Are children really less than adults?

[Sadib]

In fiction, you may see the trope where a kid may feel like they are not appreciated by adults. The adults dismiss the kid due to their age. The kid then of course proves the adult wrong by saving the day.

Is there any reality behind this trope? If children are just as capable as adults, why can't they vote? Why should children believe that they are on the same level as adults?

For clarification: let's compare an adult with their child self.

 

[arized]

There are levels of psychological development that are not met until other criteria of the hierarchy are met. You cannot skip a stage of psychological development. You will be developing within a certain stage until you achieve the results. This doesn't just mean that children are less capable than adults but also that some adults will only ever be as capable as children.

Empathy is one of these learned stages of psychological development. Kids say mean things to other kids and, when they see their face twisted in a pained reaction, they learn that it doesn't feel good to be mean or have someone say something mean to you. That's how kids often learn empathy.

Reasonably speaking, children are less capable than adults.

 

[poke poke]

most adults are intellectually and physically superior to two year olds. a 12 year old child going to school in america will on average be better at math than a 50 year old poverty-ridden somalian. a scrawny freshman at harvard will usually have better informed and intelligent sociopolitical opinions than a hick farmer in rural texas, but the latter could probably beat the former in a fight.

i hope you see the problem here. this is a such a vague topic. what do you mean by 'less' or 'capable'? are you referring to intellect, brawn, some combination of the two? what age groups are we talking about here? are we accounting for socioeconomic discrepancies or talking about purely physical/physiological differences that are independent of environment? this is a meaningless question without any clarification.

 

[Steampunk]

Well, a lot of what I was gonna say has already been said, but I'll put my $0.02 in.

It really depends on what you see as "Less". Do you mean, treated as a lesser sentient being? Lesser mentally? Lesser physically? Less appreciated? Gotta give us more to go on.

Now, if you mean that they should/are treated as lesser, that they are disposable, its ok to harm them, (etc. with that line of thinking) then yes that is wrong. They are sentient, can feel pain, and even though they may not currently be as equally capable- physically or mentally- as a mature adult, does not mean that they are insignificant, or should be treated as such.

If you are saying that they are mentally and/or physically less capable than an adult then yes you would be correct. We were all at that point before we matured, (assuming we mature) but developing is a process that takes time, and is by no means a bad thing. When just born we are literally helpless, and we do not instantly go into a self-sustaining adult, there is a middle ground, with many varying degrees. But again, this is not a bad thing, all humans go through this process, Edison was once helpless, so was Einstein, as was George Washington, and Ben Franklin, the list goes on indefinitely.

Now if you are saying that they are less appreciated...perhaps they are, I cannot answer that question. Yes there are things that children can do that adults take for granted, and they should not take them for granted, but what realistic steps can one take to appreciate a child more? I'm sure there are ways, but I personally can come up with nothing. And this also depends on the maturity level of the child, if this is a 2 year old we are discussing here, then what realistically can you expect? But if we are dealing with a 10 year old, the situation is a totally different one altogether.

 

[Sadib]

most adults are intellectually and physically superior to two year olds. a 12 year old child going to school in america will on average be better at math than a 50 year old poverty-ridden somalian. a scrawny freshman at harvard will usually have better informed and intelligent sociopolitical opinions than a hick farmer in rural texas, but the latter could probably beat the former in a fight.

i hope you see the problem here. this is a such a vague topic. what do you mean by 'less' or 'capable'? are you referring to intellect, brawn, some combination of the two? what age groups are we talking about here? are we accounting for socioeconomic discrepancies or talking about purely physical/physiological differences that are independent of environment? this is a meaningless question without any clarification.

I see the problem here. You're all over the place. When comparing two people, you choose two individuals who have little to nothing in common. An educated American with a poverty stricken Somalian? A university student with a rural farmer? If you want to make a claim, you're going to have as many constants as possible. Perhaps you should compare an adult with their child self.

 

[poke poke]

i was making the point that 1) you havent specified the sort of children and adults youre talking about and what 'more/less capable' or 'same level' means and 2) given that you havent specified anything any discussion becomes meaningless because you can pick arbitrary swathes of children and adults and posit them as more/less capable based on just as arbitrary criteria. so perhaps you should start by clarifying the terminology youre using in the initial post.

 

[Sadib]

i was making the point that 1) you havent specified the sort of children and adults youre talking about and what 'more/less capable' or 'same level' means and 2) given that you havent specified anything any discussion becomes meaningless because you can pick arbitrary swathes of children and adults and posit them as more/less capable based on just as arbitrary criteria. so perhaps you should start by clarifying the terminology youre using in the initial post.

Just because I didn't specify every single detail about who I'm comparing, you automatically jump to ridiculous conclusions? Maybe I should have also specified that I meant human children, so you don't compare trees to tadpoles.

 

[Psychic]

Just because I didn't specify every single detail about who I'm comparing, you automatically jump to ridiculous conclusions? Maybe I should have also specified that I meant human children, so you don't compare trees to tadpoles.

marioguy, you started the topic, so you're responsible for starting it off on the right foot and giving the thread clear direction. As it stands, there isn't much to debate here - it's pretty cut and dry. If someone is unclear about the very topic you are trying to debate, you can't shift all the blame. poke poke asked for clarification, and you have yet to actually give any. You haven't even addressed his question of "what 'more/less capable' or 'same level' means."

