 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ

Registered: May 2002
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by bananas
That's the thing. When I'm thinking about having kids, I'm thinking I'll have them when I can support them, when I'm in a good financial situation.
That's what I'm asking, theoretically, if everything's good, would you have children? I would. |
No matter how good my financial situation becomes, having children will always mean living at a lower standard of living than I otherwise would. And greater personal wealth would do little to relieve the burden on my personal freedom and free time. Not to mention the omnipresent possibility that your financial situation could suddenly take an unexpected turn for the worse, via divorce, or loss of employment. How can you account for that in deciding when it's safe to have children?
On the other side of the ledger, I have little use for children generally, and if my children were anything like I was as a child, it only stands to become a greater headache. So any upside is highly speculative, at best.
It seems to me that the cost/benefit equation is rather straightforward. Do you disagree?
|
|
Nov-09-2011 16:10
|
|
|
 |
 |
bananas
baby i got your money

Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Mordor
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
No matter how good my financial situation becomes, having children will always mean living at a lower standard of living than I otherwise would. And greater personal wealth would do little to relieve the burden on my personal freedom and free time. Not to mention the omnipresent possibility that your financial situation could suddenly take an unexpected turn for the worse, via divorce, or loss of employment. How can you account for that in deciding when it's safe to have children?
On the other side of the ledger, I have little use for children generally, and if my children were anything like I was as a child, it only stands to become a greater headache. So any upside is highly speculative, at best.
It seems to me that the cost/benefit equation is rather straightforward. Do you disagree? |
I agree that you, as we all know, are a robot, so bringing the argument of mental pleasure of having children would be fruitless. (sorry for my poor choice of words on the matter, english is far from my first language).
|
|
Nov-09-2011 16:14
|
|
|
 |
 |
Vector A
Your petrochemical arms

Registered: Apr 2011
Location: U.S.
|
|
|
Not to rain on the parade of would be parents, but...
| quote: | "In what may have been the most influential article ever written in the field of developmental behavior genetics, Plomin and Daniels (1987) reviewed evidence that a substantial portion of the variability in behavioral outcomes could not be explained by the additive effects of genotype or the environmental influences of families. They suggested that this residual term, which they called the nonshared environment, had been neglected by environmentally oriented researchers who assumed that the most important mechanisms of environmental action involved familial variables, like socioeconomic status [SES] and parenting styles, that are shared by siblings raised in the same home and serve to make siblings more similar to each other. Indeed, Plomin and Daniels argued, once genetic relatedness has been taken into account, siblings seem to be hardly more similar than children chosen at random from the population."
In other words, despite a lifetime of proximity, your adopted child may bear no more similarity to you (in terms of, e.g., intelligence) than someone selected at random from the general population. The shared family environment that your children (biological or adopted) experience has little or no measurable effect on their cognitive development. While there are environmental effects on intelligence (the highest estimates of heritability for adult IQ are around .8, and some would argue for a lower value; see here for Turkheimer's work suggesting low heritability in the case of severe deprivation), they seem to be idiosyncratic factors that can't be characterized using observable parameters such as the parents' SES, parenting style, level of education, or IQ. It is as if each child experiences their own random micro-environment, independent of these parental or family characteristics.
...By now these results are well understood and accepted by experts, but not by the general population or even policy makers.
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2009/1...nvironment.html |
The evidence seems to be that intelligence (and possibly other traits) is a product of genetics and non-familial environment. The effect of parenting and home life is pretty close to nil.
The guy who wrote the blog above has two kids, btw.
|
|
Nov-09-2011 16:18
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:52.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|