4 ms·

I think its still correct. Sorry, I don't find your examples to be a reason to teach children that truth is optional.

by ksk 8y ago

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)
    - ksk 8y ago
      Sorry, I don't agree with your comment. No point in going round and round. Goodluck!
  - hutzlibu 8y ago
    But it is much more likely for a kid to be approached by strangers who ask them if they are alone, than be hit by a meteor. So I say it does make sense to explain them the concept of a complex world and different rules for different situations as early as they can get in situations, where they have to look for themselves.
klibertp 8y ago
It would be much better to teach children that the truth doesn't exist, that everything we call "reality" is a lie on some level, and that the best you can do is to stay honest to yourself and your intentions. Probably much harder to teach, but much closer to what they will fight with for the rest of their lives. I think it's the lack of such preparation in childhood which makes people give up, either never trying to figure out what the "truth" even is or relying on an imaginary friend in the sky as a source of one and only truth. Some simplifications are useful in some contexts, but the world is an unimaginably complex thing and trying to dumb it down can only take you so far.
- ibeckermayer 8y ago
  "the truth doesn't exist, that everything we call "reality" is a lie on some level" Wait so does this truth exist, or is it also a lie on some level?
  - klibertp 8y ago
    > does this truth It's not truth at all. Just an observation. It happens to fit with my perceptions. That's it. You can artificially define truth by tying it to a particular frame of reference, but that's not "the truth", as that frame of reference is not 100% transferable to others anyway. The idea of umwelt, as I understand it, seems to work here. Still, it's just an observation, an impression. I'm not really saying anything new here. Descartes was saying something similar quite a long time ago. Then again, he could have meant something else entirely and there's no way for me to know which is it. I just assume my understanding is close enough to the intended meaning. I may well be completely wrong on this. Basically, there's nothing you can be really sure about, including the fact that you can't be really sure about anything. There are only things that appear to work for you and, possibly, others. You can use them. Just don't believe them unquestioningly.

I think its still correct. Sorry, I don't find your examples to be a reason to teach children that truth is optional.

by 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)
  - ksk 8y ago
    Sorry, I don't agree with your comment. No point in going round and round. Goodluck!
- hutzlibu 8y ago
  But it is much more likely for a kid to be approached by strangers who ask them if they are alone, than be hit by a meteor. So I say it does make sense to explain them the concept of a complex world and different rules for different situations as early as they can get in situations, where they have to look for themselves.

klibertp 8y ago

It would be much better to teach children that the truth doesn't exist, that everything we call "reality" is a lie on some level, and that the best you can do is to stay honest to yourself and your intentions. Probably much harder to teach, but much closer to what they will fight with for the rest of their lives. I think it's the lack of such preparation in childhood which makes people give up, either never trying to figure out what the "truth" even is or relying on an imaginary friend in the sky as a source of one and only truth. Some simplifications are useful in some contexts, but the world is an unimaginably complex thing and trying to dumb it down can only take you so far.

ibeckermayer 8y ago
"the truth doesn't exist, that everything we call "reality" is a lie on some level" Wait so does this truth exist, or is it also a lie on some level?
- klibertp 8y ago
  > does this truth It's not truth at all. Just an observation. It happens to fit with my perceptions. That's it. You can artificially define truth by tying it to a particular frame of reference, but that's not "the truth", as that frame of reference is not 100% transferable to others anyway. The idea of umwelt, as I understand it, seems to work here. Still, it's just an observation, an impression. I'm not really saying anything new here. Descartes was saying something similar quite a long time ago. Then again, he could have meant something else entirely and there's no way for me to know which is it. I just assume my understanding is close enough to the intended meaning. I may well be completely wrong on this. Basically, there's nothing you can be really sure about, including the fact that you can't be really sure about anything. There are only things that appear to work for you and, possibly, others. You can use them. Just don't believe them unquestioningly.