Comment author:sketerpot
11 August 2010 07:13:43PM
12 points
[-]
"How dare you disrespect my authority you little terr..."
You raise an interesting point here. When a parent or teacher imposes their authority on a child, there are two very different goals they could have:
To get the child to comply, and/or
To establish their own dominance.
When you ask why you're being ordered to do something, and you happen to be beneath the age that society considers you a real person, that's taken as an attack on the dominance of the person bossing you around. Obedience isn't enough; a lot of people won't be satisfied with anything less than unquestioning obedience, at least from mere children. I suspect that this is what people are thinking most of the time when they use "because I say so" as a 'reason' for something. (The rest of the time, they're probably using it because they're feeling too harried to explain something to a mere child, and so they trot out that tired old line because it's easy.)
I remember when I was young enough that adults dared to treat me that way. (Notice the emotionally charged phrasing? I'm still irritated.) Someone who gave reasonable orders and provided justifications for them on request, got cooperation from me. My parents were like this, and they say I was very well-behaved. Someone who told me to do things "because I said so" automatically gained my resentment, and I felt no need to cooperate with them. They were less effective because they insisted on unquestioning obedience.
I realize that not every child is as reasonable or cooperative as I was, but providing a reason for your instructions doesn't hurt anything; at worst it's useless, and at best it reinforces your authority by making people perceive you as a reasonable authority figure worthy of listening to.
Comment author:Eudaimoniac
12 August 2010 11:37:41AM
3 points
[-]
I am a parent and I have to disagree with you. The worst case scenario is not that it is worthless. If a child learns to question the "order" given out loud, it would suggest that the child is also questioning the "order" internally. This leads to the internal debate whether to ask for a justification for the "order" or internally decide if it is justifiable or not.
Now you have a situation where the child does not stop up and ask for the justification, but in stead decides that some situations cannot be justifiable and thus will not ask for said justification.
When the parents are around, this is problematic, but when no authoritative figure is close this leads to the child questioning already given "orders" and possible overruling any preexisting justification. They are children after all.
Now you have a child who actively disregards (or might disregard) "orders" given - with or without justification. Sure, you told your daughter not to go with strangers, but the stranger had candy and instead of seeking out parents to gain a justification for the rue of not going with strangers, the child will examine the justification itself and given an upbringing with minimal trauma, might follow the stranger with the candy.
You either have to demand absolute obedience or allow for your child to make its own decisions and accept the danger and risk involved with that, but it is a wrong simplification to say that the worst that can happen is that it is useless. After all - the way you parent your child shapes them - good or bad.
= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You raise an interesting point here. When a parent or teacher imposes their authority on a child, there are two very different goals they could have:
To get the child to comply, and/or
To establish their own dominance.
When you ask why you're being ordered to do something, and you happen to be beneath the age that society considers you a real person, that's taken as an attack on the dominance of the person bossing you around. Obedience isn't enough; a lot of people won't be satisfied with anything less than unquestioning obedience, at least from mere children. I suspect that this is what people are thinking most of the time when they use "because I say so" as a 'reason' for something. (The rest of the time, they're probably using it because they're feeling too harried to explain something to a mere child, and so they trot out that tired old line because it's easy.)
I remember when I was young enough that adults dared to treat me that way. (Notice the emotionally charged phrasing? I'm still irritated.) Someone who gave reasonable orders and provided justifications for them on request, got cooperation from me. My parents were like this, and they say I was very well-behaved. Someone who told me to do things "because I said so" automatically gained my resentment, and I felt no need to cooperate with them. They were less effective because they insisted on unquestioning obedience.
I realize that not every child is as reasonable or cooperative as I was, but providing a reason for your instructions doesn't hurt anything; at worst it's useless, and at best it reinforces your authority by making people perceive you as a reasonable authority figure worthy of listening to.
I am a parent and I have to disagree with you. The worst case scenario is not that it is worthless. If a child learns to question the "order" given out loud, it would suggest that the child is also questioning the "order" internally. This leads to the internal debate whether to ask for a justification for the "order" or internally decide if it is justifiable or not.
Now you have a situation where the child does not stop up and ask for the justification, but in stead decides that some situations cannot be justifiable and thus will not ask for said justification.
When the parents are around, this is problematic, but when no authoritative figure is close this leads to the child questioning already given "orders" and possible overruling any preexisting justification. They are children after all.
Now you have a child who actively disregards (or might disregard) "orders" given - with or without justification. Sure, you told your daughter not to go with strangers, but the stranger had candy and instead of seeking out parents to gain a justification for the rue of not going with strangers, the child will examine the justification itself and given an upbringing with minimal trauma, might follow the stranger with the candy.
You either have to demand absolute obedience or allow for your child to make its own decisions and accept the danger and risk involved with that, but it is a wrong simplification to say that the worst that can happen is that it is useless. After all - the way you parent your child shapes them - good or bad.