimal trauma, might follow the stranger with the candy.
You either have to demand absolute obedience or allow for your child to make its own decisions and accept the danger and risk involved with that, but it is a wrong simplification to say that the worst that can happen is that it is useless. After all—the way you parent your child shapes them—good or bad.
I agree Eudaimoniac (nice name by the way!). The worst case scenario is definitely less than worthless. The question of what is best in the average case would be an interesting one. My hunch is that it depends on the neurology of the child and also on the nature of the culture. Expectations of and relationship with
‘justification’ vary quite a lot between individuals in a way that I trace down to genetics.
I am a parent and I have to disagree with you. The worst case scenario is not that it is worthless. If a child learns to question the “order” given out loud, it would suggest that the child is also questioning the “order” internally. This leads to the internal debate whether to ask for a justification for the “order” or internally decide if it is justifiable or not.
Now you have a situation where the child does not stop up and ask for the justification, but in stead decides that some situations cannot be justifiable and thus will not ask for said justification.
When the parents are around, this is problematic, but when no authoritative figure is close this leads to the child questioning already given “orders” and possible overruling any preexisting justification. They are children after all.
Now you have a child who actively disregards (or might disregard) “orders” given—with or without justification. Sure, you told your daughter not to go with strangers, but the stranger had candy and instead of seeking out parents to gain a justification for the rue of not going with strangers, the child will examine the justification itself and given an upbringing with minimal trauma, might follow the stranger with the candy.
You either have to demand absolute obedience or allow for your child to make its own decisions and accept the danger and risk involved with that, but it is a wrong simplification to say that the worst that can happen is that it is useless. After all—the way you parent your child shapes them—good or bad.
I agree Eudaimoniac (nice name by the way!). The worst case scenario is definitely less than worthless. The question of what is best in the average case would be an interesting one. My hunch is that it depends on the neurology of the child and also on the nature of the culture. Expectations of and relationship with ‘justification’ vary quite a lot between individuals in a way that I trace down to genetics.