

How intellectual pollution has crippled America's children - Alex3917
http://alexkrupp.typepad.com/sensemaking/2009/06/how-intellectual-pollution-has-crippled-americas-children.html

======
giardini
The article itself is intellectual garbage: a hodge-podge of guesses, social
fables and random facts assembled on a web page.

He far overestimates parents' influence on children. Judith Rich Harris' work
has proven that (for normal families, where parents don't traumatise their
children) the peer group is far more important than parents in the child's
development.

~~~
Alex3917
"the peer group is far more important than parents in the child's
development."

That's during the school years. I'm only talking about kids younger than four.
Also, I'm talking about the cognitive development of structures which become
relatively fixed after age five. (Like extraversion and executive function.)
The peer group is more important than parenting, but only for predicting the
trajectory of further academic achievement, which is completely different from
the ways in which parenting styles affect cognitive, emotional, and
physiological development.

EDIT: Also, speaking of peer groups, one of the reasons good parenting is
critical is because schools sort children into different tracks as early as
age six. In principle, track placement is temporary. In practice, it is quite
permanent. To quote one researcher, “We found that first-grade ability-group
placement can have persistent effects on children’s achievement in school over
a period of several years and may shape the expectations of children’s
performance held by significant others, such as parents and teachers. Whether
these effects are instructional, social, or institutional, they are real, and
they have implications for children’s future schooling trajectories. […]
Instructional grouping may have the unintended effect of increasing
inequalities in educational outcomes, largely by creating inequalities in
educational resources and rewards.”

(This comes from Equality and Achievement, and also from Pallas et al.
“Ability Group Effects: Instructional, Social, or Institutional?” Sociology of
Education 67 (1994).)

~~~
whacked_new
A few semi-questions. Structures that become relatively fixed after five? This
seems suspect. There are two major prunings of overgrowth of neurons: once
soon after birth (where your case stands), once in puberty (where your case
falls). I'm not the best at sources but without evidence in my face my guess
would put post-puberty for the "relatively fixed" threshold, and common sense
confirms this: "identity formation" = puberty. And identity formation
basically means habits, which are also manifested in parenthood. As for
executive functions, we're probably talking about white matter growth, which
is mostly genetic. There could be swing cases, but if your white matter puts
you firmly above or below your peers, there's no way in hell you will not
perceive it and act on this knowledge -- unless there is some crazy conscious
brainwashing going on, which doesn't apply in this case.

Amount of father time vs mother time, and type of father time vs mother time
is unaddressed in your post but potentially a critical difference. Role models
are important in gender role formation (and, no, we aren't all equal): a
negligent father would imply less play-ball, a negligent mother would imply no
breastfeeding... for whereever those lead. (I recall breadfed children grow to
be less anxious)

Finally, I see a chicken and egg here -- what is your opinion about that?
Suppose a borderline autist has a child. They turn out to be an aloof parent.
Their child ends up being aloof as well, etc. Okay, that was a convenient
example -- but really, how convenient? The kid with a submissive employee for
a parent imbibes submissiveness through how they are reared; is this a learned
and transferred behavior, or a preexisting tendency, a phenotype observed
externally and possibly mistakenly over-credited to the environment?

/i make no reservations in stating my affinity to nature > nurture and
determinism > free will

But, I totally agree that good parenting is important, overlooked, and
underestimated.

------
russell
The terrible title and blaming Dr Spock for our cultural woes almost put me
off the article. Below the fold he starts to make some interesting points. By
age 4, higher income children have been talked to nearly 4 times as much as
poor children. The encouragement/discouragement ratio is 2 to 1 whereas for
poor children it is 1 to 2. He talks about the soccer mom phenomenon where
every minute of a child's day is scheduled with some activity. He thinks that
with the move to white collar work, there is too much emphasis on status and
social climbing.

