21st Century Children and Respect

[Nieroshai]

Now for me to get on-topic. The fear problem is to me less a matter of respect than not having what makes one scared by something: immersion. If I am not immersed in a scary movie, I am not scared. I personally find Dead Space immersive (and others don't, I'm not stating absolutes here) so when something happens, I can get scared by it. Same in Alien, etc. But with the newer generation being so used to seeing how cinema works and how games work. When you know deep down that what pops out is just another enemy with hit points, and you have the ammo to deal with it, that can lead to an in-game scenario not being scary. Fear often comes from the unknown, or else a threat that feels visceral and real. I say the problem is that the youth of today are so entrenched in entertainment media that they simply aren't as immersed in it. And the same thing happens to us.

Make them play Amnesia. If they don't have a high pulse at any time in that game, they just can't be startled.

As for respect, there isn't a generation in all of history that thinks their parents understood the world better than them, and respect varies. What we have here is a coincidence, a case of correlation without causation.

PS: I do respect your opinion.

 

[Nieroshai]

Alright, alright, I'll accept now that maybe I didn't put as much thought as I should have into my initial post. YES, I'm only 18, but when I said "Children", I meant ones on the lower scale of age, the pre-teen years. I still believe that you need to respect something on a subconcious level to fear it. And you may not have found the examples I presented scary, but if you think that THAT alone invalidates my point, then you're also missing my point. My point was that they didn't find anything in the vein of horror scary. I should have been more clear in my initial post, I see that now.

Let me also specify that I'm talking more about respect on a subconcious level, i.e., thinking to oneself that something is important. Er, maybe that's still not quite the right wording, but I'm working on that.

You're using a blatant logical fallacy dude.

You say "You need to respect something to fear it", which is equivalent to "If you fear it, then you respect it". You're taking that to mean "If you don't fear it, you don't respect it." That's the inverse. The truth of the inverse is not related to the truth of the original statement.

Maybe I'm just a moron, but they don't find anything scary because they don't have respect? What?

Yeah, maybe I could have made my logic a little clearer there... my thought is that you have to respect something to fear it.

Still terrible logic.

I stand by it.

Continue to stand by your incredibly flawed and downright stupid logic?
Yeah, you do that.

Damn dude, did I do something to piss you off, or do you just not understand the concept of different people having different opinions?

Oh cut out that 'different opinions' crap. Just because your opinion is different doesn't mean it deserves respect. Your logic is fallacious, having a different opinion doesn't change that.

Doesn't give you the justification to be butthurt. Heck, I think he's wrong and you're annoying me and likely others. Which you have a right to do, but you're whining.

I'm supposed to care that I'm annoying someone who thinks that correcting someone is whining? Sorry, I don't. Come back with something relevant maybe?

Suit yourself, just know that adding to a discussion is pointless if all you contribute is noise.

 

[bigfatcarp93]

Alright, everyone, I'm smart enough to know when I've been proven wrong. Thanks to all of you being able to present actual logic contradicting my point (and no thanks to the pricks who just avoided the subject and insulted my intelligence), I've changed my mind. I can think of no proof to support my theory besides the behavior of my own brother... and after all, that could just be my brother.

I withdraw my point and tip my hat to my fellow Escapists.

 

[Nieroshai]

Alright, alright, I'll accept now that maybe I didn't put as much thought as I should have into my initial post. YES, I'm only 18, but when I said "Children", I meant ones on the lower scale of age, the pre-teen years. I still believe that you need to respect something on a subconcious level to fear it. And you may not have found the examples I presented scary, but if you think that THAT alone invalidates my point, then you're also missing my point. My point was that they didn't find anything in the vein of horror scary. I should have been more clear in my initial post, I see that now.

Let me also specify that I'm talking more about respect on a subconcious level, i.e., thinking to oneself that something is important. Er, maybe that's still not quite the right wording, but I'm working on that.

You're using a blatant logical fallacy dude.

You say "You need to respect something to fear it", which is equivalent to "If you fear it, then you respect it". You're taking that to mean "If you don't fear it, you don't respect it." That's the inverse. The truth of the inverse is not related to the truth of the original statement.

Maybe I'm just a moron, but they don't find anything scary because they don't have respect? What?

Yeah, maybe I could have made my logic a little clearer there... my thought is that you have to respect something to fear it.

Still terrible logic.

I stand by it.

Continue to stand by your incredibly flawed and downright stupid logic?
Yeah, you do that.

Damn dude, did I do something to piss you off, or do you just not understand the concept of different people having different opinions?

