18 ms·

What Danes consider healthy children’s television

355 points by CraneWorm 10y ago

arethuza 10y ago
"Supreme Being is not only imaginary" I was immensely proud when my son at 4 years old decided to stand up in his pre-school class and point this out to everyone.
- crististm 10y ago
  By the same account, electrons are imaginary as well. Edit for the naysayers: quantum effects too...
  - erelde 10y ago
    There's proof of electrons... Your screen. edit: there's also proof of quantum effect in the real world.
    - tankenmate 10y ago
      My favourite one is that Mercury is a liquid at room temperature. It should be a solid, it doesn't form diatomic molecules in gas form, and it has far lower melting points and electrical conductivity; largely because it doesn't share it's valence electrons easily due to a mixture of relativity and quantum effects.
      - waqf 10y ago
        I think you'll find Mercury is a solid at room temperature. You're probably thinking of mercury.
    - pbhjpbhj 10y ago
      You say "your screen" like you imagine that there's more than one mind here .. and you imagine that mind isn't being fed sense-data from a malevolent aliens laptop for entertainment purposes. Being a bit more grounded there's a possibility that it's electron, not electrons too.
    - wtbob 10y ago
      > There's proof of electrons There's also proof of God: to borrow Sir Christopher Wren's epitaph, si monumentum requiris, circumspice. I don't mind a little atheist boy proclaiming his disbelief in preschool, but I wonder how his father would feel about a little religious boy proclaiming his belief in that same school.
      - erelde 10y ago
        > If you seek his monument, look around you This, is no proof. At best it's an argument from authority. You need a little leg up in rhetoric arguments. It has long been decided, by better logicians and theologists than us, that either there's no proof of a supreme being or that it doesn't exist. To borrow vocabulary from another domain, it's a closed issue. Either way is fine, and I've been careful not to disclose my beliefs. edit: I used an argument from authority, partly by sarcasm pedit: musing about languages and brains: I did 3 years of latin classes and was good at it, and although I could roughly understand the latin quote, translating it in English through my native tongue made my brain feel weird, so I took the translation found on wikipedia...
- dagw 10y ago
  Why? Should he also be telling them that Santa Clause and the tooth fairy are imaginary? Why can't kids be kids and believe in whatever makes them happy? They'll have plenty of time later to be old and cynical.
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    Because false beliefs that are later dashed make kids cynical? Being prepared to distinguish reality from fanatasy is an essential skill needed to rise above the whims of crowds. However, if I had a kid in a similar situation as the OP, I might have tried to teach them about the dangers of confronting other kids' parents when those kids stop believing in Santa at four instead of whatever age they'd hoped.
    - ganzuul 10y ago
      The premise is unfalsifiable, so claims of falsehood are unscientific. Doing this is just as bad as preaching from a book if you care about truth.
      - akiselev 10y ago
        That's ridiculous. The claim that unicorns and hobgoblins don't exist is also unfalsifiable but we human beings aren't purely rational automatons that can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality. In the absence of falsifiable claims, the burden of proof lies exclusively on the person making a positive statement of existence (that there is a supreme being). If you care about truth, preaching from a book is so much worse.
        ganzuul 10y ago
        Do you always downvote people you disagree with?
  - pessimizer 10y ago
    Kids don't choose to believe in any of that stuff. It's a game for adults that involves extensive lying and often elaborate staging. You're explicitly equivocating between cynical and realistic, here. Everything true is not bad, and the adult world is not all terrible.
- lintiness 10y ago
  i've never met a more evangelical (from the greek) crowd than atheists.
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    You really ought to get to know some Mormons ;) (spoken as a former believer). One reason some groups, like atheists or evangelicals, are so vocal is because they believe that the damage done to society by others not sharing their beliefs will be irreparable. This is why beliefs and decisions need to be rooted in reproducible evidence, rather than the reverse.
    - sverige 10y ago
      There are many kinds of evidence that are not reproducible.
      - justinjlynn 10y ago
        Evidence refers to that which can be evidenced on demand, or rather more apropos, produced upon demand. Therefore, unless you mean something other than the commonly accepted meaning of the term 'evidence', then evidence must be reproducible. Perhaps if you could share some examples, we could explore your definition more fully?
        sverige 10y ago
        I disagree that all evidence must be reproducible, which is the standard for experimental evidence (simple physics comes to mind). Just off the top of my head, there is historical evidence and geological evidence, for example. Historical evidence (whether documentary or archaeological or otherwise) is certainly producible, but not reproducible in the sense that you can provide the exact same thing again. Geological evidence (again, very simply, like rock strata) is not reproducible. Even saying that this kind of formation always accompanies another kind isn't reproducible. (The "all ravens are black" problem.") There are other logical kinds of evidence that don't meet the "scientific" standard, and yet are quite valid. My objection really is that the original statement was far too narrow.
- nsxwolf 10y ago
  Can your 4 year old refute Aquinas? It's a little condescending to say he "pointed it out" to everyone, as though it's some trivial subject.
  - arethuza 10y ago
    I was proud of him for stating his beliefs in a context where that would have been difficult to do. The fact that his own beliefs happened to coincide with my own even though I'd never explicitly communicated them to him was a secondary thing.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - Retra 10y ago
    It is a trivial subject.
    - nsxwolf 10y ago
      Nietzsche sure didn't think so.
      - Retra 10y ago
        I guess that proves it isn't then. Bummer.
  - pluma 10y ago
    Everyone can refute Aquinas.
- sctb 10y ago
