[HN Gopher] In Praise of Difficult Children (2009)
___________________________________________________________________
In Praise of Difficult Children (2009)
Author : yamrzou
Score : 48 points
Date : 2024-01-20 09:41 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.lrb.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.lrb.co.uk)
| psynister wrote:
| I love this. It beautifully captures the inner conflict of
| adolescence and the quest for self-discovery. It's easy to forget
| how hard that time of life can be and how in order to truly
| understand ourselves, we must explore the boundaries of our
| beliefs and reconsider once closely held ideals. It's a messy
| journey, but it's the only path to find our authentic selves.
| leetrout wrote:
| Im 39 and that is still true for me today. In my career. In my
| marriage. As a parent.
| silasdavis wrote:
| An incomprehensible mess
| leetrout wrote:
| _clears throat_ A _beautiful_ mess
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| > You have to be bad in order to discover what kind of good you
| want to be (or are able to be).
|
| I find this hard to believe. Somethings may be difficult to learn
| without firsthand experience. Though I'm not convinced this is
| the same for everyone or that it applies to being 'bad'.
| chefandy wrote:
| They're using the word "bad" as shorthand for deviance, because
| people often view all deviance as bad. I can't imagine someone
| going through adolescence without deviating from their own or
| other people's expectations and learning something from it-- be
| it about life, themselves, their relationships, or even
| deviance itself. However, I obviously can't see into other
| peoples minds, and my experience was far more deviant than
| most, so it's not a representative point of comparison. I do
| think testing boundaries by defying rules and expectations,
| even in pretty benign ways, is a pretty normal part of
| adolescence, and I think by labeling that "bad" the author was
| trying to elicit a similar response: "well if it's beneficial,
| is it truly _bad_?"
| wizerdrobe wrote:
| Some folks are able to listen to an authority figure and follow
| through with what is expected no problem.
|
| Some folks might not trust those authority figures and their
| advice. For those, doing wrong and discovering you don't like
| it is a hard won life lesson.
|
| Along a similar line, I've heard it say that if you consider
| yourself a peaceful person but are not actually capable of
| great violence, then are you actually peaceful or simply
| harmless? If you're not capable of doing wrong perhaos you're
| not good, simply neutral "robot" entity confined to your
| programming.
| thanhhaimai wrote:
| > Along a similar line, I've heard it say that if you
| consider yourself a peaceful person but are not actually
| capable of great violence, then are you actually peaceful or
| simply harmless?
|
| Why not both peaceful and harmless (for the moment)? This is
| a function of time. I don't think it's possible to make that
| statement without supplying the time parameter.
|
| Also, I don't think peaceful people are not capable of great
| violence. It's about choice. I'm capable of violence, but I
| choose to not use that capability.
| beebeepka wrote:
| It's not simply a choice. I know that I am capable of
| terrible things, if pushed. I know because I've done plenty
| of stuff I am not proud of.
|
| Avoiding guilt, or reprisals, doesn't make me "good".
|
| All this reminded me of this fantastic Stargate SG-1
| episode: https://stargate.fandom.com/wiki/Absolute_Power
| noduerme wrote:
| I don't think there's such a thing as a human incapable of
| violence, given the right situation. Check out the reaction
| of every other mammal on the planet when cornered in a life-
| threatening situation. Many are incapable of _effective_
| violence, but as a last resort it 's hardwired. Being a
| peaceful person on a daily basis is a measure of how
| socialized you are and how much negotiation and compromise
| you're capable of, but that in turn is a measure of your
| ability to evaluate risk and threat in a sane, socialized
| way. Non-peaceful people are in some ways reacting to
| everything as if it were a threat to their lives.
|
| Harmlessness and peaceability are orthogonal to each other.
| One can be violent and harmless just as easily as peaceable
| and dangerous.
| gwd wrote:
| > Some folks might not trust those authority figures and
| their advice.
|
| Part of this might be just normal human nature; but a big
| part of it is that authority figures are often simply not
| reliable. They set and enforce rules based on fears, or their
| own convenience, or their own pride or status instead of
| actually making rules which are for the benefit of the person
| under authority.
| ChainOfFools wrote:
| Being bad, in its most salient forms, has a greater power than
| being good to jolt you out of a complacent life lived around
| the question how, and thereby make you consider the question
| why instead.
| elevatedastalt wrote:
| > You have to be bad in order to discover what kind of good you
| want to be (or are able to be).
|
| Sounds like one of those pseudo-profound woo statements.
