3 ms·

> Perhaps it is an outgrowth of the fact that people are basically institutionalized from ages 13-22. I would also add that this institutionalization largely d

by qb45 9y ago

> Perhaps it is an outgrowth of the fact that people are basically institutionalized from ages 13-22. I would also add that this institutionalization largely deprives youth of contact with adult role models, forcing them to figure out many things by themselves or from TV or the Internet. And models or advice which can be found there are various and not always provided with disclaimers regarding their accuracy and scope of applicability.

derefr 9y ago
Adult role-models, but also (perhaps even moreso) "older sibling"-aged role-models. There is literally no social context in which an 8-year-old and a 13-year-old, or a 13-year-old and a 19-year-old, are allowed or encouraged to commingle, interact, bond, etc., unless they're related (or "pretend related", in the Big Brothers Big Sisters sense.) It's nearly impossible, through the entirety of a Western childhood, to get a sense of what's "coming up" in the next few years of your life, or in which direction you'd like to head, because the lives of older children are entirely invisible to you. This breaks the most major way children have historically found their vocation: by asking people a few years older than them, who already have some small proficiency in the subject, to show them how to get into the subject. And, as well, being that mentor later on. Some school systems try to recreate this effect with clubs, but clubs are broken at the most important point—the transition from elementary to high-school. It's the kids before the transition and the kinds after it that are most in need of this mentorship interaction, and there's no system in place to give it to them. And this also breaks socialization: every year of children is now its own isolated cohort, with isolated social norms, entirely unmoved by what older or younger children would think of those actions. This is basically 90% of why "kids are terrible" in the Western school system: kids don't learn social norms from parents, but rather expect to read them on the faces of slightly-older kids reacting to their behavior. If there are no slightly-older kids (as in a uniform-age classroom), then there's nobody the kids trust there, who also has the maturity to disapprove. And there's no slightly-younger kids they feel responsible for behaving in front of.

by qb45 9y ago

derefr 9y ago

Adult role-models, but also (perhaps even moreso) "older sibling"-aged role-models. There is literally no social context in which an 8-year-old and a 13-year-old, or a 13-year-old and a 19-year-old, are allowed or encouraged to commingle, interact, bond, etc., unless they're related (or "pretend related", in the Big Brothers Big Sisters sense.) It's nearly impossible, through the entirety of a Western childhood, to get a sense of what's "coming up" in the next few years of your life, or in which direction you'd like to head, because the lives of older children are entirely invisible to you. This breaks the most major way children have historically found their vocation: by asking people a few years older than them, who already have some small proficiency in the subject, to show them how to get into the subject. And, as well, being that mentor later on. Some school systems try to recreate this effect with clubs, but clubs are broken at the most important point—the transition from elementary to high-school. It's the kids before the transition and the kinds after it that are most in need of this mentorship interaction, and there's no system in place to give it to them. And this also breaks socialization: every year of children is now its own isolated cohort, with isolated social norms, entirely unmoved by what older or younger children would think of those actions. This is basically 90% of why "kids are terrible" in the Western school system: kids don't learn social norms from parents, but rather expect to read them on the faces of slightly-older kids reacting to their behavior. If there are no slightly-older kids (as in a uniform-age classroom), then there's nobody the kids trust there, who also has the maturity to disapprove. And there's no slightly-younger kids they feel responsible for behaving in front of.