Comments on Raising children - proselytise - or guide?

Go to 42 - Add a comment - Go to Raising children - proselytise - or guide?

Lapis, I should get a referral fee for you, too, then! LOL Seriously,

thanks!

I really enjoy the way you think and write.  Look forward to more!

posted by Ariala on December 3, 2005 at 4:09 PM | link to this | reply

Hey thanks Ariala...!

My joining Blogit was not nothing to do with looking at the quality of the postings - and obviously your postings influenced this conclusion! Am most flattered to have caught the attention of such a worthy fellow-blogger!

So - was thinking - how this whole thing demonstrates how utterly serious and consequential the whole affair of bringing kids into the world can be. Cos with the spell thing - it absolutely doesn't matter that your husband didn't turn into a frog. For one - the next 'bad' thing that happens to him (silly things, say) - the kid will attribute to the spell, and worse - conclude that this vindicates what their parents taught them.

Further - let's say you persuaded them to watch this movie - they would quite likely then become the authors of the bad luck that they are now so fully expecting. I don't really believe in luck as such - but self-fulfilling prophecies - yes. The mind is a powerful agent.

Messing with kids' minds - a serious affair.

As a believer though - all in God's Hands, in the end. I take comfort that way, at any rate.

Thanks for checking up on my humble blogs!

posted by LapisLazuli on December 3, 2005 at 4:04 PM | link to this | reply

Lapis, hi!

Just now read your comments!  Wow, you are an awesome thinker and articulator! 

Well, as for the statement the child made about a "spell" being cast on those who might see that one movie, my husband had just seen that movie with a friend of his and he laughed too.  He told the little boy, "I saw that movie!  No spell was cast on me." hahaha  The little boy only repeated that he heard that and stuck to his position.  There was proof in seeing that my husband hadn't turned into a frog, or whatever, but that wasn't going to budge him from what he "knew" would happen.  It made me realize how children internalize the opinions of their parents.  When I'm with the kids, I try to teach them judgment and discernment, like you said...I love that definition of teaching.  I try to bring in rational thinking and let them figure it out for themselves, without drawing conclusions for them.  I do notice they come with their parents' bias, and their parents are close friends of ours...we attend the same church, but they're much more rigid and conservative.  They hold to many ignorant opinions that I know you know exist among organized religion...So, I am caught between a rock and a hard place.  It's like the whole Santa Clause lie...what do you do with that?  These kids were never taught Santa Clause was real, but the rest of the kids of the world are lied to about that...how do you think they feel when they realize it was just a nice fantasy?  I never believed in Santa though my parents tried hard to make me believe.  I broke things down logically even at a young age and realized there was no way a fat dude like that was getting through my chimney and all the other irrational lies that came with the whole scenario.

Anyway, I'm really glad you joined Blogit...you add a wonderful dynamic here with your comments and posts!

posted by Ariala on December 3, 2005 at 2:16 PM | link to this | reply

Oh, and...

Ariala - meant to add - quite crucially - that the fact that these kids 'look up' to you - MEANS something.

I have beliefs about where cildren have 'come from' - but either way - they will in my opinion inherently gravitate toward Truth, Wisdom, Light. And not for no reason - it's the compass they have been given (Given), which if they stay in touch with it, and don't get taught by the world out of using it (their hearts) it will take them to where they need to go.

Ariala - and anyone who's relating to this subject - this is no time to be humble.

I don't know if you're watching Lost (which is an excellently-crafted bit of work) - but in there is this character called Locke. Now there's this kid whose own dad is having trouble connecting with him - but Locke has this kid's full attention. Locke is a beautifully-crafted character here, and depicts the kind guy who if I'd had as a fatehr or an uncle - would have launched my life in a much-accelerated manner.

He embodies 'wisdom' - more often than not getting the kid to think for himself, but also and very importantly, being aware of the ethics of their dynamic - by remembering to get the kid to listen to his own father, even if that means to stop talking to him (Locke). Wisdom when dispensed with a concern for ethics - results in people like Locke. The whole point is - the kid's father is flummoxed as to how to win this kid over (always just 'ordering' the kid about, "I'm your father!") whereas he has only to look and learn from who, what and how Locke is. Locke treats the kid like a grown-up, for one - very crucial. As children have much to teach us. And when you relate to a child in this way - it brings out an entirely and otherwise-inaccessible dynamic.