|
| Many people manage being perfect good, well-adjusted humans
| without going through a bout of "being bad".
| dadoomer wrote:
| > > You have to be bad in order to discover what kind of good
| you want to be (or are able to be). > > Sounds like one of
| those pseudo-profound woo statements. > > Many people manage
| being perfect good, well-adjusted humans without going through
| a bout of "being bad".
|
| The way I read it, that paragraph is not about whether anyone
| can be a well-adjusted human or not. Rather, it is about how
| specifically some people discover what kind of good they want
| to be by being bad.
|
| In that sense, "you have to be bad" talks to those people
| specifically, and uses "have" to refer to that causal process.
|
| (English is not my first language, so my interpretation may be
| very wrong.)
| gnicholas wrote:
| FYI you don't have to include a quote of the entire parent
| post in your reply. People typically just include quotes when
| they are responding to a piece of the parent comment, and
| want to make it clear what they're responding to.
|
| Thanks for the downvotes -- mind explaining why? I have
| literally never seen anyone do this in the decade-plus I've
| been here, and thought it would be helpful to mention.
| c22 wrote:
| I didn't downvote you, but it's probably because your
| comment added nothing to the conversation. We're already
| down here at the bottom of the page, we already slogged
| through the gratuitous inline quote, and then there's you
| telling us something irrelevant we already know. And now
| I'm here making it even worse. Sorry.
| thanhhaimai wrote:
| I tried reading this, but for some reason I can't connect with
| it. The ideas that the author wrote seems very foreign to me
| (born and raised in Asia).
|
| For example, this doesn't ring a bell :
|
| > You thought that doing this - taking drugs, lying to your best
| friend - would give you the life you wanted; and then it doesn't
|
| Or this:
|
| > You have to be bad in order to discover what kind of good you
| want to be (or are able to be).
|
| To me, what was considered "good" was clearly laid out by parents
| and schools. I think it's the same here in the US: a large
| portion of the population follow the definition of "good" from
| their parents and churches (a bit less so from schools)
|
| I would love to have some help to understand the article's
| viewpoint better.
| polishdude20 wrote:
| I think the articles viewpoint is that kids not only need to be
| told the rules and follow them blindly but also need to test
| the rules and see if they are really as important as everyone
| says. It's the same thinking when people say you have to make
| your own mistakes to truly learn.
| thanhhaimai wrote:
| > but also need to test the rules and see if they are really
| as important as everyone says.
|
| Thank you.
|
| Then I don't quite agree with the article on this. I don't
| need to "test the rules" myself to see if they are ready as
| important as everyone says. I can observe.
|
| For example: I don't need to drive without a seatbelt to
| "test" whether seatbelt is as important as everyone says. I
| can observe that people without seatbelt have worse outcomes
| from accidents.
|
| I think this might also be related to whether the kid grow up
| with parents they can trust and are able to explain the
| reasons behind "rules" to them. I was fortunate that my
| parents always tried their best to explain why I should or
| should not do something. I questioned them a lot, but
| defaulted to "trust" when they didnt have time to explain.
| daseiner1 wrote:
| > For example: I don't need to drive without a seatbelt to
| "test" whether seatbelt is as important as everyone says.
|
| There is a trivial objection to every ethical position. The
| parent commenter is not suggesting every rule needs to be
| tested. But we can imagine plenty of situations where a
| form of rebellion would be endorsed by most, or may at
| least be supposed to be constructive to one's identity. For
| instance, rejecting one's family's religious practices.
| Preferring tinkering alone in a milieu that prefers more
| extraverted, social activities and might view the
| aforementioned as a concerning form of lonerism. Living,
| briefly, a nomadic lifestyle. Historically (and,
| unfortunately, still into the present in some places),
| being sociable with people of differing race was/is met
| with censure and even threat of violence. And so on.
| Certain forms of cultural transgression are imperative, in
| my opinion, for the advancement and development of society,
| culture, and (as a downstream effect), technology.
|
| There are certainly advantages to a more conservative,
| traditionalist societal arrangement as well. It's a matter
| of balance.
| RangerScience wrote:
| There's a pretty good observation in the book "Iron John"
| that's about how you have to _take_ your freedom from
| your parents (in the myth, it's something you steal) - if
| it's given, there's always the shadow of it being taken
| away again. If it's something you've _taken_ , it's yours
| now.
|
| Testing "seatbelts" doesn't really _take_ any freedom
| /adulthood for yourself.
|
| Spending your earned money on something your parents
| don't approve of, does.
| rglullis wrote:
| Some other "rules":
|
| - you need to get a college degree if you want to get a
| good job.
