While abundance has increased, so have the burdens on the parent. Both of them have to get jobs, there's no longer a grandmother in the house to help with the cooking and cleaning, the community is more individualistic so you can't just have someone watch out for your child for a couple hours.
And on top of that the constant app distractions that keep you from focusing on your children create a completely different set of challenges than what our grandparents had.
We can talk about "choice" for an individual. But when it's hundreds of millions of people in a society overwhelmingly "choosing" the same thing, it becomes more useful to talk about causes, about how society is structured to reward some choices and punish others.
For example, do you think the US has an obesity problem and Japan doesn't because, by pure chance, there are far more people who "choose" to eat unhealthy in the US?
> how society is structured to reward some choices and punish others
Who is gong to punish you for spending more time with your kids, introducing them to interesting people, maybe hiring tutors, even home schooling? People in our society today do all of those things. Nobody punishes them. The discourse around this is veering into the fantastical. We’re human beings in free societies. We get to choose.
It’s as though a lot of the commenters here, members of some of freest and most prosperous societies that have ever existed, have somehow managed to completely abandon the concept of individual responsibility.
Words like "individual responsibility", "free Societies", "prosperous societies" are big words, big in the sense that they're fuzzy. I understand they're popular terms since Modernity. However, for the sake of communication in thread. I have a theory that finding some connection, even if on just emotional level, with the people responding here may be easier if you spoke "around" these words.
Consider for a moment that you are a social animal. For the purpose of this thought experiment, let's say that just means you're an animal that can't function long without being a part of N others like yourself. Also, let's add that there is some variance in behavior in all of these animals.
Also consider that the environment of these groups is not the same and the environment of the group has an effect on the group.
Okay run this experiment for T time based off those assumptions.
Some simple questions to ask:
- If you took an individual from one group and plopped them over to another group with a different environment would you expect a difference in their behavior?
- If you took an individual from some T and plopped them over to another some other T* (T* >> T) would you expect them to make different choices?
Okay this point you may feel that this is all condescending and what I'm doing here is a strawman of your original points with some nonsense assumptions.
You may feel like this whole speaking around words like "freedom" is dumb because you believe, as I believe, there is a thing called freedom and humans possess this thing. But that's our religion, we made a leap of faith to this freedom concept. Why force this model on others? It's not binary, there's a lot variations on this idea of freedom.
The thing is, I would argue as the others in this thread have implied that, we are not just born into this world, we are also born out of it.
If you follow this thought it gets really hard to buy this discourse as "veering into the fantastical". Because you have to ask what is a free society? To what extent can a society be free?
I’m not arguing that societies don’t have norms, or that social norms don’t have an effect on people. Obviously they do. I’m arguing that free individuals in those societies with the power to choose otherwise, and access to information about the consequences of their choices, don’t get to blame those norms for their behaviour.
Plenty of people in society act contrary to the norms. In fact modern developed societies are incredibly diverse relative to the way they were a few generations ago in terms of lifestyle choices. Individual people do have agency, do have the power to choose and many of them exercise it.
Do again it comes down to responsibility. Averages are a measurement of outcome, not a determinant of it for individuals in the sample.
> I’m arguing that free individuals in those societies with the power to choose otherwise, and access to information about the consequences of their choices, don’t get to blame those norms for their behaviour.
Fair enough, but I care less about how to apportion moral blame for society's collective failings, and more about how to fix it, into a society able to sustain itself and produce exceptional children.
Setting aside that one does not choose the circumstances of their birth, the point is that these choices are more and more “expensive” with time. The tradeoffs involved look very little like the family dynamics prevalent not very long ago.
Reducing this to “choices” ignores the cultural reality surrounding those choices, and obscures that while they may not be bounded by hard imposed limits, they’re still effectively limits for many people.
While abundance has increased, so have the burdens on the parent. Both of them have to get jobs, there's no longer a grandmother in the house to help with the cooking and cleaning, the community is more individualistic so you can't just have someone watch out for your child for a couple hours.
And on top of that the constant app distractions that keep you from focusing on your children create a completely different set of challenges than what our grandparents had.