5 ms·

But your objection is rather silly!! Those rules are meant for beginners. If you're not a beginner you already know when/if/how you can break the rules. It is c

by ksk 8y ago

But your objection is rather silly!! Those rules are meant for beginners. If you're not a beginner you already know when/if/how you can break the rules. It is correct to teach kids that they should tell the truth in every scenario, even if as adults we don't.

anyfoo 8y ago
Exactly. Fully understand why should never do x, so that fully understand when you actually have to do x.
- voodootrucker 8y ago
  values > principles > practices You are free to violate any of those on the right in the interest of the ones to the left.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
hutzlibu 8y ago
"It is correct to teach kids that they should tell the truth in every scenario, even if as adults we don't." Not correct. Example, a stranger: "are you alone a home?" or "what is the keycode for the door" etc.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  I don't agree that these are counterexamples; there's a difference between telling the truth and telling the truth someone else wants to hear. “I am not going to answer that” is a true, correct, and appropriate response to both of those questions.
  - hutzlibu 8y ago
    But to a potentiell hostile stranger it is better to lie, than to tell the truth. More extreme examples come to my mind, with active agressor wanting to know something, where it is smarter to fool the enemy, than to tell the truth. "I don't knoe the code instead of "I am no allowed to tell". But besides, most kids learned to lie pretty well, to circumvent various restrictions - and learning from the adults who tell them no to lie, but do it by themselves. I am in favor of leading by example. If I am lying, how can I possible demand it from kids, to do otherwise? When they find out, they loose confidence in me. But when I tell them to only lie in extreme situations to "enemys" and act accordingly, they are much more likely to become truthful by default as well.
- ksk 8y ago
  I think its still correct. Sorry, I don't find your examples to be a reason to teach children that truth is optional.
  - hutzlibu 8y ago
    Never said that. Default is truth. But there are rare exceptions.
    - ksk 8y ago
      If you didn't then I don't even know what you're saying, or why you're disagreeing. Me: It is correct to teach kids that they should tell the truth in every scenario, even if as adults we don't. You: Not correct. [...] Exceptions exist in every situation for every single thing you say or do or think. Pointing out exceptions doesn't get you anywhere. Every adult knows this. A childs mind doesn't, and depending on the maturity level, cannot comprehend them. There is an established successful method of instruction of starting with simple rules/laws/examples, and then layering complexity later on. All of our systems of education are based on this. Nobody tells a child to also look up for a possible meteor or a skyscraper collapsing, or a vulture about to attack them before crossing the street. We just teach them to look both ways. Programmers are taught to take for granted that a bit in memory retains its value once set. When you're learning how to program you don't need to account for CPU bugs or cosmic radiation.
      - hutzlibu 8y ago
        "If you didn't then I don't even know what you're saying, or why you're disagreeing. Me: It is correct to teach kids that they should tell the truth in every scenario, even if as adults we don't." teach children that truth is optional." Optional means maybe. I said default is truth. And when I say every, I mean every. But there are exceptions, in the case of enemys. So if they lie to someone, it means this one is a (temporary) enemy. Which is a serious implication. They do understand that usually. They also understand the concept of friend and enemy very early, I bet you agree. (not that they can allways correctly sort it out, but also we adults can't do that allways) So they very intuitively understand the exception in the case of a meeting with a potential dangerous person and I bet, instinctivly act accordingly and not tell him, where others are hiding for example. (Or break down and cry, also a valid strategy)

by ksk 8y ago

anyfoo 8y ago

Exactly. Fully understand why should never do x, so that fully understand when you actually have to do x.

voodootrucker 8y ago
values > principles > practices You are free to violate any of those on the right in the interest of the ones to the left.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

hutzlibu 8y ago

"It is correct to teach kids that they should tell the truth in every scenario, even if as adults we don't." Not correct. Example, a stranger: "are you alone a home?" or "what is the keycode for the door" etc.

dragonwriter 8y ago
I don't agree that these are counterexamples; there's a difference between telling the truth and telling the truth someone else wants to hear. “I am not going to answer that” is a true, correct, and appropriate response to both of those questions.
- hutzlibu 8y ago
  But to a potentiell hostile stranger it is better to lie, than to tell the truth. More extreme examples come to my mind, with active agressor wanting to know something, where it is smarter to fool the enemy, than to tell the truth. "I don't knoe the code instead of "I am no allowed to tell". But besides, most kids learned to lie pretty well, to circumvent various restrictions - and learning from the adults who tell them no to lie, but do it by themselves. I am in favor of leading by example. If I am lying, how can I possible demand it from kids, to do otherwise? When they find out, they loose confidence in me. But when I tell them to only lie in extreme situations to "enemys" and act accordingly, they are much more likely to become truthful by default as well.
ksk 8y ago
I think its still correct. Sorry, I don't find your examples to be a reason to teach children that truth is optional.
- hutzlibu 8y ago
  Never said that. Default is truth. But there are rare exceptions.
  - ksk 8y ago
    If you didn't then I don't even know what you're saying, or why you're disagreeing. Me: It is correct to teach kids that they should tell the truth in every scenario, even if as adults we don't. You: Not correct. [...] Exceptions exist in every situation for every single thing you say or do or think. Pointing out exceptions doesn't get you anywhere. Every adult knows this. A childs mind doesn't, and depending on the maturity level, cannot comprehend them. There is an established successful method of instruction of starting with simple rules/laws/examples, and then layering complexity later on. All of our systems of education are based on this. Nobody tells a child to also look up for a possible meteor or a skyscraper collapsing, or a vulture about to attack them before crossing the street. We just teach them to look both ways. Programmers are taught to take for granted that a bit in memory retains its value once set. When you're learning how to program you don't need to account for CPU bugs or cosmic radiation.
    - hutzlibu 8y ago
      "If you didn't then I don't even know what you're saying, or why you're disagreeing. Me: It is correct to teach kids that they should tell the truth in every scenario, even if as adults we don't." teach children that truth is optional." Optional means maybe. I said default is truth. And when I say every, I mean every. But there are exceptions, in the case of enemys. So if they lie to someone, it means this one is a (temporary) enemy. Which is a serious implication. They do understand that usually. They also understand the concept of friend and enemy very early, I bet you agree. (not that they can allways correctly sort it out, but also we adults can't do that allways) So they very intuitively understand the exception in the case of a meeting with a potential dangerous person and I bet, instinctivly act accordingly and not tell him, where others are hiding for example. (Or break down and cry, also a valid strategy)