I hope you don’t mind too much but I’m going to “take apart” your post.
“There are some fundamental disagreements. One is "You don't know what you don't know." Other side says, "Sure you do." One is "Children are not little adults." Other side says, "Sure they are."
For the record I’ve never said you know what you don’t know. That does not make sense. I said that for the most part what a child needs to know at any given time is for him to determine (He is not in an empty room his whole life, he sees things around in his many experiences of interacting with the world, including people).
I also never said a child is a little adult. If you meant to imply that by given him many opportunities to choose his values in his life I am treating him like a little adult, that might make more sense, but I would say that I am treating him like a person.
”One point I'd like to make, though, is that what I do is not "forcing" my son to learn.”
To the extent that you are choosing to send him to a school you are forcing him to learn, when you deem it appropriate.
“If there's a way to do that, please let me know. I cannot tell him, "learn this or I will blow your brains out."
Do you think that only if it gets to the extreme of that statement then we are in the realm of force?
“And, since I don't believe in corporal punishment, I don't tell him, "do your homework or I will spank you." Even this last would leave him a choice; he could always say "I'll take the spanking."”
I think you should really reexamine the last part of this statement. Are you saying there is a real choice when one of the options for the child is possibility of being spanked?
“So I think the argument against coercion is a bit spurious. In reality, we are not forcing our children to go to school. If I were in a position where I had to physically drag my son to school, of course I wouldn't do it. I would take it as an indication that there was something terribly wrong at the school, and would remedy the situation.”
To address this part of your argument I would need to find out whether or not you accept the premise that there is a continuum as far as what constitutes force. It seems like your definition, at least in regards to children might mainly (or only include) the range from spanking to “I’ll blow your brains out.”
So, rather than forcing or coercing, what I am arguing for is persuading, encouraging, bribing, etc.
I find it revealing that you include bribing with persuasion and encouragement.
And I don't see anything wrong with that. In reading Kelly's posts, I sometimes have a twinge of an emotion I am not sure how to characterize; a combination of guilt, regret, and inferiority. "Why doesn't my son act like a little adult? Am I a bad mommy?" Why, I can't even get him to do the dishes without paying him!
“But on the other hand, if he doesn't want to do the dishes, I guess I shouldn't be "forcing" him? Where do you draw the line?”
That is a good question.
This idea that a child should never be made to do what he doesn't want to do -- it comes up at least a couple of times a week. Let's say I want to go shopping, my husband is out of town, my son doesn't want to come with me, but I don't want to leave him home. Yes, I "force" him to come with me. What should I do, sacrifice my interests to his? "No conflict of interest among rational men..." ... could it be that my child cannot be treated as a "rational man" yet? Because I don't think my desire to go shopping is irrational. I don't see how you can raise a child with the permissive attitude that he can do whatever he wants, without completely sacrificing yourself. "While he's in my house," things will be done my way.
Laure in this paragraph you raise a very good point: how do you balance your values with your child’s without being altruistic?
Like Phil, I strongly object to the idea that you can just "pick up" whatever learning you are deficient in, whenever you determine that you need to. If it's just learning a set of facts, sure you can pick it up. But if it is a field of study, it is built upon a skill set and a knowledge base that may be very hard to fill in on your own.
I think you actually answered part of your objection by partially describing the learning process. I’d like to hear what subject/ field of study a child cannot eventually learn by picking up the initial facts that their intellectual context can handle. No one is denying that a child learns things in stages. If a child develops some interest on their own in any academic subject can’t they be given books that are appropriate to their current intellectual understanding.
”Another point (that a professional educator would be much better in arguing than I) is the concept of "readiness". As I understand it, children develop according to a kind of timetable which differs in specific age, but is similar in structure for all children. There is a time at which a child is ready to learn to speak, ready to learn to read, ready to learn to do math word problems, ready to learn algebra, etc. They can learn the skill later than this time, but their brains will have a harder time later. I think Kelly would argue that this "readiness" will correspond almost perfectly with the child's "interests". I don't think it's necessarily the case.”
I’m not sure Kelly would argue that a child’s interest necessarily correspond with this supposed “readiness” (even if this “readiness” were scientifically verifiable it would not change my response). I think it has been scientifically demonstrated that it is biologically healthier for a female to have children when they are somewhere around 18. Even if this is true I would not encourage/persuade my daughter to have children then. Her goals/values are for her to decide on her timetable
