Raising children to understand selfishness

[mikes3283]

I'm interested in getting parents perspectives on how to raise children to have the virtue of selfishness. Specifically how did you deal with brothers, sisters or brother and sister sharing toys or other things? What was your approach, and what would you have done differently?

Thanks!

Edited January 24, 2009 by mikes3283

[Scott_Connery]

I am a teacher of 1st-3rd graders (but not a parent), but I will chime in anyway.

Mostly, I tell children who want something a friend has, that there is no rule they must share. I tell them that they would not like it if Johnny came and took their toy, and so they are not allowed to take his.

Sometimes, this does not work, and I may ask the first child to put their item (whatever it may be) away because it is a distraction for the class.

If it is an item owned by me (or the school) then I tell them that it is not theirs, and I get to decide who may use it.

[mikes3283]

I am a teacher of 1st-3rd graders (but not a parent), but I will chime in anyway.

Mostly, I tell children who want something a friend has, that there is no rule they must share. I tell them that they would not like it if Johnny came and took their toy, and so they are not allowed to take his.

Sometimes, this does not work, and I may ask the first child to put their item (whatever it may be) away because it is a distraction for the class.

If it is an item owned by me (or the school) then I tell them that it is not theirs, and I get to decide who may use it.

A teachers input is most welcomed! As a followup question, do you encourage the children (in your example johnny) to share, or do you reinforce to them that they do not have to share if they do not wish to?

And a personal question, do you believe that a child that shares a toy, game etc.. when they don't want to is counter productive?

Thanks!

[adrock3215]

To anyone who has been around young children, this question is essentially irrelevant. Young children only understand selfishness--what they don't understand is selflessness. It's up to the parents to foster the child's natural inclination to act in his own self-interest; most parents fail horribly at this task, and destroy their own kids by preaching altruism and self-sacrifice as moral ideals. As a child grows, he will undoubtedely face opposition from all sides, but with the help and guidance of a parent will develop a more systemic and conceptual justification for egoism, as opposed to altruism.

Edited January 24, 2009 by adrock3215

[~Sophia~]

I'm interested in getting parents perspectives on how to raise children to have the virtue of selfishness. Specifically how did you deal with brothers, sisters or brother and sister sharing toys or other things? What was your approach, and what would you have done differently?

Sharing can be and properly is selfish. You are not trying to uproot sharing per say but altruism or a mistaken sense of duty. If a child wishes to have playmates (and this should be left to his choice) mutual trade/exchange of values of which toys are a part - is the proper mechanism of interaction. The problem is a proper motivation and not the bahavior itself.

Edited January 24, 2009 by ~Sophia~

[4reason]

A teachers input is most welcomed! As a followup question, do you encourage the children (in your example johnny) to share, or do you reinforce to them that they do not have to share if they do not wish to?

And a personal question, do you believe that a child that shares a toy, game etc.. when they don't want to is counter productive?

Thanks!

As a former Montessori teacher, I can vouch for the wisdom and efficaciousness of reinforcing the notion that children do not need to share if they do not want to. A Montessori classroom is designed to reinforce this principle in concrete form: there is only one of each work (although some of your more granola Montessori types encourage sharing and altruism). If a child came to me complaining that they wanted something else that another child had, I would tell them they had to ask (and show them how to ask, for the younger ones, if needed). If that child in possession of said wanted object said no, then I simply explained that they had to wait. I would tell them that they could then ask the possessing-child to come find them when they were done with the work, but rarely did it go that far because children could quickly find something else to occupoy themselves in the material-rich classroom that is Montessori. The playground was another matter, but even though the children were more easily frustrated by my rules on the playground, the rules were the same. You have to wait until they are finished. I firmly believe that being consistent in this expectation actually produces children that are more respectful of others than does teaching children to share. Sharing is confusing because the child is left wondering: who determines how much we have to share and what we have to share. They wonder, what is mine and what is yours. It creates a gray area that their pre-abstract minds struggle to understand. If, on the other hand, you let the child use the fact that someone is concretely in possession of and using a particular item as a definition of "what is theirs" they are much more capable of understanding when it may rightfully be theirs. I visisted many preschools that encouraged sharing, and I can tell you that those children were not respectful of each other and each others rights at all. The only thing they were was resentful of the adults in the room who arbitrarily enforced these sharing rules. My students respected me because they knew what my expectations were; I was not one of those confusing adults with arbitrary rules. I was consistent, reliable and trustworthy and by letting them maintain possession of what they had I gained their respect. If a child physically took something from another, and the victim reacted violently, my reprobation always went toward the stealing child first. Events like this would always occur frequently in the beginning of each school year, but the children would quickly learn that they were not permitted to steal in the school setting, just as they also quickly learned that they didn't have to worry about feeling guilty for possessing or using something that they enjoyed.

It is, therefore, much easier to teach a child the virtue of selfishness than it is to teach them altruism. You really have to make a consistent, arbitrary effort to NOT teach a child the virtue of selfishness, but sadly many adults do this by not being consistent in simple rules that children can easily see in concrete form. Be consistent, and make sure there is a concrete reference for the child to have. Trying to explain justice or the "ethics" of altruism to a child is futile. They rely on patterns to predict the order around them that they are to follow. And adults who teach sharing are never consistent in their enforcement.