|
| - work hard and you will be rewarded by your efforts.
|
| - you can be good at anything if you stick long enough with
| it.
|
| Would you agree that there is no way to reliably "observe"
| if these rules are true?
| crazygringo wrote:
| But you wrote above:
|
| > _follow the definition of "good" from their parents and
| churches_
|
| And different churches in your community teach different,
| contradictory things. Not just in small details but in
| really big things.
|
| And your two parents don't agree on everything, and your
| friends' parents have different views as well, sometimes
| dramatically so. And sometimes you raise their views make
| more sense than your own parents' in some areas.
|
| So how are you going to figure out which things to follow
| and which things to ignore?
|
| There's a lot you just have to test and figure it for
| yourself. Especially since people are born with very
| different temperaments, so the rules one person follows may
| be very different from another -- like whether they
| consider getting up extremely early to be virtuous, or bad
| for their health.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| There are simple rules which breaking doesn't matter much,
| but there are certainly rules that are worth questioning.
| Seatbelt rule is quite meaningless to question, but then
| there are all sorts of rules about substances for example
| which you are told not to consume. Alcohol as a teenager or
| drugs. We need rules around substance usage, but for
| example many of those substances can give you experiences
| where you learn about human nature and what you really are.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Even if they explain the reasons, doesn't mean the kid will
| listen; reason may not apply. May also depend on their
| personality, temprament, communication style, etc. You can
| try "analyzer" style communications with a "promoter" style
| teenager but they have tuned out after 10 seconds already
| and think you're a buzzkill, intentions aside.
|
| "Fuck around and find out" is a great phrase to use in such
| cases.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Yeah, but teenagers will intrinsically try and rebel against
| what is "good"; what I think this article drives at, in simpler
| terms, is that just telling someone they should or shouldn't do
| this or that isn't enough. Teenagers will resist this "just so"
| authority, ask "why though?", but even if a complete answer is
| given they will have to find out for themselves.
|
| "Why should I go to bed at this time?" they will ask. Then they
| try staying up all night and realize they're useless the next
| day.
|
| "Why shouldn't I drink?" they ask, then drink a lot and forget
| how they got home, but won't forget how sick they are the next
| day.
|
| And this isn't a one off thing, many people continue this thing
| until well in their twenties; some never learn. But those that
| do and have kids of their own will continue the cycle; don't do
| this, do do that, because I found out the hard way that if you
| don't do as I'm trying to tell you, bad things will happen and
| your life may be worse off. In theory.
|
| (many caveats there, I am not a psychologist, I'm just a 30
| some year old who considered himself a good kid but ended up
| pretty under-matured with a load of relationship problems to
| show for it. And now a teenager in my house too, who is a lot
| more rebellious, lol)
| __MatrixMan__ wrote:
| Is it intrinsic, or is a reaction to an oversold notion of
| "good"? I didn't rebel until I realized how much of a lie
| DARE was. I'm now 36 and I still think that most of the
| crimes I committed as a teen were justified (except for the
| handful that weren't, those keep me up at night).
| h0l0cube wrote:
| I've been reading Determined by Robert Sapolsky. He mentions a
| study about the behavioral differences _on average_ between
| peoples that come from rice-growing and wheat-growing regions
| of China. When two chairs were placed obstructively in a
| Starbucks, people from rice-growing regions would move around
| the chairs, whereas those from the wheat-growing regions would
| move the chairs. The explanation given is that rice-growing
| requires intergenerational cooperation to be tenable, and he
| highlights an example of terraces that were found to be
| maintained for over 2000 years. On the other hand, he notes
| that the US consists of a largely immigrant and pioneer
| populations, which are selected for individualism.
|
| It's important to note that neither of the cultures are
| 'better', and that also within populations there are great
| individual differences. In the chair example, the middle ground
| would be to consider the chairs a Chesterton's Fence (Why were
| they placed there? Is it to cover a spill?)
| tomcam wrote:
| > When you play truant you have a better time... When you betray
| yourself, when you let yourself down... You have to be bad in
| order to discover what kind of good you want to be
|
| This implies that being truant from school is some kind of a
| self-betrayal. School as constituted over the last 50 years ago
| or so is effectively no different from prison for many many
| people. If you are sedentary, intellectually inclined, and not
| cut out for a job in the trades, school may be good for you.
|
| If you need fresh air or are entrepreneurial or competitive in
| sports or are better suited for welding than for trig, it is 12
| to 16 years of punishment and being ground down.