  We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12274765 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12274765 and marked it off-topic. This is a classic flamewar topic and the guidelines ask us to resist introducing it: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    I've made this comment in response to this type of moderation before: if comments expressing skepticism (or even cute stories about kids being kids) are detached, but comments lacking skepticism it are not, then a bias is created in which it becomes okay for the religious to discuss those intellectual aspects of their beliefs suitable for HN, but not anyone else. And FWIW, I thought the commenters in this thread did a decent job of not turning it into a flamewar. So if this comment was detached because it received a lot of flags, consider that it may be effectively suppressing an interesting intellectual viewpoint because of one group's disproportionate taking of offense at disagreement, to the point of feeling the need to flag this comment but not other, similar comments that support that group.
- gedy 10y ago
  Which is why he did it, and sounds a lot like you posting this here.
wodenokoto 10y ago
> And God he says, lives in heaven with Santa Claus and > their dog Marianne, implying that the Supreme Being > is not only imaginary, but also gay. That is like saying Ernie and Bert are gay. I'd appreciate if the author tried a little harder at interpreting childrens television from a childs perspective.
- homingbrain 10y ago
  > That is like saying Ernie and Bert are gay. It turns out that they are not gay, but not because it's inconceivable to children. They just aren't gay. (http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Are_Ernie_and_Bert_gay%3F http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Are_Ernie_and_Bert_gay%3F)
- dalke 10y ago
  Or Felix Unger and Jack Klugman in The Odd Couple.
- Zekio 10y ago
  I think it is just there for the parents, so they won't fall asleep
- cocotino 10y ago
  To me it's just propaganda, normalisation, etc
- alex_hitchins 10y ago
  If we are all made in his image, a bit of him must have been gay, trans, fluid, etc. etc. Or is this not how it works?
  - wtbob 10y ago
    > If we are all made in his image, a bit of him must have been gay, trans, fluid, etc. etc. > Or is this not how it works? I think that the orthodox position would be that man was meant to be in God's image & likeness, but the Fall has warped the world and imperfections have crept in. Kinda like if I took a photograph of you, and then some random person came by and drew on a moustache.
skrebbel 10y ago
Kaj and Andreea is fantastic! I'm Dutch but my wife is Danish. She does her utmost best confronting our kids with Danish TV (we live in Holland), so I understand a bit of what the author is on about. I was initially surprised as well. Truth is, it _is_ entertaining! But most importantly, once you get past the absolutely amateuristic way things are shot (hey, the kids don't care, why should you?), there's a lot of depth to a lot of it. You need to let that depth sink in a bit before you can see the value of it. For example, the article about Kaj and Andreea: Probably most striking, though, is another thing lacking: education. Quite simply, there is none, academic or moral. “Kaj and Andrea”, a pair of puppets, are sweet friends, but also goofily flawed: Kaj is terribly self-obsessed, Andrea is warbling and neurotic. When other characters do something wrong, there is little of the obvious consequence-and-lesson resolution of American shows; the results are usually left to speak for themselves. The lovely thing here is that it is educative, but it's up to the watcher to draw the lesson. Kaj's self-obsession is usually very funny and rather ridiculous. It teaches kids "wow, it's pretty ridiculous to be so self-obsessed". And at the same time it teaches kids that even if you're flawed, that's ok - both Kaj and Andreea appreciate one another and are appreciated and respected by the human co-hosts of their TV shows. This is something that I've not really seen anywhere else. I'm not convinced that kids learn lessons like these better when it's spelled out for them.
- tclancy 10y ago
  I am old enough (40) with a daughter who is almost 3, to be a little horrified by kids' TV. It's not that there isn't a ton of "good" stuff for her, it's that there is only "good" stuff. There isn't anything not geared toward teaching her math, reading or morals. When I was a kid, that was PBS and a handful of other shows and the rest of it was people whacking the crap out of each other to make me bug my parents to buy toys. I don't think either extreme is particularly wise, but it's strange to me there's nothing aimed at her age range that's simply fun. Left to her own devices (literally), she scans youtube for videos of off-screen adults playing with toys (which depresses the crap out of me) and 1990s-quality offshore Flash video of the same "Johnny finger" song in various copyright violating incarnations. The song is horrific. Do not go look it up unless you plan on having kids and want to inoculate yourself now, but writing this out I wonder if it's not her looking to simply enjoy something rather than constantly be prompted to solve a shitty math puzzle so we can move on with the plot. All of this sounds like I am an awful father but in reality we limit her daily screen time to no more than 24 hours.
tronje 10y ago
> But until then, they seem utterly unharmed by a childhood of hearing about the queen’s bottom and watching grandma light some bodily gas on fire. Is that really as surprising as is implied? To me, none of what the article describes seems like such a bad thing. Sure it's a little weird, but it seems right up there with the humor children enjoy. And not everything has to have a message or a moral at the end of it.
- lintiness 10y ago
  that's the point the author's making.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
At the risk of making a tu quoque argument - if you want to see unhealthy children television, look no further than Cartoon Network.
- wodenokoto 10y ago
  I don't know what they are showing on CN in general right now, but I'm an adult who watches the regular show and Steven Universe, and would very much watch the latter together with my children if I had any.
  - mack73 10y ago
    My two kids (6, 9) fell in love with the regular show years ago. It's the only show I can watch with them. The writing is strange and psychadelic with hidden messages I'm sure only I pick up on and the artists (is this show computer animated?) are great.
    - egypturnash 10y ago
      Pretty much every new cartoon you see is done at least partially with the computer. In the case of Regular Show, Wikipedia tells me that it's animated traditionally, on paper, then goes through digital ink and paint. Which is pretty retro for a show that premiered in 2010.
  - justabystander 10y ago
