Modern life 'has turned children into loners'

[Osborn F Enready]

Rinoa said: Public school is as necessary as public roads.

Both topics are debateable, and I would debate you on those issues if you would like to start a thread.

Rinoa said: If we undereducate those that are not able to afford private schooling we are sentencing them to become even more poor creating a larger difference between rich and poor than already exists. The extremely poor(those making minimum wage...sorry, but that's just not enough to live on, full time or no) would not be able to support themselves with their jobs alone. They would end up relying on the government, or turning to petty crime. Both would drain society more than public school currently does. I will, however agree that public school here needs a serious revamp.

Again, I disagree with much of that, but I don't think this is the thread to debate that.

[Athena]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Women, as well as men, can still work and put their children first. Take jobs where you are only gone when the child is gone, or work for yourself. Children are a famillial burden, not a societal burden.

In your mind the responsibility for children rest with the family, but this is not a shared opinion in USA culture and in some cultures the responsibility of children is so shared, the children are identified with a tribe not parents. Comparitively the English are very anti-social. The USA culture is strongly influenced by the English, and I don't think this is a good thing. Our relationships with native Americans may have been totally different, if the English had been more civil to them. The USA would not have invaded Iraq, if they didn't assume this is how human beings do things, from the British who did things this way. Sorry, this getting off the subject, but then again it is not. The English and USA have a serious social problem, and the children are victims of it.

Come to think of it Osborn, democracy is a group effort.

[Athena]

Quote by: Rinoa Of course it is possible to turn out ok, because there are other factors involved, but someone who sits in front of a screen all day playing games all by themselves is less likely to have the social skills.

I think we need to be more speicific and more inclusive.

The problem is more apt to emerge as difficulty getting along in large social organizations, such as school or employment. I do not believe I can adequately define the wide range of social skills, necessary to getting along in a variety of social situations.

I have a dear 50+ year old friend, who is making a mess of her life, because she will not accept the authority of superiors who make decisions about her source of income. She has virtually been excommunicated from her church, and she has terrible family problems. She has a few friends willing to over look her short comings, but a few true good friends can be better than many superfacial relationships. So we must be careful about judging things like social skills. There are many different kinds. Some people are great con artist and would not be good friends.

My social life would be so different if I lived in a separate home instead of an apartment. There are community rooms where I live and this encourages social activity. I like to entertain, so I instigate social activity.

How social children are, depends on their social position, their economic position, their neighborhood, and their home. There are many factors that go into our social behavior. If children have all the best circumstances and also a computer with games, an X box, cell phone, I pod this technology probably will increase, instead of decrease, social interaction. However, if the child's life really stinks, we are apt to blame a social problem on the technology the child uses to make his/her life tolerable. The problem is unlikely the technology, but all the other factors.

[Athena]

Rinoa, Osborn has not understanding of democracy and liberty and how things work when people hold these principles.

While education does give children upward economic mobility, the original purpose of free public education was to socialize the children and make them good citizens. Our liberty is dependent on this, and it is so cost effective, because then we don't need all the programs to manage the social problems, such as welfare and prisons.

We didn't add vocational training to this free public education until WWI, and then school attendence sky rocketed, because with vocational skills the young could have better lives. Of course this increased our middle class and improved our economy and standard of living in general. But some people like justify their anti social approach to life and don't want to question the rightness of being self serving. Assuming self serving people have made our lives good. This is actually a philosophical dispute and it can be flawed by either/or thinking.

[Osborn F Enready]

Athena said: In your mind the responsibility for children rest with the family, but this is not a shared opinion in USA culture and in some cultures the responsibility of children is so shared, the children are identified with a tribe not parents.

Athena, this is the United States of America. Regardless of the "opinion" of Americans, you don't speak for them, nor do I, so please stop trying to use "a majority" as your basis for seeking to remove rights of the individual. No majority can remove the rights of a minority, regardless of emotional claims or logical fallacies, because we are a nation built on OBJECTIVE LAW.

Athena said: Comparitively the English are very anti-social. The USA culture is strongly influenced by the English, and I don't think this is a good thing.

Great, you have an opinion about the way England affects our culture. So do I.

Athena said: Our relationships with native Americans may have been totally different, if the English had been more civil to them. The USA would not have invaded Iraq, if they didn't assume this is how human beings do things, from the British who did things this way. Sorry, this getting off the subject, but then again it is not. The English and USA have a serious social problem, and the children are victims of it.

In your opinion, where cause and effect aren't objectively determined, and emotional appeal appears to trump logic and reason, at least in YOUR view.

