Example of a Buddhist perspective of self-defense:

http://www.insightmeditationcenter.o...n-non-harming/

So if somebody is trying to buttrape me, and it pisses me off, I can't fight back until I decide I'm not pissed off about it? Sounds legit.

You just have to get inner cool down within 0.01-0.1 sec derived from high confidence that your attacker is doomed in the near future light cone and then based on that inner cool deliver the strike back and high 5 your future self in the next second. If things dont turn out as planned you still have to keep confident searching for that future high 5 never getting mad.

Makes you wonder if the entire BS between Buddhism and quantum field theory/cosmology etc has any merit (not).

" Of course, most developmental psychologists still don’t agree with me, but at least they’re acknowledging that there’s another point of view."


That doesn't sound like there's a consensus on the viewpoint.


PairTheBoard

I am anxiously waiting for some breakthrough paper anytime soon that will claim that in order to succeed in life you need your parents to teach you to be prime time a$$hole and manipulator of others, total selfish scumbag and yet make a promise to open a letter addressed to you in 30 years, which you will wait all your life with high anticipation about the true meaning of all these early lessons to be bad.

In that letter it says now use your power to do good to this world so all the nastiness that you have experienced will not be required in the future by others...

Oh but maybe it is too late by then...Maybe this kind of damage can never be bought back.

I don't claim that it is. But in the last 15-20 years or so, this position has gone from nothing to being strong enough that it needs to be addressed. Mostly, it's a direct counter-point to Masque's ongoing crusade against parents. (Notice his most recent rendition of my position. <trump> SAD! </trump> )

I only speak about parenting better and the input parents can have indirectly by enabling a strong education and exposure to world literature (even via recordings for kids or other programming) at early age because at least its something that can be affected.

The other things like your genes and your chemical makeup and overall mood/personality may be beyond control without some intrusive highly experimental and risky methods. I am not denying the role of other things including overall human culture these days. What i am saying is that there is little that can be done about them or at least its is not as easy to control. Parents should pay attention about what happens outside home at school and with friends because a lot of ugliness exists out there.

People in your life can make a difference. They may not control your natural character and tendencies but they can help you see things that can make a difference.

You dont have to get physical and discipline your kids hard but that too may be required at some ugly point in life that they no longer listen. You need to show them what you know from very early and this exposure to some wisdom can help them cope with their problems and be an influence in the lives of their friends too.

The age of course is important and we didnt discuss it yet because it can completely change the discussion.








We moved the discussion to older ages when talking to kids about bullying is more effective. You cannot do such things at much smaller ages of course. So the true age in question here makes a difference. It may be a complete nonissue even. But there is some tendency for kids to do these things.

http://ecap.crc.illinois.edu/poptopics/biting.html

http://families.naeyc.org/learning-a...ldren-who-bite

The reasonable fear of certain danger is an impetus to stop a buttrapist. So anger following in such a spot is not anger first and fear may lead to anger but not must lead to anger.

Anger can influence perception, judgment and choices. It may be the correct choice in the butt rapist scenario to unrestrain some anger, or maybe getting angry leads to an ineffective move where restraint would lead to better awareness and choices in such a situation.

Restraint could lead to the choice to go balls of the wall angry on the buttrapists eyeballs. Anger could lead to getting overpowered and murdered instead of just raped.

Violence is not easy.

Camus would probably tell you it didn't really matter after all if you could get into the right absurd mindset and legitimately just laugh at the thought of anything like social status being important (I think Schopenhauer would support this).

Nietzsche would probably say that you need to disregard it or fight back, revolt against the "slave-owners" and follow your instinctive will to power and avoid letting the common misconceptions of what's right and wrong affect you because all that serves to do is aid the weak and the weak do not matter, only the overman does.

All of this is probably horrible advice, I'd say all you need to do is teach her about empathy, without knowing how things went down it could've happened due to her panicking, as long as it's an isolated incidence I don't think there's cause for concern, I know that I myself (and pretty much everyone around me) once in a while did some utterly ****ed up **** because we were in situations where we were uncomfortable or simply because we were stupid kids, but as long as we were taught afterwards that a given action was not acceptable we'd, usually, quit.

GLGL

Teach her better anatomy - the jugular is below the face. Carotid is quicker, but you have to bite really, really deep.

You're welcome.

I think OP has made a mistake by not already doing 3-hour nightly read-and-discuss sessions starting with The Republic (since it is pretty easy) and then moving on to the other great works in chronological order.

I can see it now.

A 4 year old boy gets the toy by pure force. The girl is frustrated briefly. She wants to go after the bully and regain the toy. But her dad has taught her game theory. Biting will not work because the grown ups will focus on the bite and not the abuse that caused it. Instead lets try something else. Lets replay the smart phone recording of the incident for the class to see in the big monitor. And then lets initiate a rule that from now on when an abuse of that matter takes place all the kids after seeing the replay move towards the abuser and correct the injustice. In return every time one of the group suffers the same the others will come to aid defeating the bully every time by pure numbers. Any takers? Western Hemisphere Counter Bully Alliance is born.