So - know that when a child finds it natural to look up to you - in the way that happens with Locke - that this is evidence of something magical (read also - 'real and true'), in you, and in the dynamic between you and the child. Knowing this may contribute to how you feel about the aforementioned cost-benefit analysis. If not for 'spells' - but later, for anything else that may crop up.

And incidentally - I agree with your having reservations about a child believing in 'spells' in that sense. The parents clearly have deployed this as a tool for control - but for the ultimate rights and wrongs of this, more would need to be known.

posted by LapisLazuli on December 3, 2005 at 2:07 AM | link to this | reply

Ariala...

...Thanks for your words of support! I've been reading and getting to know your 'blog-Self', as it were - and am therefore very happy to learn that you consider my efforts here so far as worthwhile. Most flattered.

Am glad also that people are appreciating the title!

That quandary that you refer to - is indeed exactly the sort of situation I had in mind too, when mulling on these issues. Like me and my Wife are not from the 'same' religious background - and this could either be regarded as setting up any children we might have with a schism/identity crisis from the outset - or if WE apply our God-given intellect to the matter, understand where and how our positions reconcile and run in parallel - then THAT is the perspective that any children should be presented with - teaching not 'difference' - but the importance of diversity, and that everything 'good' is a facet of the same thing. That must be the more powerful approach - and surely bringing up children needs to be more about empowering and equipping - than 'teaching' per se - because let's say (taking religion just as an example here) that both parents are of one belief and faith - and they naturally wish to pass that on to their children, but worry about what effects 'the world outside' and school, and television is going to do. You could go down the Amish route - an interesting solution, at any rate (but even then they have to release their adolescents into the 'world outside', to let them decide if they want to enter 'that' world and leave the community forever, or not) - or you could realise that no matter what you do - one's children WILL be exposed (sorry - haven't figured out italics, quite yet!) to the rigours that the world outside represents - and guess what - Life is about dealing with that.

So the solution to my mind - best approach at least - is to seek to equip children with JUDGEMENT - the faculty of discerning for oneself 'what is good for me', and 'what is bad for me' - and I'm talking about everything from starting to smoke, to whether to bother with Universty or not. There are no rights and wrongs here necessarily - but there is a right and a wrong for each individual, for their own Path, Journey and destiny.

All this is the application of something I read as an adage once, "If you want to BE yourself - THINK for yourself". How usual is it in this day and age for us to surrender the need to decide upon something for ourselves - to somebody else. Lifestyle coaches?!?! Oh my God. It seems almost a condition of this Age - to not do anything for ourselves, and to not think for ourselves - to lap up 'right' and 'wrong' from our leaders, priests, rabbis and imams. If we are stripped of the faculty of thought - then I proffer that we are stripped of something that fundamentally goes to make us human. A 'Muslim refusenik' (please see bio) - I see this as the disease that has afflicted the religion of Islam today - or at least afflicted those who think they are practicing it when they advocate the whole anti-West/hate the West thing. Just another example, though.

Ralph Waldo Emerson put it rather controversially - "I am unto myself mine own law" - NOT a licence to anarchy, because at the same time we should be seeking to be guided by the Light and the Truth (call it conscience, if you will). And anyway - anarchy does mean chaos and confusion - it means without a leading figurehead - we all do and think for ourselves - and if we're all seeking to be moral and ethical - then that's not such a bad thing.

So - I digress! - I once heard on Radio 4 this guy define education as not being about teaching - but about imparting judgement.

Taken to an 'extreme' - this should mean that our young children will begin from very early on to be able to point out in us grown-ups - what we're doing wrong! This does happen anyway - we teach our children not and never to lie - but hey presto, Grandma gives us a stupid sock for Christmas - and we're supposed to tell them how wonderful it is?!?! Life is indeed never simple.

And to cover the quandary you mention about your friends' children - I see this as a complete case-in-point. Have to assume first that the parents in question here would indeed not wish for you to expose their children to opposing ideas and notions - then this pressure you feel to hold back your true inclination, arises from the parents' subscription to (in my opinion) a weak approach to bringing their children into the world. It's the approach where you're certainly not seeking to teach your children judgement - but simply to upload them with your own beliefs and thoughts - and at the same time prevent them from being exposed to anything that may conflict or contradict. Why do we find so often that children brought up in strict religious households turn so fully against that very religion when they grow up? Children are not silicon chips to be uploaded - the faculty of thought and self-determination is so fundamental to being human - that anything which seeks to kill this in us will (hopefully) be rebelled against, at some point, in some way.