    I've got a large amount of extended family and married friends, so good shows like these are super helpful in positively connecting with their kids. And shared media interests is actually part of a large social aspect of public school. > Steven Universe This show works incredibly well. Especially since the episodes are short - a feature for parents as well as kids. Gravity Falls, as well, does a great job of being fun without trying to do much preaching. Of course, some of the adult fandom for these can be a bit ... enthusiastic, so I worry about whether the kids will be able to enjoy themselves at conventions and on the internet without getting caught up in the drama. Both of these shows have also garnered approval from some parents with some pretty insane control issues, too. In situations like that, it's nice to be able to provide gateway entertainment to kids languishing under extreme supervision. I doubt I'm the only one who's had to deal with that. It's surprising how many parents unwittingly rob their kids of a childhood. Being a non-parent in some ways gives a more even perspective about loosening the grip on the kids and not taking everything so seriously. Shows like Regular Show and Adventure Time are pretty good, but some parents reject them for being "too stupid". Yeah, there's juvenile behavior, but it's not all over. When introducing parents to these, I sometimes have to be particular about which episodes I start with, or they'll immediately reject it. I've introduced teens to shows like Rick and Morty and Star vs. the Forces of Evil. Parents are generally more accepting of more edgy material at that age. And they're gonna push boundaries, so at least point them to the better quality shows. Anime has also gotten hugely popular in this recent generation, to the point that some of my nieces and nephews seem to literally breathe it. Streaming subscriptions help with that, though available shows vary by licensing deals and region. Hulu is one of the best for cartoons. It's also amusing that the creators of these shows are the recent adults who grew up on the last generation of entertainment cartoons.
silvestrov 10y ago
This link to "Ramasjang" might (or might not) work from outside Denmark: https://www.dr.dk/tv/se/onkel-reje-og-boernenes-brevkasse-s1/onkel-reje-og-boernenes-brevkasse-6#!/ https://www.dr.dk/tv/se/onkel-reje-og-boernenes-brevkasse-s1... Most bakers sells "Kaj Cakes", we don't mind eating the cute puppets: https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e35/c72.0.495.495/13734503_295893287429006_1357333032_n.jpg https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e35/c72.0.495....
- farhaven 10y ago
  Works fine from Germany. And now I'm watching bizarre Danish children's TV. There goes my day.
ulrikrasmussen 10y ago
I'm a Dane, and grew up with Danish children's television, including the shows mentioned in the article. I just recently re-watched one of my favorite shows "Nanna", which you can now stream from the archives of DR. Even as an adult, I still enjoy watching it for its humor and creativity, and for the fact that it doesn't speak down to its audience. I don't think that can be said about most other children's shows. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1kBNCRB6hw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1kBNCRB6hw Nanna: "What're you doing?" Mother: "We're having sex, what're you doing?"
- maaaats 10y ago
  > I'm a Dane with possibly the most Danish name I have ever seen, heh.
- Munksgaard 10y ago
  Some might even recognize the dad as Jesper Christensen, who portrays Mr. White in the recent James Bond movies.
ups101 10y ago
You missed Bamse ("Teddy"): A self-absorbed egocentric narcissist, taking advantage of his naive, little-minded friend Kylling ("chicken"), episode after episode with zero negative impact. After +20 years he's now joined by Bruno, also a teddy bear, sharing similar personal flaws except with much refined insults bordering on psychopathic abuse, bullying kids instead of chickens, believing firmly that the world exists solely to please him in every which way. However, mostly you may have missed the subtle, educational point (yes, there is one) underpinning these characters: Critical thinking. Is it right to behave like this, even if there is no negative consequence (as is often the case in real life)? Do you emphasize with someone taking advantage of their friends? In Denmark, we have this crazy idea that kids are interested in distinguishing right from wrong, even when the answer isn't spoon-fed by a morally correct television character - and maybe exactly because it isn't. The kids don't like Ramasjang because it's a training ground for inspiring film makers. The like it because naughty is fun. And, if done right, it just may induce some critical thinking. It'll take more than a few days of watching, but just like the kids, you'll see the point :-) Best regards from a grown-up, bottle-fed on Bamse, somewhat certain of right from wrong.
koolba 10y ago
> Probably most striking, though, is another thing lacking: education. Quite simply, there is none, academic or moral. I already love this! If there's one thing that children need to experience at an early age, it's that the majority of what they'll deal with in life will have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Life should be enjoyed for life ... it doesn't always have to be a backhanded way to learn to count.
koolba 10y ago
> Probably most striking, though, is another thing lacking: education. Quite simply, there is none, academic or moral. I already love this! If there's one thing that children need to experience at an early age, it's that the majority of what they'll deal with in life will have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Life should be enjoyed for life ... it doesn't always have to be a backhanded way to learn to count.
johnjuuljensen 10y ago
As a Citizen of Denmark and a father of two (4 & 1), I absolutely love the danish stuff on Ramasjang and hate most of the American (foreign) stuff. The programs produced in DK are rude and fun and slow and scary, while the foreign stuff is mostly lame attempts at education (Dora the explorer is a particularly nasty example of this) or over the top animations with too much moral crap, too pretty characters and backed by toy franchises and whatnot. I seems to me that the author actually enjoyed the shows and I mostly agree with his assessment, but he can't have been watching too much because he missed some important shows that are in fact educational. Most prominent of the educational shows is Mr. Beard, who teaches numbers, counting, simple math, letters and simple spelling. The show is weird and quirky, but also features some great songs. The whole thing is backed by some pretty great apps, which expand on the educational stuff. There's also a great show about kids helping animals in trouble. They don't pretend that the kids do most of the work, it's a professional that does the heavy lifting, but the kids get involved as much as possible. I don't mind watching these shows with my kids, but I'll leave as soon as Dora or Thomas the tank engine or Chuggington starts. If you're interested in watching some completely outrageous danish childrens TV, go watch "Carsten og Gittes vennevilla". It's created by the duo "Wulf Morgenthaler", who have produced some the weirdest stuff on danish TV. Particularly the one where Carsten creates a fox is a hoot.
aedron 10y ago
The most astute observation is that characters on Danish kids TV are often completely, unapologetically flawed. This makes them relatable to kids, and kids enjoy watching them in all their dysfunction. And I actually disagree with the premise that this contains no lessons or morals. Children are able to see clearly how ridiculous and ill-advised the behavior of these characters is, and so learn to recognize it in themselves and others. Someone once pointed out that while Mickey Mouse is the mascot of Disney in the U.S. and the main character of the franchise, in Europe it was Donald Duck who became popular. Europeans like the flawed anti-hero, while moralizing America (sorry!) preferred the do-gooder know-it-all Mickey Mouse.
