"Parenting is, above all, a moral obligation." (pp 7)
I completely agree with this statement, yet disagree with some of the things Pinker says about parenting. Time and time again I hear people say "Children are the future," but they never act on it. The parent who sits by and talks on the phone while their child plays video games, or the parent who gives their child what they want because it is easy, is doing that child and ultimately the world no good. Parenting is a moral obligation. I have to wonder why people have children, then let them sit on the back burner because they would rather watch television. I am a parent, and even though I have my days where I send my three year old off to play puzzles on my tablet, the majority of our time together is spent playing constructively, building her imagination, helping her rhyme words, or teaching her lessons like cleaning up after herself. My parents taught me the same things and even though it has been years since I played under a table with my mom, or played word games with my dad, those things stuck with me.
Pinker does say how you are raised has an impact but says other things, genetics, culture, peer group, and chance play an important role too. When I told an early childhood family education (ECFE) teacher that I knew my daughter was going to hit me, or throw something she said, "You two are a good fit," which, in one way of thinking, means we have similar personalities. This seemed obvious to me, but as I read Pinker's article, I thought more and more about it and my upbringing. I, no doubt, would be different had I been raised by a different family. I may have different ideals, a different religion, and celebrated holidays differently. Genetics, culture, peer group, and chance all played a role in who I am today. All of those things also played a part in how my parents raised me. I wouldn't have a hankering to watch the Packers play if my dad hadn't watched them every Sunday during football season. But I don't think parenting is exclusive to the things a parent does with a child. Parenting is the way an adult acts with their child, what activities they do, how time is spent, who the parents are around, what and how holidays are celebrated, so while Pinker sets these things apart from being raised, I compound them. The genetics of my parents, the culture I was surrounded by, the peer group they associated with, and chance all took part in their parenting, their moral obligation to raise me.
The 'science wars' seem like a back and forth war between science, the humanities, and personal experience. In my case, I'm rejecting science on the grounds of personal experience, but I understand that, in any experiment, there is a margin of error. I don't fit into Pinker's parenting being separate from genetics, chance, culture, and peer groups. What is at stake here is, let's face it, a war. I may be one of the few people who can look at Pinker's argument and say, 'I don't agree but there's a certain truth to it.' I think everyone should be able to take a step back and understand that even though an idea they have differs from someone else's there are probably common threads throughout, so maybe, like the framers of the USA, we may be able to set aside our differences to create something greater than ourselves.
I completely agree with this statement, yet disagree with some of the things Pinker says about parenting. Time and time again I hear people say "Children are the future," but they never act on it. The parent who sits by and talks on the phone while their child plays video games, or the parent who gives their child what they want because it is easy, is doing that child and ultimately the world no good. Parenting is a moral obligation. I have to wonder why people have children, then let them sit on the back burner because they would rather watch television. I am a parent, and even though I have my days where I send my three year old off to play puzzles on my tablet, the majority of our time together is spent playing constructively, building her imagination, helping her rhyme words, or teaching her lessons like cleaning up after herself. My parents taught me the same things and even though it has been years since I played under a table with my mom, or played word games with my dad, those things stuck with me.
Pinker does say how you are raised has an impact but says other things, genetics, culture, peer group, and chance play an important role too. When I told an early childhood family education (ECFE) teacher that I knew my daughter was going to hit me, or throw something she said, "You two are a good fit," which, in one way of thinking, means we have similar personalities. This seemed obvious to me, but as I read Pinker's article, I thought more and more about it and my upbringing. I, no doubt, would be different had I been raised by a different family. I may have different ideals, a different religion, and celebrated holidays differently. Genetics, culture, peer group, and chance all played a role in who I am today. All of those things also played a part in how my parents raised me. I wouldn't have a hankering to watch the Packers play if my dad hadn't watched them every Sunday during football season. But I don't think parenting is exclusive to the things a parent does with a child. Parenting is the way an adult acts with their child, what activities they do, how time is spent, who the parents are around, what and how holidays are celebrated, so while Pinker sets these things apart from being raised, I compound them. The genetics of my parents, the culture I was surrounded by, the peer group they associated with, and chance all took part in their parenting, their moral obligation to raise me.
The 'science wars' seem like a back and forth war between science, the humanities, and personal experience. In my case, I'm rejecting science on the grounds of personal experience, but I understand that, in any experiment, there is a margin of error. I don't fit into Pinker's parenting being separate from genetics, chance, culture, and peer groups. What is at stake here is, let's face it, a war. I may be one of the few people who can look at Pinker's argument and say, 'I don't agree but there's a certain truth to it.' I think everyone should be able to take a step back and understand that even though an idea they have differs from someone else's there are probably common threads throughout, so maybe, like the framers of the USA, we may be able to set aside our differences to create something greater than ourselves.
I want science to get generous enough that Jesse doesn't need to reject it. And Pinker isn't helping....
ReplyDelete