| PopAlongKid wrote:
| >School as constituted over the last 50 years ago or so
|
| What changed 50 years ago?
|
| >If you need fresh air
|
| I got plenty of fresh air walking to and from school each day,
| as well as gym class, and recess in elementary school,
| intermural sports in high school.
|
| >12 to 16 years of punishment and being ground down
|
| In your example, why would someone attend 16 years if only 12
| are required? Also, school year is only 35-40 weeks of the
| calendar year, so not really like a prison at all.
| tomcam wrote:
| Starting around 50 years ago things like wood shop, metal
| shop, home economics, sports, economics, PE, and band started
| to lose funding. By about 20 years ago most schools stopped
| these programs. Teachers nowadays think almost exclusively in
| terms of students getting a college education, not some going
| into the trades, and some getting degrees.
|
| This has led to many people being steered into college or
| university when they should really just be out working a job.
| Hence the 16 year number.
|
| I am delighted this system worked out for you. It is
| perfectly valid for many. It is also a hellhole for many
| others.
| bcrosby95 wrote:
| It's a damn shame too. I was never interested in the
| trades, but being able to use your hands to build stuff is
| useful. I still have the clock, cutting board, and dustpan
| I made in my wood/metal shop.
|
| There should, at the very least, be something where you
| learn to follow instructions and put things together. Like
| ikea furniture. Learn how to hang a picture. And so on.
|
| Heck, I know people who can barely change their light
| bulbs.
| TheGreatCabbage wrote:
| > If you are sedentary, intellectually inclined, and not cut
| out for a job in the trades, school may be good for you.
|
| The intellectually inclined are also badly affected by school.
| The slow pace of learning stifles intellectual curiosity, and
| causes severe boredom. School is a nightmare that grinds them
| down while not allowing them to pursue their interests.
|
| (Speaking for the UK, anyway.)
| thefaux wrote:
| Just as true in the US.
| flockonus wrote:
| Praise to this website to how well it saves to .pdf, might sound
| insignificant but I've lost count to how many times i needed to
| manually adjust website elements or layout before having anything
| near a viable save or print.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| I'm not sure after reading this what 'good' and 'bad' even refer
| to. Is there some independent ethical principle to uphold, or is
| it merely a matter of obeying the rules one is given?
|
| A truly difficult child will pester the parents about the quality
| of the societal ruleset they're supposed to obey, taking
| advantage of any obvious hypocrisy in the application of the
| ruleset, or internal contradictions, e.g. "so how come poor
| people go to jail for commiting a crime, when rich people just
| get a fine and don't have to go to jail?"
|
| Eventually the frustrated parent will give in and admit that
| human society is ridden with hypocrisy and contradictions, which
| is probably all the difficult child was looking for - some
| honesty.
|
| P.S. I think Bertrand Russell fits the definition of 'difficult'
| in this sense:
|
| https://harpers.org/archive/1932/10/in-praise-of-idleness/
|
| > "All this is only preliminary. I want to say, in all
| seriousness, that a great deal of harm is being done in the
| modern world by the belief in the virtuousness of work, and that
| the road to happiness and prosperity lies in an organized
| diminution of work."
| ufocia wrote:
| Sounds like the old adage that you learn from failures, not
| successes. Much ado about nothing, methinks.
| neonate wrote:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20240120095030/https://www.lrb.c...
| SebFender wrote:
| I have to live with a difficult kid for the past years (GF's
| daughter) and I have no patience for babies. Every time I
| challenge, mommy comes in to cover. Any way - one day she will
| hit her Waterloo and deal with it. As for me - I now wave saying
| goodbye and good luck.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Being a parent of an adolescent that is just as troubled as I was
| as an adolescent... is basically the hardest thing I've ever done
| in my life. It's harder being the parent to that adolescent, than
| it was _being_ that adolescent.
|
| It's like watching your toddler reach and put their hand out on a
| hot stove burner... knowing exactly what that's going to feel
| like... and not being able to do almost _anything_ about it.
| precompute wrote:
| If personal responsibility towards harmful things requires
| firsthand, "practical experience" of the same, then we need
| better philosophers and teachers, and an environment that rewards
| people in the long run for not choosing the wrong things.
| surfingdino wrote:
| "You have to be bad in order to discover what kind of good you
| want to be (or are able to be)." ... How very Etonian.
| thom wrote:
| It's funny reading some of the responses here because it's clear
| many people have lived as if responding to a completely literal
| reading of only the first paragraph of the book of life.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-01-21 23:01 UTC)