- selimthegrim 10y ago
  I don't know, Chileans sure hated Donald Duck (:P) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_Donald_Duck https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_Donald_Duck
- larsiusprime 10y ago
  Mickey Mouse in his original incarnations was actually a bit of a miscreant!
- david-given 10y ago
  In Britain, the nihilistic Looney Tunes cartoons like Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry and (above all else) Roadrunner were vastly more popular than anything by Disney. In fact, I don't think I've even seen a single Mickey Mouse cartoon...
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
    Watched tonnes of Looney Tunes growing up on British TV. Never seen a Mickey cartoon and I've always been curious if there even were any besides a few when Disney first started.
  - riprowan 10y ago
    I'll take Bugs Bunny and the Roadrunner v Wile. E. Coyote (supra-genius) over Disney any day of the week.
iamthepieman 10y ago
I just turned off the television after my kids watched more television in one morning than they have in an entire month. The reason? Rio Olympics track and field. Finally had to turn it off because I wasn't getting any work done. Other than that, in the summer time anyways, I'll usually toss them a book of matches and tell them to start a fire or go build a dam in the brook. We usually have lofty educational goals at the start of summer but quite honestly I can't be arsed when the weather is warm and there's so much great romping to be had. When we watch TV it's usually youtube for something we're curious about as a family. The "Fun" T.V. most always leaves my kids grumpy afterwards so we avoid it, not for moral or educational or child development reasons, but because i don't like grumpy kids. After a couple kids and being the oldest of a large family I've realized from my individual scientific survey of one that kids will develop and learn in spite of their parents. We get too much credit and too much blame. You gotta water if the sun's hot and it won't be raining for a while and you should try to get a load of fertilizer at least once a year. I guess you should weed after the first planting but you certainly can't make them grow. If this comment is too rambling for you maybe you should go watch something with a moral in it[0] [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xMb3X7fDYQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xMb3X7fDYQ
goodJobWalrus 10y ago
> Ramasjang is entertainment, not a replacement for parents or school. Parents are expected to know when to switch it off (but just in case, the characters go to bed at 8.00pm, and are shown sleeping until the morning) rather than pretend that it is self-improvement. yes, I grew up watching mainly old American cartoons (like Tom and Jerry), and I don't remember them being particularly "educational", and it was well understood that we are watching them for entertainment, and the last one was at 7:15 pm on our television.
chvid 10y ago
As a dane I was deeply traumatised by the show "Poul og Nulle i hullet".
ganzuul 10y ago
"And God he says, lives in heaven with Santa Claus and their dog Marianne, implying that the Supreme Being is not only imaginary, but also gay." Or, you know, a woman.
spullara 10y ago
None of my kids watch traditional television at all, everything they are interested in is on YouTube, both for entertainment and education.
repler 10y ago
95% of the population needs to be brainwashed means 95% of the children's shows are going to be garbage. It's just math. Make sure your kids are in that 5%.
zeristor 10y ago
You can download the DR app on an Apple TV and watch Danish television. Strangely a lot of reshot UK programmes. My particular favourite was putting a camera on the front of a train: Helsingør to Helsingborg the long way round. I'll get my coat.
sixhobbits 10y ago
Can we please edit the title to match the (correct) original "children's" instead of the modified (incorrect) "childrens'"
- iammyIP 10y ago
  'childrens' is 'more correct' because it makes the most grammatical sense. Since it's genitiv, why would you apostrophe it, add another character for what reason? Whose ball is it? The dogs ball. Whose exhaust is it? It's the rockets exhaust. The apostrophe is used to mark silent letters inbetween the slew of two words. It is -> It's ~ It(i)s.
  - asjo 10y ago
    Obligatory Bob the Angry Flower educational cartoon link: http://www.angryflower.com/247.html http://www.angryflower.com/247.html See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genitive_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genitive_case
    - iammyIP 10y ago
      That flower's partially wrong. I disagree with the angry flowers possesive case. The apostrophe in possesive case is confusing and illogical.
      - asjo 10y ago
        That's fine, but that's how english works.
        iammyIP 10y ago
        I would refactor this.
        asjo 10y ago
        The users of a language decide, so you just need to get everybody to follow your idea.
mankash666 10y ago
Denmark - Crass, potty mouthed but entertaining kid shows. USA - Clean, preachy, educational kid shows. Denmark - No gun crime, low homocide rate, high Human Development Index (HDI) USA - High gun crime, high homicide rate, lower HDI. So - What exactly do kid shows have to do with long term success of the kid, or the general society they contribute to?
jonah 10y ago
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Mr. Roger's Neighborhood yet. One of the best if not the very best childrens' program in the US. It was slow-paced and deliberate like the Danish shows are described, but instead of being crass and letting things play out, he dealt with serious topics in a simple, honest, and caring way. He also encouraged curiosity and investigation and broke gender and ethnic mores way before it was the in thing to do. Well worth checking out.
galfarragem 10y ago
They are using 'vaccination' logic: a small dosis of reality makes kids healthier in the long term.
gurkendoktor 10y ago
I see a lot of fellow Europeans in this thread who prefer local TV series to preachy US cartoons (me too). This is slightly off-topic, do you have an opinion on the old Dutch show Alfred J. Kwak[1]? It was extremely political, but somehow I didn't mind when I was a kid. I wonder if it was simply surreal enough to make up for all the reality that it depicts? Has anyone re-watched this series again with kids, 25 years later? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_J._Kwak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_J._Kwak
zeristor 10y ago
Hi kids, don't forget we live in the future; seems odd to discuss something and not have a link to it. Onkle Reje: http://www.dr.dk/Ramasjang/Onkel_Reje/forside.htm http://www.dr.dk/Ramasjang/Onkel_Reje/forside.htm It may be in Danish, but it is for 4 year olds. What would Rasmus Klump do?

