What About the Children?
Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 7 months ago to Philosophy
Thoughts from a child of the hills.
If a child is taught that humility is a virtue and has that hammered into his head his entire life, can he ever overcome that and make the transition to trust his own mind and rational decisions? If he’s told that his group and their feelings are more important than his own accomplishments, can he find any pride in seeking and overcoming challenges? If he learns in his sports that everyone is a winner, will he be able to reach logical choices for himself? If he’s constantly told that others in authority and government are there to make decisions for him and take care of everybody, will he ever be of use to himself? If he doesn’t understand that he’s part and parcel of nature and owns his place and and status in the biology and geology of the Earth, can he ever learn to take advantage of his only advantage in life, his mind and the ideas it generates? If he’s taught that the measure of a good man is to place others before himself, can he ever be happy with his life?
If all of these things are true, AND THEY ARE, can that child become a truly alive adult?
How many Objectivist parents teach their children that to share is their duty?
How many Objectivist parents let their children attend the schools that teach the lessons of the first paragraph?
How many Objectivist parents teach their children that they must work for their allowance and their first car?
Will your children as adults, live full of fear or as cowards?
Will your children be able to find Objectivism on their own?
If a child is taught that humility is a virtue and has that hammered into his head his entire life, can he ever overcome that and make the transition to trust his own mind and rational decisions? If he’s told that his group and their feelings are more important than his own accomplishments, can he find any pride in seeking and overcoming challenges? If he learns in his sports that everyone is a winner, will he be able to reach logical choices for himself? If he’s constantly told that others in authority and government are there to make decisions for him and take care of everybody, will he ever be of use to himself? If he doesn’t understand that he’s part and parcel of nature and owns his place and and status in the biology and geology of the Earth, can he ever learn to take advantage of his only advantage in life, his mind and the ideas it generates? If he’s taught that the measure of a good man is to place others before himself, can he ever be happy with his life?
If all of these things are true, AND THEY ARE, can that child become a truly alive adult?
How many Objectivist parents teach their children that to share is their duty?
How many Objectivist parents let their children attend the schools that teach the lessons of the first paragraph?
How many Objectivist parents teach their children that they must work for their allowance and their first car?
Will your children as adults, live full of fear or as cowards?
Will your children be able to find Objectivism on their own?
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Prope...
Property Rights for “Sesame Street” by Janet Beales Kaidantzis
" Ever seen two children quarreling over a toy? Such squabbles had been commonplace in Katherine Hussman Klemp’s household. But in the Sesame Street Parent’s Guide she tells how she created peace in her family of eight children by assigning property rights to toys.
As a young mother, Klemp often brought home games and toys from garage sales. “I rarely matched a particular item with a particular child,” she says. “Upon reflection, I could see how the fuzziness of ownership easily led to arguments. If everything belonged to everyone, then each child felt he had a right to use anything.”
To solve the problem, Klemp introduced two simple rules: First, never bring anything into the house without assigning clear ownership to one child. The owner has ultimate authority over the use of the property. Second, the owner is not required to share. Before the rules were in place, Klemp recalls, “I suspected that much of the drama often centered less on who got the item in dispute and more on whom Mom would side with.” Now, property rights, not parents, settle the arguments.
Instead of teaching selfishness, the introduction of property rights actually promoted sharing. The children were secure in their ownership and knew they could always get their toys back. Adds Klemp, “‘Sharing’ raised their self-esteem to see themselves as generous persons.”
Not only do her children value their own property rights, but also they extend that respect to the property of others. “Rarely do our children use each other’s things without asking first, and they respect a ‘No’ when they get one. Best of all, when someone who has every right to say ‘No’ to a request says ‘Yes,’ the borrower sees the gift for what it is and says ‘Thanks’ more often than not,” says Klemp. "