https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorrows_of_Young_Werther#C...
> When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned in seven years.
That said, I'm always bothered about "you think you know everything" speeches given to children, particularly teenagers.
(Note to poster: You triggered this semi-rant, but not because you are guilty of this. You just started the chain of logic that led me here)
I remember clearly getting that "think you know everything" speech often when I'd point out something was "stupid" or "why can't we just...". What I didn't get was any real attempt to disprove my arguments. Instead of learning "Wow, I thought this and I was legitimately wrong, I should be more cautious" I was taught "wow, adults don't listen and are content to look down on me and my ideas".
It's like the whole puberty speech. Don't tell me I have hormones raging and a changing body and I suddenly getting interested in a particular gender - I have no context for the first part and the last part is not a change but something that was true for my entire conscious life (though the importance may have changed). Instead understand that a teen has spent their life as a child and has only been asked to be a child. Trying to be an adult is something totally new. The risk of failure (loss of status among peers, loss of respect of superiors, loss of closer companionship) is high, the experience to help decide what to do is minimal, even the experience of seeing others face these challenges and NOT suffer is minimal to non-existent. Every adult that forgets their personal experiences when they were a teen and gives the above speech is just proving, not disproving, the common accusation that parents "just don't understand".
Kids aren't dumb, they're actually smarter (in the sense of capability to learn) than most of us. Blaming them for their lack of experience is not our best move. Telling them they'll "understand when (they're) older" is moronic if we don't give support to our claim. (NB: Concepts like the "it gets better" movement to encourage teens with non-traditional sexuality seem dramatically better at trying to do the right thing to me, though any teens involved might correct me - I'm cis-straight male, never heard such attempts when I was a kid, and haven't been a teen for decades)
Nothing will make the teenage years without drama for most people, but actually trying to relate, offering support that doesn't rely on having experiences they don't have, and dropping our own "I know everything" attitudes can do a lot.
(/me steps off soapbox)
Supposedly, childhood was invented quite recently in our evolutionary history by our culture: http://a.co/34eSXPC I have read that children were once treated more like little adults who didn't know anything.
Kids aren't dumb, they're actually smarter (in the sense of capability to learn) than most of us. Blaming them for their lack of experience is not our best move.
Kids aren't dumb, they're actually smarter? I would agree. This is why kids should use their superior brain plasticity to get their heads around the implications of their lack of experience, and try to benefit from indirect experience and the store of human knowledge. Some kids are smart enough to do this. Some kids instead convince themselves of a narrative of superiority, as if they're the first truly "real" humans on the planet.
It's precisely because kids are so smart and imbued with so much potential, that I have to call them out. With great power, comes great responsibility.
If you're providing them with the tools to learn from, I'm all for it. When I'm learning something, I want to be told when I mess up, but the best advice also comes with an explanation, or at least counter evidence to examine. Just saying "WRONG!" and "You think you know this? Bah, you're an idiot" all the time makes me less likely to learn from you specifically AND less likely to learn in general.
There's nothing wrong and a lot right with giving these people with little experience the benefit of your own, to preventing them from making mistakes. We just need to make sure that's what we're doing. While the teen years will (literally) naturally involve a lot of questioning authority and testing boundaries and establishing a pecking order, I think we've magnified this by blaming the teenager rather than their lack of experience, by blaming their attitude while ignoring our own. Every "why do I have to..." and "Can't we just..." and "this isn't FAIR!" is an opportunity to engage them. Every "because I said so" and "you don't know what you're talking about" that involves no other data is teaching them there's no point in consulting us.
Put another way - I don't think most teens think they know everything. They just know little else, and too often we're telling them that they think they know everything, while not showing that they don't.
Right. That's such a bad teaching strategy, it's more like a technique for fighting education.
Every "why do I have to..." and "Can't we just..." and "this isn't FAIR!" is an opportunity to engage them.
That is profound, actually. I may indeed use those as teaching moments. If my teen-aged kids can convincingly argue the other side, I might just raise their score a point, credit their account, then give them a chance to think out how they can make at least a part of their goal happen after all.
Every "because I said so"
Adults need to remember that "because I said so" only flies with little kids. (And even then not necessarily.) It certainly doesn't fly with adults, and teens are kids becoming adults.
But all that said, when someone brings up an idea with merit containing a potentially mental-model revising observation, there are two kinds of people in the world: People who consider the idea sincerely, and people who refuse to do so. In that case, be the smart one!