355 points by CraneWorm 10y ago

"Supreme Being is not only imaginary" I was immensely proud when my son at 4 years old decided to stand up in his pre-school class and point this out to everyone.

crististm 10y ago
By the same account, electrons are imaginary as well. Edit for the naysayers: quantum effects too...
- erelde 10y ago
  There's proof of electrons... Your screen. edit: there's also proof of quantum effect in the real world.
  - tankenmate 10y ago
    My favourite one is that Mercury is a liquid at room temperature. It should be a solid, it doesn't form diatomic molecules in gas form, and it has far lower melting points and electrical conductivity; largely because it doesn't share it's valence electrons easily due to a mixture of relativity and quantum effects.
    - waqf 10y ago
      I think you'll find Mercury is a solid at room temperature. You're probably thinking of mercury.
  - pbhjpbhj 10y ago
    You say "your screen" like you imagine that there's more than one mind here .. and you imagine that mind isn't being fed sense-data from a malevolent aliens laptop for entertainment purposes. Being a bit more grounded there's a possibility that it's electron, not electrons too.
  - wtbob 10y ago
    > There's proof of electrons There's also proof of God: to borrow Sir Christopher Wren's epitaph, si monumentum requiris, circumspice. I don't mind a little atheist boy proclaiming his disbelief in preschool, but I wonder how his father would feel about a little religious boy proclaiming his belief in that same school.
    - erelde 10y ago
      > If you seek his monument, look around you This, is no proof. At best it's an argument from authority. You need a little leg up in rhetoric arguments. It has long been decided, by better logicians and theologists than us, that either there's no proof of a supreme being or that it doesn't exist. To borrow vocabulary from another domain, it's a closed issue. Either way is fine, and I've been careful not to disclose my beliefs. edit: I used an argument from authority, partly by sarcasm pedit: musing about languages and brains: I did 3 years of latin classes and was good at it, and although I could roughly understand the latin quote, translating it in English through my native tongue made my brain feel weird, so I took the translation found on wikipedia...
dagw 10y ago
Why? Should he also be telling them that Santa Clause and the tooth fairy are imaginary? Why can't kids be kids and believe in whatever makes them happy? They'll have plenty of time later to be old and cynical.
- nitrogen 10y ago
  Because false beliefs that are later dashed make kids cynical? Being prepared to distinguish reality from fanatasy is an essential skill needed to rise above the whims of crowds. However, if I had a kid in a similar situation as the OP, I might have tried to teach them about the dangers of confronting other kids' parents when those kids stop believing in Santa at four instead of whatever age they'd hoped.
  - ganzuul 10y ago
    The premise is unfalsifiable, so claims of falsehood are unscientific. Doing this is just as bad as preaching from a book if you care about truth.
    - akiselev 10y ago
      That's ridiculous. The claim that unicorns and hobgoblins don't exist is also unfalsifiable but we human beings aren't purely rational automatons that can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality. In the absence of falsifiable claims, the burden of proof lies exclusively on the person making a positive statement of existence (that there is a supreme being). If you care about truth, preaching from a book is so much worse.
      - ganzuul 10y ago
        Do you always downvote people you disagree with?
- pessimizer 10y ago
  Kids don't choose to believe in any of that stuff. It's a game for adults that involves extensive lying and often elaborate staging. You're explicitly equivocating between cynical and realistic, here. Everything true is not bad, and the adult world is not all terrible.
lintiness 10y ago
i've never met a more evangelical (from the greek) crowd than atheists.
- nitrogen 10y ago
  You really ought to get to know some Mormons ;) (spoken as a former believer). One reason some groups, like atheists or evangelicals, are so vocal is because they believe that the damage done to society by others not sharing their beliefs will be irreparable. This is why beliefs and decisions need to be rooted in reproducible evidence, rather than the reverse.
  - sverige 10y ago
    There are many kinds of evidence that are not reproducible.
    - justinjlynn 10y ago
      Evidence refers to that which can be evidenced on demand, or rather more apropos, produced upon demand. Therefore, unless you mean something other than the commonly accepted meaning of the term 'evidence', then evidence must be reproducible. Perhaps if you could share some examples, we could explore your definition more fully?
      - sverige 10y ago
        I disagree that all evidence must be reproducible, which is the standard for experimental evidence (simple physics comes to mind). Just off the top of my head, there is historical evidence and geological evidence, for example. Historical evidence (whether documentary or archaeological or otherwise) is certainly producible, but not reproducible in the sense that you can provide the exact same thing again. Geological evidence (again, very simply, like rock strata) is not reproducible. Even saying that this kind of formation always accompanies another kind isn't reproducible. (The "all ravens are black" problem.") There are other logical kinds of evidence that don't meet the "scientific" standard, and yet are quite valid. My objection really is that the original statement was far too narrow.
nsxwolf 10y ago
Can your 4 year old refute Aquinas? It's a little condescending to say he "pointed it out" to everyone, as though it's some trivial subject.
- arethuza 10y ago
  I was proud of him for stating his beliefs in a context where that would have been difficult to do. The fact that his own beliefs happened to coincide with my own even though I'd never explicitly communicated them to him was a secondary thing.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- Retra 10y ago
  It is a trivial subject.
  - nsxwolf 10y ago
    Nietzsche sure didn't think so.
    - Retra 10y ago
      I guess that proves it isn't then. Bummer.
- pluma 10y ago
  Everyone can refute Aquinas.
sctb 10y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12274765 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12274765 and marked it off-topic. This is a classic flamewar topic and the guidelines ask us to resist introducing it: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- nitrogen 10y ago
  I've made this comment in response to this type of moderation before: if comments expressing skepticism (or even cute stories about kids being kids) are detached, but comments lacking skepticism it are not, then a bias is created in which it becomes okay for the religious to discuss those intellectual aspects of their beliefs suitable for HN, but not anyone else. And FWIW, I thought the commenters in this thread did a decent job of not turning it into a flamewar. So if this comment was detached because it received a lot of flags, consider that it may be effectively suppressing an interesting intellectual viewpoint because of one group's disproportionate taking of offense at disagreement, to the point of feeling the need to flag this comment but not other, similar comments that support that group.
gedy 10y ago
Which is why he did it, and sounds a lot like you posting this here.

