Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Yakk · 06-11-2004, 01:08 PM

What is the response of the child to "here are some of the reasons why we have this rule": is it picking the reasons apart, proving that the rule is invalid, then asking for the rule to be removed?

Second, there aren't always reasons for rules. No, really. A good chunk of societies rules are there simply because they are there. You can build up rationalizations around them, but most of those rationalizations are not the reason behind the rule, they are just the reasonings people have made about the rule.

Some rules exist to form habits (as noted with the curfew rules), some rules exist to reduce the chance of a harmful thing happening, even if that harmful thing is rare. Some rules are dumb. Distinguishing between them is an exausting and difficult process.

Imagine if you had to justify, verbally, why you should be allowed to make a stride. Every time you want to put one foot in front of the other, you have to defend your choice of foot location, explain why it is better than other places where you could put your foot, show how it moves you towards your goal in the most efficient manner, demonstrate that the place where you are going to put your foot is legal, going back to treaties with the aboriginals, and show that the ecological impact of your footstride and the damage to the ground/shoes/self is justified against the gain of moving you closer to your destination.

Now, some strides are stupid. Sometimes you walk in the wrong direction, sometimes you step in front of traffic. However, as a rule, having to justify every step you take is a silly and counter productive thing to do.

Having to justify every rule a parent places on a child is analagous. Yes, a parent can constrain a child with "bad" rules. However, the discussion of which rules are good and which rules are bad isn't an a priori good thing to have in every situation.

Yes, "leaving home" is a very dangerous, difficult and uncomfortable thing: it could mean delaying or not doing school, living in squalor, and many other things which you might think are unthinkable. I wouldn't advise it. The alternative to it is obeying the rules your parent places on your life. Possibly some of the rules are bad. Your parents unwillingness to justify them, however, is not evidence that they are bad, nor is it unreasonable.

06-11-2004, 01:08 PM	#34 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	What is the response of the child to "here are some of the reasons why we have this rule": is it picking the reasons apart, proving that the rule is invalid, then asking for the rule to be removed? Second, there aren't always reasons for rules. No, really. A good chunk of societies rules are there simply because they are there. You can build up rationalizations around them, but most of those rationalizations are not the reason behind the rule, they are just the reasonings people have made about the rule. Some rules exist to form habits (as noted with the curfew rules), some rules exist to reduce the chance of a harmful thing happening, even if that harmful thing is rare. Some rules are dumb. Distinguishing between them is an exausting and difficult process. Imagine if you had to justify, verbally, why you should be allowed to make a stride. Every time you want to put one foot in front of the other, you have to defend your choice of foot location, explain why it is better than other places where you could put your foot, show how it moves you towards your goal in the most efficient manner, demonstrate that the place where you are going to put your foot is legal, going back to treaties with the aboriginals, and show that the ecological impact of your footstride and the damage to the ground/shoes/self is justified against the gain of moving you closer to your destination. Now, some strides are stupid. Sometimes you walk in the wrong direction, sometimes you step in front of traffic. However, as a rule, having to justify every step you take is a silly and counter productive thing to do. Having to justify every rule a parent places on a child is analagous. Yes, a parent can constrain a child with "bad" rules. However, the discussion of which rules are good and which rules are bad isn't an a priori good thing to have in every situation. Yes, "leaving home" is a very dangerous, difficult and uncomfortable thing: it could mean delaying or not doing school, living in squalor, and many other things which you might think are unthinkable. I wouldn't advise it. The alternative to it is obeying the rules your parent places on your life. Possibly some of the rules are bad. Your parents unwillingness to justify them, however, is not evidence that they are bad, nor is it unreasonable. __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.