|
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Not at all, I just don't advocate the right of a society to oppress its deviants. Just because the society at large would like to deprive the rights of a minority within it does not make it right for them to do so. So, society's wishes are entirely irrelevant. If they fly in the face of liberty and justice, it is our government's responsibility to ignore society's wishes.
|
Child laws are designed to protect a vulnerable segment of the population who may be suceptible to dangers that adults have a larger chance of avoiding. They aren't an imposition of society to oppress a minority, they are an extension of rights, priveledges, and restrictions imposed upon individuals more vulnerable in our society.
| quote: |
Well judging by many of your posts on this forum, I'm not sure I'd be very comfortable with you voting. That said, I'm not about to start advocating your disenfranchisement. You or others "feeling uncomfortable" is no justification for depriving another human being of his liberty.
|
Well that's rather surprising since you haven't really critiqued the methodology of much my political reasonings to arrive at this state of apprehensiveness about my voting choices. Are you not "comfortable" with anyone who doesn't think in a like manner for their vote  ? Oh well, I'll take that as the price I pay for being an outspoken moderate/"conservative" on these forums  . Although that's still rather surprising since I'm for laissez-faire economics, increased civil liberties, and I voted for Gore.
At any rate I never said I was uncomfortable with their voting choices, I stated that they would likely be easily swayed since they have not achieved maximum use of their cognitive thought processes.
| quote: |
Road tests do precisely that. If you aren't capable of driving, you cannot pass one. At least, that's the function they ought to serve. I'm interested to hear why you think they're so ineffective. Furthermore, a child of 12 probably has much faster reflexes and better spatial coordination than a man of 65. Do you advocate taking away the right to drive for the elderly based entirely on their age rather than their actual competence behind the wheel?
|
Competance and rationality are two separate things. Why do I think that a 65 year old with slower reflexes and spatial coordination should drive as opposed to a more responsive 12 year old? Simply because that 65 year old man will more than likely realize his difficiencies and adjust his driving methods to take into account his inadequacies. A 12 year old is likely less mature (and it's a fact that maturity increases with age), and not as capable in realizing the cause and effect relationship of his actions and thus less likely to appreciate the consequences of his actions as a whole.
| quote: |
An unknown percentage of the time, the child most certainly does or better. You presume that percentage to be low, but can you support that assertion? And even if you could, would that justify oppressing those children who are exceptions? I'll answer for you: No, No.
|
Ok well I would assume psychologists would know better and if there are any psychologists on this boards I'm sure their input would be appreciated. But in terms of children understanding the responsiblities of their actions I base that on cognitive thought ability. I'll use Piaget's theory of cognitive development:
| quote: |
Child Development
Jean Piaget - Cognitive Development
Jean Piaget was a developmental psychologist best known for his work describing stages of cognitive development from infancy to early adulthood. He was born in Switzerland and was interested primarily in studying how knowledge was acquired. He spent time in the Binet Lab in Paris where he helped standardize the I.Q.test. Much of his theory was based on direct observation of children, including his own three children.
His work was grounded in the concepts of assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation refers to the taking in of new experiences through one's own system of knowledge. Accommodation refers to adjusting the knowledge base depending on environmental demands. Assimilation and accommodation are the processes in which an individual learns to cognitively adapt to the environment. Piaget spoke of schema or schemata, which were defined as specific cognitive structures with a behavioral pattern. Sucking and grasping are examples of early schemata. Piaget referred to schemata occurring later in life as operations. Abstraction and imitation are examples of operations. Piaget described four major cognitive developmental stages.
Sensorimotor Stage - Birth to 2 years old
In this stage, infants acquire knowledge through sensorimotor observation while gaining control of motor function. Object Permanence is the key achievement acquired during the sensorimotor stage. Object permanence refers to the child's ability to understand that objects exist independently from the child. Prior to attaining object permanence, an infant will not look for a dropped toy. Once object permanence has developed, the child will search for objects due to the realization that the object exists even without their direct contact or involvement with it. Piaget noted that if he hid an object in the same place several times and then hid it in another place while the infant watched it being hidden, the infant without object permanence would look for the object in the first hiding place. After developing object permanence, the infant is able to develop mental symbols and use words. An infant's ability to create a mental image of an object is probably necessary for language development.
Preoperational Thought - 2 years old to 7 years old
During this cognitive stage, children develop the ability to use symbols and language extensively. Cognitively, the child has not yet developed the ability to use deductive reasoning. Early in this stage, the child does not have a good sense of cause and effect and therefore has trouble with moral dilemmas. Piaget often told stories to children of various ages that dealt with moral dilemmas. One scenario involved asking a child to tell him who had done more wrong: A child who accidentally broke 5 glasses by accident or a child that broke one glass while attempting to steal a forbidden cookie in a cupboard.