Athena said: Come to think of it Osborn, democracy is a group effort.

Well, democracies should worry about that then. We are a nation of limited government, a republic, where the rights of individuals form the objective basis for law, and we were never, and are not, a democracy.

[Osborn F Enready]

Athena said: Rinoa, Osborn has not understanding of democracy and liberty and how things work when people hold these principles.

I am going to say this ONE MORE TIME ATHENA, and then I am going to start reporting you.

You don't speak for me, or ANYONE but yourself.

Your lack of intellectual honesty amazes me.

[Rinoa]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Both topics are debateable, and I would debate you on those issues if you would like to start a thread. Again, I disagree with much of that, but I don't think this is the thread to debate that.

I agree that this isn't the place, and perhaps when I get my summer break(and enough time to do a serious debate) I'll start those threads as 'special debates'. If you do general ones I will of course participate, just not to the same extent.

[Osborn F Enready]

Great, and I look forward to your time and intrest Rinoa. I respect your debate and your opinions.

Until then, good luck with your finals.

[Rinoa]

Thanks Os, that means alot to me considering how much I respect yours.
Thanks, I'm gonna need it. Most of mine are just large projects that I need to finish...(ie start, lol) But I still don't have the time for the research I'd like to be able to put in for a debate like that. I enjoy debates that educate both opponents, and one between us is sure to do that.

[Athena]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I am going to say this ONE MORE TIME ATHENA, and then I am going to start reporting you. You don't speak for me, or ANYONE but yourself. Your lack of intellectual honesty amazes me.

Report me for what?

[Athena]

=Osborn F Enready;380122]Athena, this is the United States of America. Regardless of the "opinion" of Americans, you don't speak for them, nor do I, so please stop trying to use "a majority" as your basis for seeking to remove rights of the individual. No majority can remove the rights of a minority, regardless of emotional claims or logical fallacies, because we are a nation built on OBJECTIVE LAW.

Osborn, in my community there has been an "it takes a community to raise a child" campaign going on. John Dewey is still an important education voice. Several schools such as Waldroff and Quaker schools are intent on the democratic socialization of children. The Quakers strongly influenced our national values, and I learned this from old text books. There are many voices saying we need to work together deomocratically, and saying so is as correct as you making the opposite arguement.

The majority could not remove the rights of the minority if democracy were well understood. Unfortunately, we no longer have a strong understanding of democracy, because we stopped educating for it in 1958, and are rapidly becoming a socialist police state, with the opposite relationship to authority that we once had. Before the change in public education, there was a political movement that opposes democracy. There are some excellent philosophical debates and replacing knowledge of Greek philosophers with knowledge of German philosophers, puts us on the path Germany followed.

Great, you have an opinion about the way England affects our culture. So do I. In your opinion, where cause and effect aren't objectively determined, and emotional appeal appears to trump logic and reason, at least in YOUR view. Well, democracies should worry about that then. We are a nation of limited government, a republic, where the rights of individuals form the objective basis for law, and we were never, and are not, a democracy.

Are you refuting the influencing of England on our culture? Our industry is modeled after England's autocracy. We adopted England's concept of common law. New Orleans was influenced by France and there are some basic differences between these two cultures.

I have a copy of the 1917 National Education Association Conference which defines the purpose of public education as we mobilized for war. I have old text books, that educated for democracy. I know of the strong influence of people like John Dewey on our educational system that did prepare our young for democracy. I know these things because I made a deliberate research of the history of education. I don't know how you are going to with me, without this information I have, but to say my arguements are nothing but "emotional" is insulting.

Your lack of intellectual honesty amazes me

is an insulting thing to say. Do you have any arguements that are better than personal insults?

Osborn, you appear to feel hostile towards me, and I don't like reading something that is so hostile.

[Kuldeep]

Importance of one of the parents to remain at home till school going age was mentioned by me in one of the simialr threads.

Parents, mother in particular, are first and best teachers of the child. The base provided by them has to have appreciable effect on the overall behaviour of the child.

Rightly so, some wise person had said "Charity begins at home!!!!"

Coming to the OP title " Modern life has turned children into loners'" I donot fully agree with the statement since, modern life has given lot more exposure to children through TV, Computer and internet extra. The real culprit, I feel, is both the parents going out for jobs, depriving the child of the love it needed from parents in first 5 years of life. World over, mostly child grows in the hands of maid servants and not parents.

I recall, in the past, I said that present modern period is the transition period. Previously, child's care was taken by housewives, Moms. Presently children feel loners upto school going level. Hopefully, in future men may turn househusbands and take care of their children. Thus, children would no longer remain loners!!!