wodenokoto 10y ago

> And God he says, lives in heaven with Santa Claus and > their dog Marianne, implying that the Supreme Being > is not only imaginary, but also gay. That is like saying Ernie and Bert are gay. I'd appreciate if the author tried a little harder at interpreting childrens television from a childs perspective.

homingbrain 10y ago
> That is like saying Ernie and Bert are gay. It turns out that they are not gay, but not because it's inconceivable to children. They just aren't gay. (http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Are_Ernie_and_Bert_gay%3F http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Are_Ernie_and_Bert_gay%3F)
dalke 10y ago
Or Felix Unger and Jack Klugman in The Odd Couple.
Zekio 10y ago
I think it is just there for the parents, so they won't fall asleep
cocotino 10y ago
To me it's just propaganda, normalisation, etc
alex_hitchins 10y ago
If we are all made in his image, a bit of him must have been gay, trans, fluid, etc. etc. Or is this not how it works?
- wtbob 10y ago
  > If we are all made in his image, a bit of him must have been gay, trans, fluid, etc. etc. > Or is this not how it works? I think that the orthodox position would be that man was meant to be in God's image & likeness, but the Fall has warped the world and imperfections have crept in. Kinda like if I took a photograph of you, and then some random person came by and drew on a moustache.

skrebbel 10y ago

Kaj and Andreea is fantastic! I'm Dutch but my wife is Danish. She does her utmost best confronting our kids with Danish TV (we live in Holland), so I understand a bit of what the author is on about. I was initially surprised as well. Truth is, it _is_ entertaining! But most importantly, once you get past the absolutely amateuristic way things are shot (hey, the kids don't care, why should you?), there's a lot of depth to a lot of it. You need to let that depth sink in a bit before you can see the value of it. For example, the article about Kaj and Andreea: Probably most striking, though, is another thing lacking: education. Quite simply, there is none, academic or moral. “Kaj and Andrea”, a pair of puppets, are sweet friends, but also goofily flawed: Kaj is terribly self-obsessed, Andrea is warbling and neurotic. When other characters do something wrong, there is little of the obvious consequence-and-lesson resolution of American shows; the results are usually left to speak for themselves. The lovely thing here is that it is educative, but it's up to the watcher to draw the lesson. Kaj's self-obsession is usually very funny and rather ridiculous. It teaches kids "wow, it's pretty ridiculous to be so self-obsessed". And at the same time it teaches kids that even if you're flawed, that's ok - both Kaj and Andreea appreciate one another and are appreciated and respected by the human co-hosts of their TV shows. This is something that I've not really seen anywhere else. I'm not convinced that kids learn lessons like these better when it's spelled out for them.

tclancy 10y ago
I am old enough (40) with a daughter who is almost 3, to be a little horrified by kids' TV. It's not that there isn't a ton of "good" stuff for her, it's that there is only "good" stuff. There isn't anything not geared toward teaching her math, reading or morals. When I was a kid, that was PBS and a handful of other shows and the rest of it was people whacking the crap out of each other to make me bug my parents to buy toys. I don't think either extreme is particularly wise, but it's strange to me there's nothing aimed at her age range that's simply fun. Left to her own devices (literally), she scans youtube for videos of off-screen adults playing with toys (which depresses the crap out of me) and 1990s-quality offshore Flash video of the same "Johnny finger" song in various copyright violating incarnations. The song is horrific. Do not go look it up unless you plan on having kids and want to inoculate yourself now, but writing this out I wonder if it's not her looking to simply enjoy something rather than constantly be prompted to solve a shitty math puzzle so we can move on with the plot. All of this sounds like I am an awful father but in reality we limit her daily screen time to no more than 24 hours.

tronje 10y ago

> But until then, they seem utterly unharmed by a childhood of hearing about the queen’s bottom and watching grandma light some bodily gas on fire. Is that really as surprising as is implied? To me, none of what the article describes seems like such a bad thing. Sure it's a little weird, but it seems right up there with the humor children enjoy. And not everything has to have a message or a moral at the end of it.

lintiness 10y ago
that's the point the author's making.

TeMPOraL 10y ago

At the risk of making a tu quoque argument - if you want to see unhealthy children television, look no further than Cartoon Network.