So - if the world were how it 'should' be - then you should have been free to say almost anything you wanted to these or any children. This does I concede describe somewhat of a Utopia - because in this 'world' of free speech and thought - everyone is hopefully consciously concerned to be living ethically and morally. So this approach breaks down somewhat when Uncle Tom 'thinks that I should try smoking, drugs and drinking, because it'll be good for me' - we arrive at that line where parental responsibility does have to kick in, and we have to provide an element of 'protection'. This whole thing only really works in such a world.

So in your case - the 'believing in spells versus not believing' - a dilemma indeed. On balance, I'd say that you should be free to expose them to your views on such a matter - what if their parents are ignorant, and about to be setting their children up for a great fall life - as they eventually, sooner or later, find out about the real world? But then equally (hence my 'Life is complicated' statement for this blog) - who knows the deeper background? What if these children have been extremely difficult to manage or even guide down the good route that the parents are hoping for - and the concept of the 'spell' has turned out to be the only tool they have to influence their children in any way? A dubious scenario, especially if it were the case - but possible nonetheless.

I believe that it is our duty in this world to speak out, and speak the truth. I believe that if I were in your position, I would feel frustrated about the way these children were being taught about the world. This would represent not so much an opportunity to teach the children themselves anything new (arguably not 'your' territory or right) - but to have the courage to speak to their PARENTS - and to broach the subject. Easier said than done, I know - and also subject to a simple cost-benefit analysis* - whereby maybe in this instance you wouldn't bother - but if for example they were teaching their children to be racist, the cost-benefit analysis would yield a very different result, for you to stay silent.

And I'm most certainly not pretending to be the kind of person who would always have the courage to things like this - but am learning as I get older!

(* In this equation, you'd have factors like: How harmful would it be for the children for you to do nothing? What is your relationship with their parents like - will broaching this topic be likely to harm your friendship with them? If it may well do - given the first question, is it STILL worth the risk? If the first question yields a 'low' score - then you may for example decide that the risk to the friendship is not worth it, for a small issue like this one. Etc, etc!! I'm always doing CBA's - Life's one big CBA! Even the decision to believe in God submits to this - ask me later if interested!)

Eeeesh!! This blogging thing really does allow us to go on and on on our little soap-boxes, doesn't it? Blogging ROCKS!

Looking forward to your thoughts...!

posted by LapisLazuli on December 3, 2005 at 1:47 AM | link to this | reply

Lapis, wow...great work and honesty...I don't have children, but I can

tell you that I would go through the same questioning you have, simply because I have done so with my friend's kids.  Sometimes they ask me questions and I have answers except that my answers are not always in agreement with what I know the parents believe and teach them, so I refrain from giving them MY answer.  They really look up to me and I could very easily influence them.

For example, I take my friend's kids out at times.  The other day we went to the movies.  Their choice.  One of the kids said he wouldn't go see some movie because it would cast a spell on him.  No, it wasn't even Harry Potter, but I laughed.  He said, "No, seriously."  Now, was I to tell him that wasn't true when on of his parents told him that's what would happen?  I simply listened and did not give an opinion.  I wasn't asked to.

So, I can see the relevance of your title!

posted by Ariala on December 2, 2005 at 4:23 PM | link to this | reply

Hi people!

Rr2hsam - I had indeed hijacked Douglas Adams' notion for the title of my blog. I think for many people, on account of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, '42' will always be synonymous with the 'answer to life, the universe, and everything'. And so I ambitiously deploy the term for the title of my blog! Glad you spotted it!

An avid listener of the BBC's Radio 4 (and World Service) - you'd know that The Hitchhiker's Guide was first originally a radio production - and they recently re-ran the entire production - WITH ALL THE ORIGINAL CAST! An honour indeed to be living at a time and place to have been able to witness this.

So - thanks for your replies so far - I will return shortly with fuller responses.

Take care in the meantime all...

posted by LapisLazuli on December 2, 2005 at 4:11 PM | link to this | reply

I think I would tell a child

"This is what I think, but some people think differently."

posted by jollyjeff on December 2, 2005 at 10:37 AM | link to this | reply

Your Blog title

This is totally off the subject of your Blog. I'm just curious about the title of your Blog, '42'. Are you a Douglas Adams fan, by any chance?

posted by rr2hsam on December 2, 2005 at 6:44 AM | link to this | reply