The preoperational child answers that it is the child who broke 5 glasses had done more wrong, as that child broke the most glasses, regardless of intent.
During this stage, children are described as egocentric as they view themselves as the center of the universe and have difficulty understanding the point of view of others. They display magical thinking described as phenomenalistic causality, believing that events occurring together are causally linked. For example, a preoperational child may believe that umbrellas cause rain as they always see umbrellas when it is raining. Children in this stage also use animistic thinking and believe that objects have feelings and intentions like human beings. For example, a preoperational child may feel that a window is in pain if it is broken. Piaget also described the semiotic function in which preoperational children learn to use symbols to represent things like objects or events. This can be seen in the play of children who will use objects like an empty box to represent a house or a piece of clothing to represent an animal, etc.
Concrete Operations - 7 years old to 11 years old
During concrete operations, egocentric thought is replaced by operational thought and the child can see the world from the perspective of others. They are able to reason, follow rules, and develop a set of values and morals. Conservation develops during this stage and allows the child to recognize that objects are still the same regardless if they change shape or form. Piaget used many examples to demonstrate conservation with children of various ages. One scenario involved pouring the same amount of water into two glasses that were the same shape and size. Children with concrete operations as well as preoperational children were able to state that the 2 glasses have the same amount of water. However, if Piaget poured the water from one of the glasses into a tall thin glass, the preoperational child stated that there was more water in the tall thin glass than the other glass, while the child with concrete operations knew they were still equal. Reversibility also develops during this stage, allowing the child to understand that an object can change to another state and turn back again (e.g., that a liquid can become a solid when frozen and then becomes a liquid again when thawed out).
Formal Operations - 11 years old - Late Adolescence
Formal operations is the last cognitive developmental stage and is characterized by the ability to use deductive reasoning and think in abstract ways. With formal operations comes the ability to understand the concept of probability. During these years, adolescents often become interested in abstract concepts such as philosophy, religion, and politics. With abstract reasoning comes the ability to examine all possible combinations of variables and use thought processes necessary for higher mathematics. It is important to note that not all individuals enter into formal operations at the same time and some individuals never develop formal operations and continue to use concrete operational thought. During times of stress, individuals may transiently revert back to concrete thinking.
References
Kaplan & Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry. Volumes I and II, Seventh Edition; Editors: Sadock, B.J. & Sadock, V.A., 1999.
Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. The Psychology of the Child. Basic Books, New York, 1969.
|
Now these are the stages where these capabilities are first INTRODUCED into children development. They are still far from developed as they would be in a fully functioning adult. Additionally, the problem that most psychologists find with this theory is that although this is the generally accepted thought development, children more often than not achieve these stages at vastly varying ages. So yes I can say that typically, children do not have the same level of cognitive thought processes that adults do.
| quote: |
Most adults vote the same way as their parents too. Thanks to the practice of indoctrination, "independent thought" is a rare gift. Not one you magically acquire once the planet has circled the sun enough times.
|
Not myself, and not most people I would imagine. Nearly everybody that I know of has more or less achieved a political revolution in awareness when they turned 18, and are living independant from their parents. I'm fairly certain that it is far more likely for an 18 year old to develop independant political thought than a 13 or 14 year old that is living in a parent's household.
| quote: |
Assumptions and norms are not a good basis for legislation which deprives people of their rights. Slavery was once legal because of assumptions and norms.
|
Well it would be fine and dandy if we had a test to demonstrate maturity to make your own decisions, and then test each child as they grow a year older but that's simply unfeasible. Virtually every country on this planet operates under assumptions with their age laws.
| quote: |
Some 13 year olds are better decision makers than some 18 year olds. Some 18 year olds are better decision makers than some 13 year olds. If I were a gambler, I'd bet on the 18 year old. But I don't gamble with people's freedom.
|
So then you're gambling with the lifes of those incapable of making well informed decisions?
| quote: |
Well, I don't want to turn this into a philisophical discussion about individual thought, but I think your assertion is simply blatantly false. I hate to argue by analogy, and I certainly can't claim to represent the average individual, but I can never remember a moment in my life when I was unable to think for myself.
|
Can you remember a time in your life when you made a poor, incorrect, immature decision, that you would most certainly have done differentely in retrospect? Can you remember a time when you were misled as a child whereas you otherwise would not have been as an adult now? I think if we did a poll here a lot of people would say yes.
| quote: |
Well, if our schools did a half decent job of educating children about those same kinds of issues, I highly doubt the actual rate of molestation would be any higher than it is now.
|
Well under your system of children's rights, children would not be obligated to go to school. And the state would have no obligation to that child to even provide a decent education system about morality and right and wrong. As such they may not have any education system asides from what their parents dictate. You can't have things one way then argue the opposite point.
I will continue to argue the rest of your arguments later tonight ... I'm hungry 
___________________
Retro ...
Last edited by occrider on Apr-22-2003 at 14:12
|