wodenokoto 10y ago
I don't know what they are showing on CN in general right now, but I'm an adult who watches the regular show and Steven Universe, and would very much watch the latter together with my children if I had any.
- mack73 10y ago
  My two kids (6, 9) fell in love with the regular show years ago. It's the only show I can watch with them. The writing is strange and psychadelic with hidden messages I'm sure only I pick up on and the artists (is this show computer animated?) are great.
  - egypturnash 10y ago
    Pretty much every new cartoon you see is done at least partially with the computer. In the case of Regular Show, Wikipedia tells me that it's animated traditionally, on paper, then goes through digital ink and paint. Which is pretty retro for a show that premiered in 2010.
- justabystander 10y ago
  I've got a large amount of extended family and married friends, so good shows like these are super helpful in positively connecting with their kids. And shared media interests is actually part of a large social aspect of public school. > Steven Universe This show works incredibly well. Especially since the episodes are short - a feature for parents as well as kids. Gravity Falls, as well, does a great job of being fun without trying to do much preaching. Of course, some of the adult fandom for these can be a bit ... enthusiastic, so I worry about whether the kids will be able to enjoy themselves at conventions and on the internet without getting caught up in the drama. Both of these shows have also garnered approval from some parents with some pretty insane control issues, too. In situations like that, it's nice to be able to provide gateway entertainment to kids languishing under extreme supervision. I doubt I'm the only one who's had to deal with that. It's surprising how many parents unwittingly rob their kids of a childhood. Being a non-parent in some ways gives a more even perspective about loosening the grip on the kids and not taking everything so seriously. Shows like Regular Show and Adventure Time are pretty good, but some parents reject them for being "too stupid". Yeah, there's juvenile behavior, but it's not all over. When introducing parents to these, I sometimes have to be particular about which episodes I start with, or they'll immediately reject it. I've introduced teens to shows like Rick and Morty and Star vs. the Forces of Evil. Parents are generally more accepting of more edgy material at that age. And they're gonna push boundaries, so at least point them to the better quality shows. Anime has also gotten hugely popular in this recent generation, to the point that some of my nieces and nephews seem to literally breathe it. Streaming subscriptions help with that, though available shows vary by licensing deals and region. Hulu is one of the best for cartoons. It's also amusing that the creators of these shows are the recent adults who grew up on the last generation of entertainment cartoons.

silvestrov 10y ago

This link to "Ramasjang" might (or might not) work from outside Denmark: https://www.dr.dk/tv/se/onkel-reje-og-boernenes-brevkasse-s1/onkel-reje-og-boernenes-brevkasse-6#!/ https://www.dr.dk/tv/se/onkel-reje-og-boernenes-brevkasse-s1... Most bakers sells "Kaj Cakes", we don't mind eating the cute puppets: https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e35/c72.0.495.495/13734503_295893287429006_1357333032_n.jpg https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e35/c72.0.495....

farhaven 10y ago
Works fine from Germany. And now I'm watching bizarre Danish children's TV. There goes my day.

ulrikrasmussen 10y ago

I'm a Dane, and grew up with Danish children's television, including the shows mentioned in the article. I just recently re-watched one of my favorite shows "Nanna", which you can now stream from the archives of DR. Even as an adult, I still enjoy watching it for its humor and creativity, and for the fact that it doesn't speak down to its audience. I don't think that can be said about most other children's shows. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1kBNCRB6hw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1kBNCRB6hw Nanna: "What're you doing?" Mother: "We're having sex, what're you doing?"

maaaats 10y ago
> I'm a Dane with possibly the most Danish name I have ever seen, heh.
Munksgaard 10y ago
Some might even recognize the dad as Jesper Christensen, who portrays Mr. White in the recent James Bond movies.

ups101 10y ago

You missed Bamse ("Teddy"): A self-absorbed egocentric narcissist, taking advantage of his naive, little-minded friend Kylling ("chicken"), episode after episode with zero negative impact. After +20 years he's now joined by Bruno, also a teddy bear, sharing similar personal flaws except with much refined insults bordering on psychopathic abuse, bullying kids instead of chickens, believing firmly that the world exists solely to please him in every which way. However, mostly you may have missed the subtle, educational point (yes, there is one) underpinning these characters: Critical thinking. Is it right to behave like this, even if there is no negative consequence (as is often the case in real life)? Do you emphasize with someone taking advantage of their friends? In Denmark, we have this crazy idea that kids are interested in distinguishing right from wrong, even when the answer isn't spoon-fed by a morally correct television character - and maybe exactly because it isn't. The kids don't like Ramasjang because it's a training ground for inspiring film makers. The like it because naughty is fun. And, if done right, it just may induce some critical thinking. It'll take more than a few days of watching, but just like the kids, you'll see the point :-) Best regards from a grown-up, bottle-fed on Bamse, somewhat certain of right from wrong.

koolba 10y ago

> Probably most striking, though, is another thing lacking: education. Quite simply, there is none, academic or moral. I already love this! If there's one thing that children need to experience at an early age, it's that the majority of what they'll deal with in life will have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Life should be enjoyed for life ... it doesn't always have to be a backhanded way to learn to count.

koolba 10y ago

johnjuuljensen 10y ago

As a Citizen of Denmark and a father of two (4 & 1), I absolutely love the danish stuff on Ramasjang and hate most of the American (foreign) stuff. The programs produced in DK are rude and fun and slow and scary, while the foreign stuff is mostly lame attempts at education (Dora the explorer is a particularly nasty example of this) or over the top animations with too much moral crap, too pretty characters and backed by toy franchises and whatnot. I seems to me that the author actually enjoyed the shows and I mostly agree with his assessment, but he can't have been watching too much because he missed some important shows that are in fact educational. Most prominent of the educational shows is Mr. Beard, who teaches numbers, counting, simple math, letters and simple spelling. The show is weird and quirky, but also features some great songs. The whole thing is backed by some pretty great apps, which expand on the educational stuff. There's also a great show about kids helping animals in trouble. They don't pretend that the kids do most of the work, it's a professional that does the heavy lifting, but the kids get involved as much as possible. I don't mind watching these shows with my kids, but I'll leave as soon as Dora or Thomas the tank engine or Chuggington starts. If you're interested in watching some completely outrageous danish childrens TV, go watch "Carsten og Gittes vennevilla". It's created by the duo "Wulf Morgenthaler", who have produced some the weirdest stuff on danish TV. Particularly the one where Carsten creates a fox is a hoot.

aedron 10y ago

The most astute observation is that characters on Danish kids TV are often completely, unapologetically flawed. This makes them relatable to kids, and kids enjoy watching them in all their dysfunction. And I actually disagree with the premise that this contains no lessons or morals. Children are able to see clearly how ridiculous and ill-advised the behavior of these characters is, and so learn to recognize it in themselves and others. Someone once pointed out that while Mickey Mouse is the mascot of Disney in the U.S. and the main character of the franchise, in Europe it was Donald Duck who became popular. Europeans like the flawed anti-hero, while moralizing America (sorry!) preferred the do-gooder know-it-all Mickey Mouse.

