4 ms·

I was taught birth order effects in middle school in the 2000's in the US in a "health" class (in the same unit we also did handwriting analysis). We were liter

by tgb 9y ago

I was taught birth order effects in middle school in the 2000's in the US in a "health" class (in the same unit we also did handwriting analysis). We were literally shown a video of a family in which everyone explained why they were the rebel as the second child, the overachiever as the first child, the spoiled brat as the youngest, etc. Birth order effects might exist... but even if that were true we should not teach them to middle-schoolers as determining their life. This is for the same reason that we would not want a video of a "typical community" showing a white male doctor, a white female kindergarten teacher, and a black male janitor even if all of those occupations are statistically more likely to be held by those demographics than the others. Because we live in a time and a place where children get to choose that they are not like their statistical cohort if they put their mind to it. The only positive thing I took out of that class was the number of other students going "this is bullshit, I'm a first child and am the rebel of the family" or whatever. And it was a good introduction to not trusting authority.

AstralStorm 9y ago
Devil's advocate here: why shouldn't we teach people their position in life is largely predetermined? We have precedent in Confucian and Hinduist philosophies. If it isn't, wouldn't we state so? I am looking for an utilitarian valid and true argument.
- pas 9y ago
  We should teach people about these things that have a great effect on their life trajectory, but maybe, just maybe, middle-schoolers are not ready to appreciate the complex interplay between overlapping Gauss curves, path dependence, self-fulfilling prophecies. Of course people should know where they come from and what does that mean, just as it's usually important to tell kids if they are adopted or have some serious congenital problem. (Usually because it can mean life or death, as we all seen it in [medical] dramas where people search for organ donors and so on.) But the question of when and how to tell is a big one, and there are probably many good answers, but alas probably all of them are forged in hard compromises between hurting the kid now, or letting them finding it out by accident.
  - d33 9y ago
    > maybe, just maybe, middle-schoolers are not ready to appreciate the complex interplay between overlapping Gauss curves, path dependence, self-fulfilling prophecies I'd say that only applies if you want it to. Otherwise, are you suggesting that there's a specific age which one needs to reach in order to grok basics of statistics?
    - pas 9y ago
      No, I'm just stating the current reality of lack of basic rationality in education, which makes young people especially susceptible to drawing the wrong (sometimes literally fatal) conclusions from events that they experience, information they hear/read/see.
- onezerozeroone 9y ago
  > why shouldn't we teach people their position in life is largely predetermined? Because it isn't and history is full of examples showing it isn't. Circumstances (social, economic, etc) might sway things in certain directions, but in the same way we can't predict the weather a year out with 100% certainty, it's impossible to predict the course of a human being's life a year from now, let alone 10 or 20. And that isn't even taking into account changing environments. Ask someone in the 1950's if Obama would become president and most would probably have said "no way" It's also detrimental and discouraging to people even attempting to achieve their potential. It's like the photo of the horse tied to a chair by a rope. The horse only believes it can't move because it's been trained to think that is its reality. Philosophies are really only important and useful in as much as they produce a certain result. History is also full of examples of those philosophies being used by the ruling class to suppress their "inferiors" in order to maintain their positions of privilege. Then you get things like the French Revolution.
- anpat 9y ago
  I will give you one good reason, It turned out pretty bad over the years (at least from Hindu/Indian perspective, we are still feeling the ripples in modern Indian society/political system). Not only it will harm/limit your potential to achieve but the exploitation will be rampat

by tgb 9y ago

AstralStorm 9y ago

Devil's advocate here: why shouldn't we teach people their position in life is largely predetermined? We have precedent in Confucian and Hinduist philosophies. If it isn't, wouldn't we state so? I am looking for an utilitarian valid and true argument.

pas 9y ago
We should teach people about these things that have a great effect on their life trajectory, but maybe, just maybe, middle-schoolers are not ready to appreciate the complex interplay between overlapping Gauss curves, path dependence, self-fulfilling prophecies. Of course people should know where they come from and what does that mean, just as it's usually important to tell kids if they are adopted or have some serious congenital problem. (Usually because it can mean life or death, as we all seen it in [medical] dramas where people search for organ donors and so on.) But the question of when and how to tell is a big one, and there are probably many good answers, but alas probably all of them are forged in hard compromises between hurting the kid now, or letting them finding it out by accident.
- d33 9y ago
  > maybe, just maybe, middle-schoolers are not ready to appreciate the complex interplay between overlapping Gauss curves, path dependence, self-fulfilling prophecies I'd say that only applies if you want it to. Otherwise, are you suggesting that there's a specific age which one needs to reach in order to grok basics of statistics?
  - pas 9y ago
    No, I'm just stating the current reality of lack of basic rationality in education, which makes young people especially susceptible to drawing the wrong (sometimes literally fatal) conclusions from events that they experience, information they hear/read/see.
onezerozeroone 9y ago
> why shouldn't we teach people their position in life is largely predetermined? Because it isn't and history is full of examples showing it isn't. Circumstances (social, economic, etc) might sway things in certain directions, but in the same way we can't predict the weather a year out with 100% certainty, it's impossible to predict the course of a human being's life a year from now, let alone 10 or 20. And that isn't even taking into account changing environments. Ask someone in the 1950's if Obama would become president and most would probably have said "no way" It's also detrimental and discouraging to people even attempting to achieve their potential. It's like the photo of the horse tied to a chair by a rope. The horse only believes it can't move because it's been trained to think that is its reality. Philosophies are really only important and useful in as much as they produce a certain result. History is also full of examples of those philosophies being used by the ruling class to suppress their "inferiors" in order to maintain their positions of privilege. Then you get things like the French Revolution.
anpat 9y ago
I will give you one good reason, It turned out pretty bad over the years (at least from Hindu/Indian perspective, we are still feeling the ripples in modern Indian society/political system). Not only it will harm/limit your potential to achieve but the exploitation will be rampat