Are children really less than adults?

[Monek_OP]

I'm pretty sure I'm the only child who'd answer rationally.

 

[Sadib]

I'm pretty sure I'm the only child who'd answer rationally.

So you're saying that children are not rational?

 

[Queequeg]

No. Let kids enjoy their childhood and not lose their innocence so fast by early exposure to the highly complex and brutal nature of politics, the highly polarizing effects of elections and issues on the public, and the widespread corruption in the U.S government. Anyway, I would be shocked if you found a 10-12 year old who could logically understand the positions of politicians and the policies and ideologies of our major political parties and could watch CNN or Fox News without turning it off and understand what is being said.



Most school elections for class officer positions are popularity contests anyway. You want to give all these kids, middle and high school kids the right to vote? They don't care about real issues and the character and policies of the candidates, even on a MUCH smaller and simpler scale.

 

[Monek_OP]

No. Let kids enjoy their childhood and not lose their innocence so fast by early exposure to the highly complex and brutal nature of politics, the highly polarizing effects of elections and issues on the public, and the widespread corruption in the U.S government. Anyway, I would be shocked if you found a 10-12 year old who could logically understand the positions of politicians and the policies and ideologies of our major political parties and could watch CNN or Fox News without turning it off and understand what is being said.



Most school elections for class officer positions are popularity contests anyway. You want to give all these kids, middle and high school kids the right to vote? They don't care about real issues and the character and policies of the candidates, even on a MUCH smaller and simpler scale.

Your use of the word of "innocence" is condescending, incorrect, and offensive. If you don't want children to not learn things they'll learn eventually, than you are too absorbed in the past.

Surprise.

Most school elections for class officer positions are popularity contests anyway. You want to give all these kids, middle and high school kids the right to vote? They don't care about real issues and the character and policies of the candidates, even on a MUCH smaller and simpler scale.

Arguably though, some adults don't either. I mean, if you have a high-functioning employee who thinks he's the smartest person in the world, the first thing he hears after he smartly turns on the news will be the thing he'll work into every political conversation to make himself sound smart. And he'll stand by that until he meets someone who he thinks is very smart (but refuses to admit it) who tells him what to think. The only people who know enough about politics to matter are the people who either work in them or are so absorbed in their own opinions that they won't change them until a successful politician does.

 

[bidoofdude]

He wasn't comparing anything equivalent.

He wasn't comparing them, he was showing the equivalent, not comparing two equivalents, which is not what I said.

 

[dirkac]

No. Let kids enjoy their childhood and not lose their innocence so fast by early exposure to the highly complex and brutal nature of politics, the highly polarizing effects of elections and issues on the public, and the widespread corruption in the U.S government. Anyway, I would be shocked if you found a 10-12 year old who could logically understand the positions of politicians and the policies and ideologies of our major political parties and could watch CNN or Fox News without turning it off and understand what is being said.

._.
How so would you be shocked that a child would be able to know such things, or watch those channels, or, well, actually be involved in meaninful discussion regarding those subjects?
Not only is that sentence condescending and highly insulting to said age demographic, but also somewhat incorrect as approximately half of the kids I knew of that age were able to hold discussion upwards and make actual logically correct points regarding them, somewhat proving they understand the situation enough to retain a logical opinion on the matter.

Also, they will simply learn of the situation eventually, why would you absorb yourself and them and disclose factual information simply for something as ubiquitous as "innocence"?

 

[Sadib]

He wasn't comparing them, he was showing the equivalent, not comparing two equivalents, which is not what I said.

He didn't do that either.

 

[Queequeg]

Perhaps kids should have the right to vote, but a civics test should be given to at least show they know enough about current events, the government, and the candidates to vote and will not largely do so based on extremely trivial reasons such as physical looks and who their parents are voting for, especially when the parents would undoubtedly play a powerful role in the child's vote.



And sorry, I did not mean CNN or Fox News, those are basic sources. I meant more political media such as C-SPAN or publications like The Economist.

 

[poke poke]

Perhaps kids should have the right to vote, but a civics test should be given to at least show they know enough about current events, the government, and the candidates to vote and will not largely do so based on extremely trivial reasons such as physical looks and who their parents are voting for, especially when the parents would undoubtedly play a powerful role in the child's vote.

lol. adults vote for stupid reasons all the time.

 

[Sadib]

Perhaps kids should have the right to vote, but a civics test should be given to at least show they know enough about current events, the government, and the candidates to vote and will not largely do so based on extremely trivial reasons such as physical looks and who their parents are voting for, especially when the parents would undoubtedly play a powerful role in the child's vote.



And sorry, I did not mean CNN or Fox News, those are basic sources. I meant more political media such as C-SPAN or publications like The Economist.

I think the reasoning behind not letting children vote is that the family with the most kids would get the most votes.

 

[poke poke]

the reasoning behind not lettings kids vote is that kids are viewed as less intellectually capable and less aware of sociopolitical issues than adults. not saying thats a good reason but it is the reason.

 

[Monek_OP]

I think the reasoning behind not letting children vote is that the family with the most kids would get the most votes.

But really, is that necessarily a bad thing?


Well, yes, from and ethical standpoint, but that's only when it's applicable; how many families would have more children just so they could vote?

However, from a rational standpoint, it does sort of stand to reason with democracy; an opinion's an opinion whether it's biased from a parent, (or any source of bias at all, really) and bias is just a manipulative form of persuasion, so having more children and persuading them to think a certain way about politics shouldn't really be a problem ....

 

[The Imposter]

But really, is that necessarily a bad thing?


Well, yes, from and ethical standpoint, but that's only when it's applicable; how many families would have more children just so they could vote?

