posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 05:37 PM
Originally posted by badgerprints
Did you read that before you hit post?
I did, did you? It states "It is slightly different, I did not say completely different, or right. AT LEAST with the giving requirement to receiving,
it would teach them to do SOMETHING good in order to receive, EVEN IF, it is for selfish reasons."
Now lets revert to the initial statement, I DID NOT SAY IT WAS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT OR RIGHT. read that part carefully, word by word. I did not say it
was right, to teach kids to do something good for selfish reasons, but it is better than what you are teaching them now. To not do anything, and still
get the same reward.
You condemn voluntary giving and then try to justify forcing kids "to do good for selfish reasons"?
You would FORCE them to give, to teach the meaning of GIVING????
7 year olds being given toys don't learn the value of giving, they learn the value of entitlement and self importance. Sorry if you missed that memo,
but thats the reality of it. They are 7, they aren't philosophers. You want to teach them a moral lesson, tell them straight out.
Do you have any grasp of psychology? Kids don't even have a real sense of right and wrong till these later years when they begin to realize santa
doesn't exist. Kids that are young don't respond to morality. They respond to behaviorism.
You couldn't even comprehend my simple statement above, I don't know why I would bother to tell you about how child psychology will dramatically
impact the way they grow up and who they become in the future.
[edit on 11-12-2008 by grimreaper797]