Oh cut out that 'different opinions' crap. Just because your opinion is different doesn't mean it deserves respect. Your logic is fallacious, having a different opinion doesn't change that.

Doesn't give you the justification to be butthurt. Heck, I think he's wrong and you're annoying me and likely others. Which you have a right to do, but you're whining.

I'm supposed to care that I'm annoying someone who thinks that correcting someone is whining? Sorry, I don't. Come back with something relevant maybe?

Suit yourself, just know that adding to a discussion is pointless if all you contribute is noise.

How odd. He seemed to at least entertain the idea his logic in the fear example might be flawed from what I pointed out. So apparently that's more than noise. But here you are just whining and nothing is accomplished. I wonder who the noise contributor is here?

I have a post. Heck, a couple. If you want my contribution, go read it.

 

[bigfatcarp93]

Alright, alright, I'll accept now that maybe I didn't put as much thought as I should have into my initial post. YES, I'm only 18, but when I said "Children", I meant ones on the lower scale of age, the pre-teen years. I still believe that you need to respect something on a subconcious level to fear it. And you may not have found the examples I presented scary, but if you think that THAT alone invalidates my point, then you're also missing my point. My point was that they didn't find anything in the vein of horror scary. I should have been more clear in my initial post, I see that now.

Let me also specify that I'm talking more about respect on a subconcious level, i.e., thinking to oneself that something is important. Er, maybe that's still not quite the right wording, but I'm working on that.

You're using a blatant logical fallacy dude.

You say "You need to respect something to fear it", which is equivalent to "If you fear it, then you respect it". You're taking that to mean "If you don't fear it, you don't respect it." That's the inverse. The truth of the inverse is not related to the truth of the original statement.

Maybe I'm just a moron, but they don't find anything scary because they don't have respect? What?

Yeah, maybe I could have made my logic a little clearer there... my thought is that you have to respect something to fear it.

Still terrible logic.

I stand by it.

Continue to stand by your incredibly flawed and downright stupid logic?
Yeah, you do that.

Damn dude, did I do something to piss you off, or do you just not understand the concept of different people having different opinions?

Oh cut out that 'different opinions' crap. Just because your opinion is different doesn't mean it deserves respect. Your logic is fallacious, having a different opinion doesn't change that.

Doesn't give you the justification to be butthurt. Heck, I think he's wrong and you're annoying me and likely others. Which you have a right to do, but you're whining.

I'm supposed to care that I'm annoying someone who thinks that correcting someone is whining? Sorry, I don't. Come back with something relevant maybe?

Suit yourself, just know that adding to a discussion is pointless if all you contribute is noise.

How odd. He seemed to at least entertain the idea his logic in the fear example might be flawed from what I pointed out. So apparently that's more than noise. But here you are just whining and nothing is accomplished. I wonder who the noise contributor is here?

^Post above yours.

 

[Screamarie]

I love how you say that you understand all problems with today's youth. Psychologists and therapists have been working on these problems for years, spend serious time and money on school, work their asses off doing studies, dealing with clients, and trying to help children....but you figured it ALL out in a single conversation with one twelve year old boy and his friend. You must be a genius...and psychic.

 

[Dasick]

As for respect, there isn't a generation in all of history that thinks their parents understood the world better than them, and respect varies. What we have here is a coincidence, a case of correlation without causation.

Abrahamic religions: The original humans were perfect. They sinned. All humans after them are sinners who are born of sin, snowballing the sin factor into the next generation. Sin being the natural state of humans only grows with each generation.

Hinduism: we are living in the time of Kali Yuga, age of vice. While there are fluctuations and golden ages hidden throughout the duration (which is 432,000 years), every day it gets worse and worse. Hindus believe that human civilization degenerates spiritually during the Kali Yuga.

Darwinism: Technologically speaking, humans for the most part have been advancing. At the same time, advancements in technology and medicine mean more people survive where they would have perished. While in individual cases the death can be an unfortunate scenario out of the hands of the individual, on the bigger scale this trims away idiots and weaklings from the gene pool, a process known as Natural Selection. Our technological advancements are negating the effect of this mechanic, therefore each generation has less "undesirables" culled (proportionally speaking) before they have a chance to procreate and more undesirable genes are retained in the genepool.

These are three major world views that say that statistically speaking, each generation as a whole is going to be worse than the ones before it.

Just because lots of people notice the same thing about the subject, doesn't mean "hating the whipper-snappers is just part of being old".

 

[Nieroshai]

As for respect, there isn't a generation in all of history that thinks their parents understood the world better than them, and respect varies. What we have here is a coincidence, a case of correlation without causation.

