5 ms·
> For many/most students, the home is not particularly conducive for doing homework a variety of reasons. I think this speaks to the parents and the type of ho
by glitchc 1y ago
> For many/most students, the home is not particularly conducive for doing homework a variety of reasons.
I think this speaks to the parents and the type of home environment that they create. This is one of the major sources of disagreement between the right and the left, where the former (sometimes strongly) feel the parents bear responsibility for the type of environment their kids grow up in while the latter (equally strongly) feel that they can't really help themselves due to external factors (abuse, addiction, sickness, etc.).
- jonathanlb 1y ago> external factors (abuse, addiction, sickness, etc.). Beside factors that body's performance, also consider factors that impact well-meaning parent or caregivers' _presence_ in the home, such economic realities, e.g., parents working multiple jobs, parents with challenging schedules, single parents, lack of community support (e.g., availability of a supportive neighbors or families.)
- glitchc 1y agoAgreed, of course. All captured in the etc. Nothwithstanding these factors, the debate still boils down to who's responsible for the kids' well-being: Them or society.
- Spooky23 1y agoIt’s never that simple. When society creates an environment where neglect is baked in, society bears some culpability.
- jonathanlb 1y agoI disagree with the binary (family/society) framing because the well-being of children has always depended on overlapping responsibilities between parents, communities, and society. Not only that, but that false dichotomy also ignores children's autonomy as well. Either way, in this debate, what really matters are outcomes- whether children thrive or not.
- BrenBarn 1y agoPart of that question is whether society is responsible for the adults' well-being, so that they can then do a better job at improving their children's well-being.
- monknomo 1y agoI think the lefty one is more accurately that the children cannot help what kind of home their parents provide. Maybe their parents have a responsibility to do better, but if the parents are not delivering on their responsibility, should the children bear the consequence?
- glitchc 1y agoThe counterargument is : If there are no consequences, what is the incentive to bear responsibility? Ultimately this argument does not have a clear answer because it's driven by beliefs, not facts.
- monknomo 1y agothe consequences and responsibility fall on different parties. Children inherently cannot have responsibility because they are children. It's a wrong-headed counterargument. I'll agree that people can argue about the answer, but it is perfectly clear to me. I'd also say it's a value-system driven argument which I see as different than a belief driven argument
- glitchc 1y agoBeliefs separate from values.. that's a strange dichotomy. Do you harbour beliefs that conflict with your values?
- godelski 1y ago> Do you harbour beliefs that conflict with your values? I'm not sure how long you've been human for, but this is in fact a common thing. Common for all living creatures really. Unfortunately we cannot always uphold the full idealized versions of our beliefs due to constraints of the world we live in. But on the other hand, if your beliefs weren't beyond our capabilities then we'd never improve. (I'll assume it is "not very long")
- 1y ago
- Spooky23 1y agoThat’s the polite way they state it. The under the line philosophy comes from some reading of pre-determinism. People who are guided by this see the negative fate of a child as a measure of the parent’s rejection of god’s grace. That’s why you have the weird commitment to pro-life principles, but nearly complete disdain once a child leaves the womb. People find ways to twist things to fit their self interest.