However, from a rational standpoint, it does sort of stand to reason with democracy; an opinion's an opinion whether it's biased from a parent, (or any source of bias at all, really) and bias is just a manipulative form of persuasion, so having more children and persuading them to think a certain way about politics shouldn't really be a problem ....

Undoubtedly, children will be biased based on who their parents are voting for, or what their leaning is. Children look toward their parents as a figure of worldly advice, the place where they can get all the right answers. They will be exposed to only the beliefs and ideas of one side of the equation as they age, and as such will never be exposed to the bigger picture until they are older and less impressionable. Hell, I only believe in my political party because my parents both did and it carried over onto me.

Bias is going to happen no matter what, and I agree with you in that it really cannot be avoided, but it is a relatively major problem. As a child myself (if you consider 13 a child, anyway), I can safely say that our comparatively undeveloped opinions will be less meaningful than those of adults, and that voting-wise children shouldn't be allowed to vote, in my opinion. We just don't have the critical analysis skills required to make such major decisions, and we shouldn't put a massive portion of our government in the hands of these undeveloped minds' choices. However, in smaller matters, childrens' opinions should be given a similar amount of consideration to those of adults, as children often have a very unique viewpoint on certain matters.

I guess you could say I'm somewhere in the middle. Children are inferior to adults by nature, but they shouldn't be ignored completely.

 

[Monek_OP]

Undoubtedly, children will be biased based on who their parents are voting for, or what their leaning is. Children look toward their parents as a figure of worldly advice, the place where they can get all the right answers. They will be exposed to only the beliefs and ideas of one side of the equation as they age, and as such will never be exposed to the bigger picture until they are older and less impressionable. Hell, I only believe in my political party because my parents both did and it carried over onto me.

Bias is going to happen no matter what, and I agree with you in that it really cannot be avoided, but it is a relatively major problem. As a child myself (if you consider 13 a child, anyway), I can safely say that our comparatively undeveloped opinions will be less meaningful than those of adults, and that voting-wise children shouldn't be allowed to vote, in my opinion. We just don't have the critical analysis skills required to make such major decisions, and we shouldn't put a massive portion of our government in the hands of these undeveloped minds' choices. However, in smaller matters, childrens' opinions should be given a similar amount of consideration to those of adults, as children often have a very unique viewpoint on certain matters.

You make an excellent points. However, there is still the problem of, "If something, [in this case bais], is it really a problem? It can't be a problem without having a reasonable solution."

I guess you could say I'm somewhere in the middle. Children are inferior to adults by nature, but they shouldn't be ignored completely.

This is a great summary of what my current opinion is.

 

[dirkac]

Perhaps kids should have the right to vote, but a civics test should be given to at least show they know enough about current events, the government, and the candidates to vote and will not largely do so based on extremely trivial reasons such as physical looks and who their parents are voting for, especially when the parents would undoubtedly play a powerful role in the child's vote.



And sorry, I did not mean CNN or Fox News, those are basic sources. I meant more political media such as C-SPAN or publications like The Economist.

I disagree here, though, while children can hold such things from a political standpoint, they simply can't yet actually take the question and answer it when needed; children function (or so I've noticed) in a way where theoretically they would be correct, but when in the situation themselves they falter and gravitate towards less educated reasonings.

Not trying to put down children or anybody here, as I'm a child myself and criticizing them that way without including myself would be terribly hypocritical.


Alright, that makes much more sense, as I only know of two or three from said age that watch channels like those while being able to keep up with it.

 

[Monek_OP]

I disagree here, though, while children can hold such things from a political standpoint, they simply can't yet actually take the question and answer it when needed; children function (or so I've noticed) in a way where theoretically they would be correct, but when in the situation themselves they falter and gravitate towards less educated reasonings.

Not trying to put down children or anybody here, as I'm a child myself and criticizing them that way without including myself would be terribly hypocritical.


Alright, that makes much more sense, as I only know of two or three from said age that watch channels like those while being able to keep up with it.

Again, I agree. Theoretical thinking allows us to explore possibilities and learn from our own thoughts whereas in actual situations we try to rely on things we already know (and we're terribly forgetful, at least I am.) because of the pressure of trying to be taken seriously.

 

[The Imposter]

Again, I agree. Theoretical thinking allows us to explore possibilities and learn from our own thoughts whereas in actual situations we try to rely on things we already know (and we're terribly forgetful, at least I am.) because of the pressure of trying to be taken seriously.

Exactly. In some ways, it is the pressure induced from adults thinking us inferior that makes us children falter under pressure. Additionally, there are some serious situations in the real world. Putting such a major situation on 74 million underdeveloped minds (the number of children in America approximately) is completely impractical. These are important matters, and having a significant portion of the vote come from unexperienced people will likely lead to major problems.

 

[Sadib]

But really, is that necessarily a bad thing?


Well, yes, from and ethical standpoint, but that's only when it's applicable; how many families would have more children just so they could vote?

However, from a rational standpoint, it does sort of stand to reason with democracy; an opinion's an opinion whether it's biased from a parent, (or any source of bias at all, really) and bias is just a manipulative form of persuasion, so having more children and persuading them to think a certain way about politics shouldn't really be a problem ....

Less intelligent people tend to have more children. That's why it might be a bad thing.

 

[Monek_OP]

Less intelligent people tend to have more children. That's why it might be a bad thing.

LOL, ok.


But if they really are stupid, would they really have their own incorrect opinion on politics? Or would they just copy the first thing they heard? Or would they even care enough to bias their many children?

 

[The Imposter]

LOL, ok.


But if they really are stupid, would they really have their own incorrect opinion on politics? Or would they just copy the first thing they heard? Or would they even care enough to bias their many children?

The idiots of the world will generally have very adamant opinions about something that might not always be best for the nation. And people don't actively attempt to bias their children; it just happens naturally. The children won't really be exposed to other, potentially more "viable" viewpoints.