For a child, using a work, playing with a toy: these are concrete things. The child knows that possession brings happiness. Thus they are able to relate their happiness to what another child may be feeling when they have something that they want. They know that that child is happy in their realm because they know what that feels like: to have something that makes one happy. They get that; you don't need to explain it. But sharing does not bring happiness to a concrete thinker; it can only bring happiness to someone who abstractly measures their happiness by giving to others. The age group that I worked with, ages 2.5-6 years old, would never be able to understand something so senseless, because that's what it really is. Altruism is the essence of philosophical contradition because it impossible to maintain at all times. TEaching a child altruism does nothing but create a future adult who is full of philosophical contradictions and who has no respect for or understanding of property rights. That's what makes children so wonderful: they can often find contradictions in an adult's thinking and actions sooner than the adult can. I bore witness many a time to my students calling their parents out on their contradictions. They couldn't explain the abstraction behind how they were able to spot it or why it bothered them, but they were wise enough to know that contradictions are upsetting. You must teach children selfishness to keep this recognition alive for a lifetime. So, yes, the child who is forced to share is being counterproductive. But I was always willing to let children share if they wanted to; the point was, it was always a choice: and the choice belonged to the possessor, not to the child who wanted.

Edited January 24, 2009 by 4reason

[Scott_Connery]

A teachers input is most welcomed! As a followup question, do you encourage the children (in your example johnny) to share, or do you reinforce to them that they do not have to share if they do not wish to?

And a personal question, do you believe that a child that shares a toy, game etc.. when they don't want to is counter productive?

Thanks!

I will often ask Johnny if he would want Billy to share if Billy ever brought anything fun. That will often make them consider things from the other child's perspective for the first time.

Sometimes the just don't like the other kid (often for good reason), and they still don't want to share.

I think forced "sharing" is very counter-productive. It teaches them that their property is not really their own. (As a side-note, I think this is one reason why it is very important for parents to make clear to the children which things belong to the child, and which things belong to the parents.)

On a more practical note, I very rarely see forced "sharing" resolve conflicts. Usually the first kid ends up really mad, and the other wants to get back at the first one for withholding his toy in the first place. How likely is he to treat it gently and respectfully?

What happens to your trust with the children after Billy damages/breaks Johnny's toy? The toy that Johnny didn't want him to have in the first place.

I would always make Johnny put his toy away before I forced him to share it. I might also add a comment about how we don't want others to hurt his great toy, and how he probably shouldn't bring it to school in the first place.

[Sarrisan]

You may be interested in Rational Jenn's blog (http://rationaljenn.blogspot.com). She is a practicing Objectivist who often posts about her trips through parent-hood (As a matter of fact, I really should check for updates more often... my RSS reader has spoiled me).

[~Sophia~]

As a followup question, do you encourage the children (in your example johnny) to share, or do you reinforce to them that they do not have to share if they do not wish to?

Neither. You explain 1) why they don't have to 2) under what circumstances (not when it is a sacrifice - for example, they are not done with it themselves) and for what reason it would be beneficial to do so (trade is the proper mode of human interaction) then you leave them to make the choice. Part of the job of a good parent is to make yourself dispensable as much as possible and one virtue is not practiced in isolation of others. A child should be given as much opportunity to make his own choices and learn from his own experiences as possible. My rule is that if it is not threatening his survival (secondly not interfering too much with my plans but notice secondly) - I allow my son a choice - I am allowing him mistakes knowingly on my part. I also do not bail him out of the consequences. Next time facing similar situation I may remind him of the consequences of his previous choice but then I leave it up to him again - even when he is just about to make the same mistake and endure similar consequences again.

And a personal question, do you believe that a child that shares a toy, game etc.. when they don't want to is counter productive?

What do you mean? Do you make him share or that he made an altruistic choice himself?

[~Sophia~]

You may be interested in Rational Jenn's blog (http://rationaljenn.blogspot.com). She is a practicing Objectivist who often posts about her trips through parent-hood (As a matter of fact, I really should check for updates more often... my RSS reader has spoiled me).

I agree with Jenn about positive discipline. I have always followed similar rules as described by Jenn in her post about PD:

• Mutual respect. Adults model firmness by respecting themselves and the needs of the situation, and kindness by respecting the needs of the child.

  
  

• Identifying the belief behind the behavior. Effective discipline recognizes the reasons kids do what they do and works to change those beliefs, rather than merely attempting to change behavior.

  
  

• Effective communication and problem solving skills.

  
  

• Discipline that teaches (and is neither permissive nor punitive).

  
  

• Focusing on solutions instead of punishment.

  
  

• Encouragement (instead of praise). Encouragement notices effort and improvement, not just success, and builds long-term self-esteem and empowerment..

  
  

[mikes3283]

To anyone who has been around young children, this question is essentially irrelevant. Young children only understand selfishness--what they don't understand is selflessness. It's up to the parents to foster the child's natural inclination to act in his own self-interest; most parents fail horribly at this task, and destroy their own kids by preaching altruism and self-sacrifice as moral ideals. As a child grows, he will undoubtedely face opposition from all sides, but with the help and guidance of a parent will develop a more systemic and conceptual justification for egoism, as opposed to altruism.

I don't think the question is irrelevant, by your own admission young children only understand selfishness, which I assume leads to situations where one sibling wants something another sibling has, yet doesn't fully understand the concepts of possession. I am curious how the objectivist parent deals with such situations in the context of raising children.

Edited January 24, 2009 by mikes3283

[mikes3283]

Thank you, this was very insightful!

[mikes3283]

You may be interested in Rational Jenn's blog (http://rationaljenn.blogspot.com). She is a practicing Objectivist who often posts about her trips through parent-hood (As a matter of fact, I really should check for updates more often... my RSS reader has spoiled me).

Thank you, her posts are hilarious and insightful at the same time!

[FrolicsomeQuipster]

There sure are a lot of tripwires.

There's even a Dutch childhood saying which in English roughly goes ''trading brings tears''.