David_J_Balan comments on Our House, My Rules - Less Wrong

36 Post author: David_J_Balan 02 November 2009 12:44AM

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

Comments (229)

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

Comment author: Emile 02 November 2009 11:27:44AM 9 points [-]

Worse, it's a relatively minor manifestation of the broader notion that the child has a fundamentally lower status in the family just for being a child, that they deserve less weight in the family's utility function.

Are you sure those two are the same ?

In Chinese traditional culture, children are explicitely of lower status (they need to be respectful and obedient etc.), yet families will make great sacrifices to be able to afford a good education for the kids. So it's possible to be both at low status and have a big share in the "utility function".

I don't see what's wrong in itself with children having lower status - that seems to be the way humans have always worked (seems nearly hard-wired!). Sure, there are ways to abuse that power difference, but that's another issue.

Comment author: David_J_Balan 03 November 2009 08:07:45PM -1 points [-]

It is true that there are some people who both believe that their kids are and should be fundamentally below them in the pecking order while at the same time would make major sacrifices and even die for them. But I don't think this changes the basic point of the post.