On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 21:52:34 -0400 "David Lubkin"
<lubkin@unreasonable.com> writes:
> how have you raised your
> kids?
I always thought more in terms of watching my child unfold (sort of like
a flower) rather than raising her. It was great fun showing Earth to a
new resident. Up until she got too heavy to carry in a backpack (it
was a backpack made especially for carrying kids), I took her everywhere
I went, even to concerts and films (I don't remember her ever crying or
making any sort of disturbance) and since I had my own business she went
to work with me as well. By that time she wanted to be down on the ground
running around on her own, and it got to be more difficult to take her
everywhere.
When Kitty was very small I never left her alone for more than a few
minutes (I didn't find that I needed any sort of general anesthetic
during the birth process, so I was able to hold her and comfort her from
the moment she was born)--she always slept in the bed with me and her
father until she decided she was ready for her own bed. Leaving small
babies alone is not in keeping with human nature. When I was a child the
predominate belief was that a baby should be left alone to cry until it
had no more energy for crying and fell asleep; this seems such a
horrible, cruel way to treat a person, makes me shudder to think of it.
This child rearing practice alone could go far towards explaining the
fact that antidepressants are some of the most commonly used drugs in our
culture.
My attitude towards children has always been that they're normal people
and are best treated as such. I've found that they're much more
intelligent than our culture gives them credit for being and are capable
of making their own decisions. I've also found them eager to be helpful
if they're given the chance--this applies to all children, not just my
own.
BTW Kat (which is what she calls herself now) has given me permission to
write about her to this list.
> How do you deal with biases of the school system?
I always left it up to Kat to decided whether she wanted to go to school
or not. Up until highschool, she sometimes went to school and sometimes
stayed home. For the days she chose to stay home, we'd make up some
excuse that would sound good to the school authorities (this brought up
the opportunity to discuss the morality of lying--when it's morally ok to
lie; when it's morally wrong to tell the truth, etc.) I always told her
not to take the school authorities too seriously but to conduct herself
in such a way that she wouldn't disturb the other people. The public
schools in our small community are good, and parents were always
encouraged to participate--it was ok with the teachers for a parent to
wander into the classroom at any time without any sort of appointment. I
did volunteer work in my Kat's classes and thus got to know the teachers
and the other kids.
Unfortunately the State of Texas now has a law that a student must attend
school a certain number of days in order to get credit for courses
taken--even if they make perfect scores on the exams. They only allow 3
absences within any 9 week period. I believe it's a misguided attempt to
keep the kids off the streets and out of trouble.
Are they given
> any sort
> of religious upbringing?
Neither I nor Kat's father are religious, so we never gave her any sort
of religious instruction. I told her some of the myths from various
religions but only as good stories, not as sacred truths. She went to
Christian churches with friends now and then. I probably told her at the
time to take what she heard at church with a grain of salt. She herself
recognized the contradictions within those religions and questioned me
about some of them. She's investigated various other religions on her
own--was attracted to Wicca for a short while but in the end decided it
was interesting but silly. The answers she gives to Christian
prosyletizers have surprised me with their simutaneous depth and tact.
Do your kids know about libertarianism,
> cryonics,
> nano-technology, space colonization, SETI, the Singularity, etc.?
Only from hearing me mention them, I think. So far she hasn't shown any
great interest in any of these except for nano-technology,
libertarianism, and the Singulariy.
> Do they
> share your interests?
Kat isn't the least bit interested in gardening. She's somewhat
interested in the law and accounting/business (she's interested in making
money). She's always liked math (when she was a little girl I once
overheard her telling a friend at school, "My mom's good at math, and so
am I."). We both like swimming (I first took her swimming when she was
around 6 weeks old and she's loved it ever since). She's more interested
in the inner workings of computers and computer programming than I am.
And so forth. She's had very much her own personality ever since she was
little.
Have you taken any particular steps to
> inculcate
> rationality in them?
No, not other than by behaving rationally myself (which, alas, I don't
always do, but I try). I think rationality's an innate part of human
nature, and it takes quite a bit of brainwashing and cruel treatment to
destroy it.
> And for everyone: Do you try to pass the memes on to your friends
> and
> colleagues?
Only through my behavior or if someone tries to get me to participate in
doing something I consider wrong (such as being cruel to kids), eg. by
asking me to force children to sit in a school room pretending to pay
attention to a teacher's drivel. In such cases, I'll refuse to
participate and tell them why I'm refusing. I usually don't get into
arguments with people about their religious or political beliefs, because
I've found that it's futile. Regarding future technologies, I don't make
a special point of bringing them up, but sometimes conversation ends up
going in those directions.
How successful have you been?
With respect to child-rearing I've been somewhat successful, because
Kat's an unusually good kid, and people often ask me how I did it (I had
a foster kid for a while as well, who did very well when he was with me
and people asked what I'd done). The simple answer is, "I've done
nothing." But it's a rather profound answer when you think about it.
The natural human potential is to be rational, friendly, loving. If kids
are given the freedom to just unfold as their nature leads them to do,
they'll turn out to be good people (barring brain abnormalities--however
my opinion is that abnormalities such as chemical imbalances can be
brought about through emotional and physical stress).
Who seems the most/least
> receptive?
Smart people seem to be most receptive. Highly religious people seem to
be least receptive.
Barbara
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:38:30 MDT