Please start clarifying and edit the OP if you wish for this to remain open.

~Psychic

 

[Sadib]

marioguy, you started the topic, so you're responsible for starting it off on the right foot and giving the thread clear direction. As it stands, there isn't much to debate here - it's pretty cut and dry. If someone is unclear about the very topic you are trying to debate, you can't shift all the blame. poke poke asked for clarification, and you have yet to actually give any. You haven't even addressed his question of "what 'more/less capable' or 'same level' means."

Please start clarifying and edit the OP if you wish for this to remain open.

~Psychic

I edited my OP. Do you consider yourself to be smarter than you were when you were a child?

 

[LDSman]

I edited my OP. Do you consider yourself to be smarter than you were when you were a child?

Yes.

If you survive them, life experiences are very educational.

Things that were earth shattering as a child turn out to be less important as you grow older and you learn what really matters.

 

[Peter Quill]

I edited my OP. Do you consider yourself to be smarter than you were when you were a child?

Have you ever heard of Connectomics?

It's the principal behind the mapping of neurons and synapses in the brain. The entire map of how the synapses and neurons intertwine and connect is reffered to as the connectome. Basically the theory is that, as we age, the connections on this connectome constantly switch. The example I like to use is a kid who happens to put his hand on a hot stove. If we follow connectomics, the experience would either add or remove a connection on the connectome, so now the kid would think "Wait, that's hot and I know not to touch it" based off of his experience with getting burned earlier.

Of course this is something different than say, opinions and experiences and the fact that kids can think surprisingly critically at young ages but it's still interesting nonetheless.

 

[bidoofdude]

I see the problem here. You're all over the place. When comparing two people, you choose two individuals who have little to nothing in common. An educated American with a poverty stricken Somalian? A university student with a rural farmer? If you want to make a claim, you're going to have as many constants as possible. Perhaps you should compare an adult with their child self.

They were explaining what the general equivalent of that particular child would be in adult form in one aspect or another, for example, intelligence.

 

[Sadib]

They were explaining what the general equivalent of that particular child would be in adult form in one aspect or another, for example, intelligence.

He wasn't comparing anything equivalent.

 

[Murder Doll]

Age and it's owners posession of it is not in of it's self all that important nore is it a full blown 100% across the board accurate way to judge a person's mental capabilitys or intellect it how ever is the best way we have as of yet to give our family & social structure a passive way of putting order in what would be a chaotic frenzy of power & opinions.

In short an older person (while this is not always 100% true) is generaly going to be smarter (and consequintly make better choices) then a kid or younger person as they have had more time to mature & learn so we tend to think more highly of adults then we do children.

 

[Monek_OP]

In short an older person (while this is not always 100% true) is generaly going to be smarter (and consequintly make better choices) then a kid or younger person as they have had more time to mature & learn so we tend to think more highly of adults then we do children.

Despite your blunt re vocalization of the stereotype this thread was obviously constructed to argue against, you make an ambiguous statement in that you lack the sources outside of your own possibly biased opinion on one side of the argument, without really presenting another side; making an opinion out of fact. However, I do want to ask: did you feel this way as a child? Now if you didn't it simply shows a condescending opinion of children that is the fuel of the resentment of adult culture that, according to the trope in the OP of this thread, children dislike.

Although being true, the attitude that the "issue" is treated with is partially its own fuel, and creates a situation where children aren't expected to act intelligently and therefore there isn't much of a motivation to. So, although it is true, its paradoxically its own issue and it wouldn't be as much of an issue if things like this thread didn't exist.

 

[Sadib]

However, I do want to ask: did you feel this way as a child? Now if you didn't it simply shows a condescending opinion of children that is the fuel of the resentment of adult culture that, according to the trope in the OP of this thread, children dislike.

Well, that you would be a child's opinion though. Is it really worth that much? This question goes into a circular loop of asking whether a child's opinion is worth anything. The child would say yes, but can you really trust the child if their opinion isn't worth anything?

 

[Monek_OP]

Well, that you would be a child's opinion though. Is it really worth that much? This question goes into a circular loop of asking whether a child's opinion is worth anything. The child would say yes, but can you really trust the child if their opinion isn't worth anything?

A child is the other side of the argument, is it not? What's a debate if everyone talking about it are all on the same? Isn't a child's opinion necessary?

 

[Sadib]

A child is the other side of the argument, is it not? What's a debate if everyone talking about it are all on the same? Isn't a child's opinion necessary?

I assume many members of these forums are children. Maybe we should poll them if adults are better than children.

 

[Monek_OP]

I assume many members of these forums are children. Maybe we should poll them if adults are better than children.

That would really just be a pole of how many people are children and how many are adults.

 

[Sadib]

That would really just be a pole of how many people are children and how many are adults.

No. I meant that we only poll the children and ask them the question.