No scratch that! Why dont we instead approach the kid and whisper in his ear; For every time you exercise force to take something from me i will simply push back and if you fail to move away i will count to 3 and then will start a timer with no known expiration. At some random point in time in the next few weeks some prank will happen that will ridicule you or an unexpected loss will be endured. So enjoy this moment and then keep looking behind your back for the payback...until it happens. And just like that you push one time and after a brief pause you start, 1...


No scratch that! Lets just push him and talk to him loud for all to hear, you took my toy please give it back or ask me if i want to give it to you for a while. If this doesnt work thats ok. The teacher will be impossible to ignore it though (the style). You score 1 against me this time and i win the greater class game. So bring it!


No scratch that! You push him and ask him to give back the toy or ask for it kindly. If nothing happens you keep pushing and being a nuisance endlessly...


No scratch that! You push and ask him to give back the toy. If nothing happens you move on to another more interesting toy or create one in your mind. After all you are just 4. And this is the extend of your problems! Enjoy it while you can. It wont last.

Rethinking my last post, I think it absolutely necessary to not make ANY allowances for the age of the child and her resultant cognitive development. Simply saying "we don't bite, honey" and nothing more would be far too age-appropriate and should be discarded out of hand.

I don't understand why you are focusing on this specific incident. Did you even read the post or my subsequent replies? Or do you just read the titles of posts, open them, and then blur your eyes thinking "Blabbity Blah blah blah blah shabadoo, I already know what I'm gonna say to this one!" I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

You mean you havent said it already? Or you mean you cant improve on what you have said and revisit the case? Why havent we heard what the age of the girl is by the way? This definitely puts the answer in a much better perspective. The Philosopher can either laugh at the concern suggesting only symbolic action low ages can get (practicing new teeth or imitating cartoons or adult jokes that left an impression) or be very intrigued what the proper action is depending on age if she is 3-4-5 say and think about it further, speculating even as far as what kind of world we create by how we treat/react to these early innocent behaviors.

I was responding to the guy who seemed like he read the title of the post, and then put on his condescending super hero cape. The quote above was an attempt to clarify what I was interested in when I chose to create this thread.

The "great philosophers" don't say that much about parenting specifically. It's not a question they concerned themselves with so much. You can look at speculations upon the nature vs nurture debate (Are children a blank slate when they're born, or do they come pre-packaged with their own thoughts and ideas, and if so, where do those thoughts and ideas come from?), but you won't get too far in terms of a practical outlook or practical guidance.

And again, "religion" doesn't say too much that's clear, as there's a lot of cultural understanding of the role of parenting that aren't usually seen as the core of that religion. You'll catch little glimpses of generic parenting advice, but nothing so specific as to give you tangible guidance for dealing with a kid that bites another kid. It will just be vague generalities that you would probably agree with but still not be able to find sufficient guidance from.

And I think it's unlikely that you will ever have it figured out. I think a direct cause-effect linkage is extremely unlikely to be found any time soon. It's an unreasonable expectation to think that you would have parenting figured out at any point in your life, especially as not even those who work directly in the field think they've got parenting figured out.

So as much as you're reaching out to find high-level thinking about parenting for guidance, I think you're looking in the wrong place. Philosophers and religion probably aren't the most robust source of knowledge and perspective when it comes to parenting questions. I think it's not particularly practical or enlightening. There's just too much of parenting that's culturally embedded to allow for useful abstractions.

http://youtu.be/ERbvKrH-GC4

Links to follow from here:

http://www.apa.org/research/action/nonviolent.aspx

luis suarez approves

I glossed through most replies.

For other incidents, what you should do is to pick the philosopher/philosophy that fits best with your preconceived notions and do what you were going to do had you never picked that philosopher/philosophy. I am quite certain that this is what everyone will do anyway.

Unless someone makes suddenly more sense than your current notion. Then you have to include them too and even revise your ideas. That is possible obviously because this is how we learn. The question is if others are teachers or enforcers of attitude lol. Because it takes a teacher or genuine researcher that loves to convince you for the love of the topic, not trash you to death to change your mind and score points like most people like to do when they debate each other. And thats why it doesnt work as well even when correct.

That is a lot of "I"s for a thread.

What I want is a chicken sandwich. Why haven't you brought me one yet?

What your daughter needs is to be told "we don't bite." She will figure out the rest through interacting with others.

No. You might find a philosopher's take a better rationalization for what you already implicitly feel and incorporate it, but that isn't much to hang your hat on.

It certainly isn't how we learn.

I've only seen a couple people in our general vicinity "trash someone" for their ideas. However, some super-sensitive people might take being told "no, that is wrong" as a curse upon their very being. Those people cannot be taught by any method. Their ideas are too precious to them.

You mean you do not learn by proof if evidence is offered that is unquestionable? For some topics it is possible to argue in a rather convincing yet creative manner that is appealing only to universal logic and truths most people accept. Why would one not appreciate that?

How did these people that are hypersensitive get to know what they do by the way if they cant be taught by any method? How do they continue to learn new things? Have they stopped?

Are you sure that its more about some being supersensitive (and some are indeed that surely) and not about some being rather obnoxious, condescending sociopaths typically only after irritating the "sensitive" ones?