As reported by a recent study published in the Journal of Family Psychology, kids who were giving too much heavy work and caregiving roles without letting them simply be a carefree child in their childhood, tends to be less sensitive towards their own children’s needs too. Professor Amy K. Nuttall from the Michigan State University said,“People who raised up by giving too many stresses and burdens, would feel confused when they educate their own children in the scope of understanding children’s needs and expectations. According to an online parenting blog named let kids be kids, Childhood is a time marked by playing, making friendships, getting messy, creativity and exploration. It then stated that, "It also happens quite quickly. Lets get back to basics and bring back childhood!"
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in my opinion, had expressed a lot similar thinkings related to the study above. In Rousseau’s mind, people in the state of nature, on the contrary to what Hobbes once stated is vicious, nasty, and wicked, is actually happier, stronger, and more virtuous; they are not constrained by the repressive apparatus and factitious needs of the society. Kids in their childhood are just like people in the state of nature, they are happy, carefree, and easy to be satisfied. However, once they got chained and restrained by the pressure of real life and the lessons that their parents exerted on, they would lose the valuable peacefulness that the childhood granted to them and gradually became less sensible towards their own children when they take on the role as parents. The whole scenario here is just like what Rousseau said, people once get civilized and well informed of the real world, they would tend to be less happy and limited by the artificial needs of the society.
Link:http://www.parentherald.com/articles/10622/20150930/heres-why-you-should-let-kids-be-kids.htm
Link:http://www.parentherald.com/articles/10622/20150930/heres-why-you-should-let-kids-be-kids.htm
One major difference here might be that while kids will grow up and thus must lose that innocence - natural man did not need to move into society. It was more of a choice, though Rousseau certainly think s many were tricked and/or coerced into doing it. Do you this distinction as meaningful or do you think the parallels are much more interesting?
ReplyDeleteI think in Rousseau's theory, though it was a choice for man to enter the society, when they began to see all the benefits in the state, they would ultimately chose to enter the society as well. Same scenario presented in my example that kids would pursue to grow up as adults because they see the benefits of doing so.
DeleteThis is certainly an interesting observation about how children are educated. However, I think it is important that the idea of why children are giving work. I think it's to install discipline and work ethic which is important.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great comparison, however a parent still has to be a parent and teach their children right from wrong. Although some children would be fine and learn this on their own without heavy parental interference, this can not be said for all children. How do you determine how much to interfere with any given child? This relates back to society in that all are based on different values and filled with a unique group of people. How do you determine if, when, and how government intervention is needed?
ReplyDelete