I agree with the over scheduling criticism. Kids now have too many formal
activities and too much homework. I also wonder if two income families and
early day care adversely affect the kids.

~~~
michaelkeenan
The language difference might not be as significant as Alex thinks. Steven
Pinker criticizes studies of the kind that Hart and Risley did, where they
measured language used with children and assumed that affected development. He
says that causation is not established, and points to twin adoption studies
that indicate that the causal factor affecting IQ is genetic.

------
grandalf
I thought the most interesting point was the one about what happens when you
bring in a big, flat-screen TV -- you are introducing a highly culturally
influential meme-blaster into your environment. I think it's debatable whether
to call it pollution, but I have noticed that not having a TV leaves me naive
to all sorts of time wasting thoughts.

I also liked the point about trying to be "chosen". I think there is some
truth to it. But isn't pretty much any job about being chosen -- entrepreneurs
get chosen by VCs and customers, new lawyers by the partners, mcdonalds
employees by the regional manager, etc.

~~~
Alex3917
"But isn't pretty much any job about being chosen -- entrepreneurs get chosen
by VCs and customers, new lawyers by the partners, mcdonalds employees by the
regional manager, etc."

Well for an entrepreneur it's your product or service that's being chosen, not
you yourself. It's pretty clear when you talk with entrepreneurs that they see
the world very differently because of this.

At the end of the day there are two economies, the economy of those who do and
the economy of those who do what they're told. And both the children of white-
collar and blue-collar workers are largely ending up in the latter economy. My
point was that this isn't happening only because of the worldview that parents
are transmitting, but rather because the way parents are raising kids is
causing irreversible cognitive damage that puts kids at a huge handicap
regardless of what worldviews they're later exposed to. I didn't bother to go
into the statistics about how ECE stuff affects later outcomes like adult
literacy and such because I thought it would be excessive. But it's all there
if you're looking for it.

~~~
grandalf
Interesting point.

I would be interested in any links you might have...

I wonder about this question now and then in the context of the thought
experiment "describe a capitalist utopia". In my musings, such a utopia might
eliminate the distinction between work and play, and possibly even between
learning and play. If such a scenario came to exist, doing what one was told
would surely be the lowest form of existence and would be viewed as outright
subjugation.

Or would it -- maybe many people enjoy structure and thrive when being told
what to do. In reading about Myers Briggs it seems that the "guardian"
personality type enjoys structure and respects authority. Doesn't it follow
that if one respects authority he will do what he is told by said authority?
Guardians are over 10% of the population... Are these (often high functioning)
people actually the victims of the cognitive damage you describe?

I know this comment is a bit out there :)

~~~
Alex3917
"I would be interested in any links you might have..."

The Hart & Risley book is the best source for understanding how parenting
styles affect language acquisition. If you then want to see what how high-SES
and low-SES children diverge even more after age five, check out Equality and
Achievement by Riordan. If you're interested in ECE stuff other than language
then there are a ton of interesting academic papers, but it really depends
what you're looking for.

------
AlisdairO
The article seems to be missing the evidence to show that people treat their
kids in a given manner as a result of where they work. Just as possible
(although certainly less palatable) is the conclusion that parents who are
capable of getting white collar jobs, or any job at all, are inherently more
inclined to treat their children in the way that they do. This possible
conclusion is not even considered, so the article pretty much amounts to
guesswork.

