Alicorn comments on Absolute denial for atheists - Less Wrong

39 Post author: taw 16 July 2009 03:41PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (571)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Alicorn 16 July 2009 10:00:23PM 14 points [-]

we should recognize these practices as abusive maltreatment of children.

I think one obstacle to having this conversation is that, as a society, we think that intervention is called for when a child is being abused. People are modus-tollensing away your declarations of abuse because they don't think the things you mention warrant bringing in Child Protective Services: if it's abuse, then it warrants calling CPS. It doesn't warrant calling CPS, therefore it is not abuse.

By your definitions, I think it would be next to impossible to find someone who was never once abused as a child. That means we have no information about any given sort of abuse relative to an absence of abuse altogether. We can only compare the results of abuse A with abuse B, or more of A with less of A, or A with both A and B, or whatever. There's no control group. That casts a shadow of a doubt over many of your claims.

I'm curious about how far your absolute intolerance of hitting kids goes. I was hit exactly once by each parent as I grew up. I don't remember the exact circumstances under which my mother struck me, but I know why my father did it: I was attacking my little sister over some childish upset. There was no way to get me off of her without causing me some pain; he smacked me and I was startled enough to stop. Would you consider that an act of abuse? Wouldn't letting me attack my sister be an act of abuse towards her?

Comment author: dclayh 17 July 2009 04:48:58AM 4 points [-]

I think one obstacle to having this conversation is that, as a society, we think that intervention is called for when a child is being abused.

I think this is correct. I personally find the current social model under which children are the chattel-slaves (i.e. the property) of their parents unless and until such time as the parents do something truly egregious*, or until the child turns 18, to be rather revolting.

*That should really read "do something truly egregious, or try to extract economic value".

Comment author: wuwei 19 July 2009 03:18:02AM 1 point [-]

Nice. Tying the usage of words to inferences seems to be a generally useful strategy for moving semantic discussions forward.

Comment author: PeterS 16 July 2009 10:16:43PM 1 point [-]

Would you consider that an act of abuse?

No.

Wouldn't letting me attack my sister be an act of abuse towards her?

Yes. It is also a very common form of abuse.

I was hit exactly once by each parent as I grew up.

Does that include spanking? Note that it is usually applied to toddlers and you might not remember.

Comment author: Alicorn 16 July 2009 10:21:45PM 1 point [-]

I'm pretty sure I was never actually spanked by my parents, although my grandfather tried once before I escaped.

Comment author: CronoDAS 17 July 2009 04:28:52AM 0 points [-]

I think one obstacle to having this conversation is that, as a society, we think that intervention is called for when a child is being abused. People are modus-tollensing away your declarations of abuse because they don't think the things you mention warrant bringing in Child Protective Services: if it's abuse, then it warrants calling CPS. It doesn't warrant calling CPS, therefore it is not abuse.

What she said.