Abrahamic religions: The original humans were perfect. They sinned. All humans after them are sinners who are born of sin, snowballing the sin factor into the next generation. Sin being the natural state of humans only grows with each generation.

Hinduism: we are living in the time of Kali Yuga, age of vice. While there are fluctuations and golden ages hidden throughout the duration (which is 432,000 years), every day it gets worse and worse. Hindus believe that human civilization degenerates spiritually during the Kali Yuga.

Darwinism: Technologically speaking, humans for the most part have been advancing. At the same time, advancements in technology and medicine mean more people survive where they would have perished. While in individual cases the death can be an unfortunate scenario out of the hands of the individual, on the bigger scale this trims away idiots and weaklings from the gene pool, a process known as Natural Selection. Our technological advancements are negating the effect of this mechanic, therefore each generation has less "undesirables" culled (proportionally speaking) before they have a chance to procreate and more undesirable genes are retained in the genepool.

These are three major world views that say that statistically speaking, each generation as a whole is going to be worse than the ones before it.

Just because lots of people notice the same thing about the subject, doesn't mean "hating the whipper-snappers is just part of being old".

That is fair. I was just noticing a pattern in how my grandparents thought they were living in the end times because they'd never seen so much vice in their own generation, and same with their grandparents, and others having the exact same story. Anecdotes become anecdotes because enough people see truth in the statement to make it culturally relevant, so you could say my statement was based on the overall since-the-1900s cultural views well-established in newspapers and literature. In the 20's, Jazz was the devil's music. Beethoven's music was claimed to have negative sexual influence (little known fact, but yes). Beethoven was from the 1770s to the 1820s, though, and if we think about it, the introduction of the waltz was considered the decadence and sexualization of the new generation. Dancing face to face with a hand on the partner's hip and all, oh no!

My point is, as far back as I've cared to research into European culture, this pattern has held in the cultural view at large. You may be right overall worldwide over all of history, but hopefully you can see my perspective.

 

[Exocet]

Can it snip

Failing that, if he's 12, and seen a lot of scary movies, maybe he's been desensitized...

To reiterate, my point had nothing to do with the examples. My point was merely that they didn't find ANYTHING scary.

The desensitized thing would rather fall under what I was talking about, that modern children are in an environment where few things are percieved with real significance... or something.

Fair enough, examples have nothing to do with it.

However, what does desensitivity have to do with respect? Just because they're used to see scarier/gorier things doesn't mean they don't have as much respect for things.
It's a rather large jump to a conclusion.

 

[Altorin]

Cavemen thought their children were reckless and didn't respect anything.

There's nothing different about kids of today compared to kids of earlier generations except the rate at which they consume information, and if anything, that will probably make them incredibly influential. A baby born today with an ipad in his hands from age 1 will be much better at assimilating information then even those born 20 years ago.

Stop worrying. Kids will be kids. They'll grow up and think THEIR kids are disrespectful asses that are contributing to the downfall of society. It's just what it looks like when you get older and look at the generation below you.

 

[Dasick]

That is fair. I was just noticing a pattern in how my grandparents thought they were living in the end times because they'd never seen so much vice in their own generation, and same with their grandparents, and others having the exact same story. Anecdotes become anecdotes because enough people see truth in the statement to make it culturally relevant, so you could say my statement was based on the overall since-the-1900s cultural views well-established in newspapers and literature. In the 20's, Jazz was the devil's music. Beethoven's music was claimed to have negative sexual influence (little known fact, but yes). Beethoven was from the 1770s to the 1820s, though, and if we think about it, the introduction of the waltz was considered the decadence and sexualization of the new generation. Dancing face to face with a hand on the partner's hip and all, oh no!

My point is, as far back as I've cared to research into European culture, this pattern has held in the cultural view at large. You may be right overall worldwide over all of history, but hopefully you can see my perspective.

Every older generation thinks the youngings are good for nothing whipper-snappers? Sounds about right.

 

[Dasick]

Cavemen thought their children were reckless and didn't respect anything.

There's nothing different about kids of today compared to kids of earlier generations except the rate at which they consume information, and if anything, that will probably make them incredibly influential. A baby born today with an ipad in his hands from age 1 will be much better at assimilating information then even those born 20 years ago.

Stop worrying. Kids will be kids. They'll grow up and think THEIR kids are disrespectful asses that are contributing to the downfall of society. It's just what it looks like when you get older and look at the generation below you.

Way to ignore the discussion that took place. You know, OP has since changed his stance and other people have brought up other arguments for and against.