------
gruseom
I agree that the piece would be much better without the baity title and the
bizarre imputation to Spock.

~~~
frossie
Yes especially since he starts of bemoaning the difference in intellectual
attitudes between Anglosaxons and other countries - failing to note that Dr
Spock was widely translated and read worldwide. He also misrepresents what Dr
Spock said, which given the social climate at the time was actually a useful
addition to the childreading debate.

When the paediatricians were telling mothers to formula feed (and formula was
awful in those days - sugar and soluble fat mostly, not like today) every 4
hours (no more often, no matter how the baby cries) instead of breastfeeding
on demand (as is the current best practice), "ignore the authority and listen
to your intuition" was not the worst advice in the world.

------
Dilpil
The author makes a several interesting points, but then many of his
conclusions come out of nowhere. It is certainly of note that lower class
children are admonished more than encouraged, it is certainly of note that
America and Britain do not have intelligent political discourse.

But where does he justify the anti consumer sentiment thrown in at the end?

And what is the consequence of high SES children being overscheduled? Don't
they end up in a higher economic class in the end?

What do the last two sentences even mean?

------
Confusion
A disappointing article. The 'intellectual pollution' consists of exactly one
supposed change in the way we raise our children: following our intuition
instead of some guidebook. This change was supposedly brought about by Dr.
Spock in 1946, but I think it is obvious that doesn't make any sense: how on
earth does the author think people were raising their children in the past few
hundred years? Based on keen pedagogical insights, gathered from books on the
subject? Given illiteracy rates, lack of education, availability of books,
etc., I doubt even 10% was reading about 'how to raise children'. The others
raised their children _as they saw fit_ , so there hasn't been a change at
all.

~~~
Alex3917
"It's not that parents weren't raising their children this way before. They
were, but since the 40's the wealth of scientific best practices have been
largely ignored thanks to Spock's influence."

In other words, if not for Spock less people would be making these mistakes
today. I don't think Spock himself was a bad guy and his advice may or may not
have been sound at the time, but the problem is that this book has taken on a
life of its own to the point where people today use it as a justification to
avoid learning anything about being a good parent. And of course most of these
people haven't even read the book, but that's a whole other thing.

~~~
Confusion
We don't have an alternate history without Spock to compare to, so I reserve
the right to doubt that it would have made any difference whether Spock would
have existed at all. If not this book, then they would've used other excuses.
Everyone likes to do things 'their way'. Only those motivated to be _good_ or
_better_ at something go out of their way to read, learn and change. Most
people aren't motivated to be better at parenting, because they think they are
already doing a good job. Isn't Johnny smiling, crawling, talking, walking,
potty trained, ... when he should?

~~~
billswift
For a more everyday example of how everyone wants to do things their way,
despite evidence, see this post by Robin Hanson,
<http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/05/sweat-intuition.html>

------
edw519
"It's not that parents weren't raising their children this way before. They
were, but since the 40's the wealth of scientific best practices have been
largely ignored thanks to Spock's influence."

I stopped reading here.

You could always tell who read Dr. Spock because they were the ones with
problem children. And the laughing stock of their community.

"largely ignored" != "mainstream acceptance"

~~~
Alex3917
You don't think Spock is mainstream? Baby and Child Care alone sold over 50
million copies, which makes it one of the top 5 best-selling non-fiction books
of all time. And that's not even counting his other three best sellers.

~~~
nostrademons
"Harry Potter" has sold over 400 million copies, and yet we don't all think
we're wizards. Similarly, Ayn Rand sold over 25 million books, and yet outside
of a few Internet-forum enclaves, Objectivism is still very much outside of
the mainstream.

Many people buy a book to see what all the fuss is about, not because they
personally are interested in making it their personal bible.

~~~
TheAmazingIdiot
\---and yet we don't all think we're wizards.

Speak for yourself. I didnt believe in that "hogwash magick stuff"... well at
first. I have a fiancé who I've been with for quite some time. We both met
through our local Catholic church (no reformed church of satan here).

She's kept this little journal which she showed me a little while back. It has
a list of dates and notes. The notes are about future events. Some happened
years ago when she first wrote them down. Others happened differently because
she changed them, and others have not happened yet. She accurately predicted a
friend's ex-husband would get cancer (being treated for now), and other
things.

Honestly, how many events would it take for you to believe in something like
that? Personally, it would take 1 major event. There's been ~15 (major events)
of them correct. (There's been about 100 minor predictions correct.)

Some would say that she has precognition. Older words for what gift she has is
more accurately a Seer.

*edited for clarity, in parentheses