selimthegrim 10y ago
I don't know, Chileans sure hated Donald Duck (:P) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_Donald_Duck https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_Donald_Duck
larsiusprime 10y ago
Mickey Mouse in his original incarnations was actually a bit of a miscreant!
david-given 10y ago
In Britain, the nihilistic Looney Tunes cartoons like Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry and (above all else) Roadrunner were vastly more popular than anything by Disney. In fact, I don't think I've even seen a single Mickey Mouse cartoon...
- k-mcgrady 10y ago
  Watched tonnes of Looney Tunes growing up on British TV. Never seen a Mickey cartoon and I've always been curious if there even were any besides a few when Disney first started.
- riprowan 10y ago
  I'll take Bugs Bunny and the Roadrunner v Wile. E. Coyote (supra-genius) over Disney any day of the week.

iamthepieman 10y ago

I just turned off the television after my kids watched more television in one morning than they have in an entire month. The reason? Rio Olympics track and field. Finally had to turn it off because I wasn't getting any work done. Other than that, in the summer time anyways, I'll usually toss them a book of matches and tell them to start a fire or go build a dam in the brook. We usually have lofty educational goals at the start of summer but quite honestly I can't be arsed when the weather is warm and there's so much great romping to be had. When we watch TV it's usually youtube for something we're curious about as a family. The "Fun" T.V. most always leaves my kids grumpy afterwards so we avoid it, not for moral or educational or child development reasons, but because i don't like grumpy kids. After a couple kids and being the oldest of a large family I've realized from my individual scientific survey of one that kids will develop and learn in spite of their parents. We get too much credit and too much blame. You gotta water if the sun's hot and it won't be raining for a while and you should try to get a load of fertilizer at least once a year. I guess you should weed after the first planting but you certainly can't make them grow. If this comment is too rambling for you maybe you should go watch something with a moral in it[0] [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xMb3X7fDYQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xMb3X7fDYQ

goodJobWalrus 10y ago

> Ramasjang is entertainment, not a replacement for parents or school. Parents are expected to know when to switch it off (but just in case, the characters go to bed at 8.00pm, and are shown sleeping until the morning) rather than pretend that it is self-improvement. yes, I grew up watching mainly old American cartoons (like Tom and Jerry), and I don't remember them being particularly "educational", and it was well understood that we are watching them for entertainment, and the last one was at 7:15 pm on our television.

chvid 10y ago

As a dane I was deeply traumatised by the show "Poul og Nulle i hullet".

ganzuul 10y ago

"And God he says, lives in heaven with Santa Claus and their dog Marianne, implying that the Supreme Being is not only imaginary, but also gay." Or, you know, a woman.

spullara 10y ago

None of my kids watch traditional television at all, everything they are interested in is on YouTube, both for entertainment and education.

repler 10y ago

95% of the population needs to be brainwashed means 95% of the children's shows are going to be garbage. It's just math. Make sure your kids are in that 5%.

zeristor 10y ago

You can download the DR app on an Apple TV and watch Danish television. Strangely a lot of reshot UK programmes. My particular favourite was putting a camera on the front of a train: Helsingør to Helsingborg the long way round. I'll get my coat.

sixhobbits 10y ago

Can we please edit the title to match the (correct) original "children's" instead of the modified (incorrect) "childrens'"

iammyIP 10y ago
'childrens' is 'more correct' because it makes the most grammatical sense. Since it's genitiv, why would you apostrophe it, add another character for what reason? Whose ball is it? The dogs ball. Whose exhaust is it? It's the rockets exhaust. The apostrophe is used to mark silent letters inbetween the slew of two words. It is -> It's ~ It(i)s.
- asjo 10y ago
  Obligatory Bob the Angry Flower educational cartoon link: http://www.angryflower.com/247.html http://www.angryflower.com/247.html See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genitive_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genitive_case
  - iammyIP 10y ago
    That flower's partially wrong. I disagree with the angry flowers possesive case. The apostrophe in possesive case is confusing and illogical.
    - asjo 10y ago
      That's fine, but that's how english works.
      - iammyIP 10y ago
        I would refactor this.
        asjo 10y ago
        The users of a language decide, so you just need to get everybody to follow your idea.

mankash666 10y ago

Denmark - Crass, potty mouthed but entertaining kid shows. USA - Clean, preachy, educational kid shows. Denmark - No gun crime, low homocide rate, high Human Development Index (HDI) USA - High gun crime, high homicide rate, lower HDI. So - What exactly do kid shows have to do with long term success of the kid, or the general society they contribute to?

jonah 10y ago

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Mr. Roger's Neighborhood yet. One of the best if not the very best childrens' program in the US. It was slow-paced and deliberate like the Danish shows are described, but instead of being crass and letting things play out, he dealt with serious topics in a simple, honest, and caring way. He also encouraged curiosity and investigation and broke gender and ethnic mores way before it was the in thing to do. Well worth checking out.

galfarragem 10y ago

They are using 'vaccination' logic: a small dosis of reality makes kids healthier in the long term.

gurkendoktor 10y ago

I see a lot of fellow Europeans in this thread who prefer local TV series to preachy US cartoons (me too). This is slightly off-topic, do you have an opinion on the old Dutch show Alfred J. Kwak[1]? It was extremely political, but somehow I didn't mind when I was a kid. I wonder if it was simply surreal enough to make up for all the reality that it depicts? Has anyone re-watched this series again with kids, 25 years later? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_J._Kwak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_J._Kwak

zeristor 10y ago

Hi kids, don't forget we live in the future; seems odd to discuss something and not have a link to it. Onkle Reje: http://www.dr.dk/Ramasjang/Onkel_Reje/forside.htm http://www.dr.dk/Ramasjang/Onkel_Reje/forside.htm It may be in Danish, but it is for 4 year olds. What would Rasmus Klump do?