Teach Your Children Well

[Flannel Jesus]

The younger the child the more they already know 'well'. They certainly do not need 'teaching'. What they all need is just being 'listened to', 'heard', recognized, and accepted for who they really are. If this were to happen and occur, then you adults would 'learn well'.

Humorous that people would say, back in the days that this was written, that children did not need teaching.

Thank you for alerting me to where I wrote Incorrectly here. The word 'they' means and is in reference to 'younger children', and not 'children' "themselves".

The fundamental message here is that if adults just 'listened' to 'younger children', instead of trying to 'teach them', then adults would learn that the younger a child, then the more that that child can, and actually are, teaching far more about life, and living, properly and Correctly, than adults could ever teach anyone.

Very humorous that people would say that children can teach more about life, in the days that this was written.

[Harbal]

Age, the way I figure it, this thread is about teaching your children well, not teaching adults not yours well, even if the teaching isn't contracted.

The younger the child the more they already know 'well'.

That's not how I remember it.

[henry quirk]

TANSTAAFL

Nope.

Libertarians say Yep.

Well, not me. And even the utilitarians in the Libertarian Party don't seem like free lunch types.

Can you gimme an example?

[henry quirk]

challenge you to another 'conversation'. Would you partake in the latter here?

Fine. Let's converse.

But make a thread for it...I'm not fond of hijacking, in an extended way, other people's threads.

Title the thread: Age vs Quirk.

[henry quirk]

Nope.

Libertarians say Yep.

Well, not me. And even the utilitarians in the Libertarian Party don't seem like free lunch types.

Can you gimme an example?

You do know that when I said nope I was saying nope, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch and not nope, there are free lunches, yes?

[Flannel Jesus]

You do know that when I said nope I was saying nope, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch and not nope, there are free lunches, yes?

That's the problem with answering a negative with a negative - are you confirming or negating the negative? The ambiguity of that is on you.

[accelafine]

But of course writing in a way that others can understand (which usually involves a competent degree of grammatical correctness) is 'old fashioned' and frowned upon, especially by Americans, which is odd when they are so obsessively litigious.
Imagine being executed because some semi-literate fool made a grammatical error that caused a statement that was supposed set you free to be saying the exact opposite and had you marched off to the gallows the next day.

[Flannel Jesus]

But of course writing in a way that others can understand (which usually involves a competent degree of grammatical correctness) is 'old fashioned' and frowned upon, especially by Americans, which is odd when they are so obsessively litigious.
Imagine being executed because some semi-literate fool made a grammatical error that caused a statement that was supposed set you free to be saying the exact opposite and had you marched off to the gallows the next day.

It's not limited to Americans, I live in England and the largest portion of my coworkers do not care to clearly communicate at all.

[accelafine]

Humans might as well have not bothered evolving laguage then. May as well be still just grunting expressively

[Flannel Jesus]

Humans might as well have not bothered evolving laguage then. May as well be still just grunting expressively

I have literally told my boss, "I don't know why you bothered to learn English if you don't even care to be understood."

Luckily I have a good enough relationship with him that I can say that.

[Walker]

Libertarians say Yep.

Well, not me. And even the utilitarians in the Libertarian Party don't seem like free lunch types.

Can you gimme an example?

You do know that when I said nope I was saying nope, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch and not nope, there are free lunches, yes?

Nope.

I thought you were saying nope, there are free lunches.

[Harbal]

Well, not me. And even the utilitarians in the Libertarian Party don't seem like free lunch types.

Can you gimme an example?

You do know that when I said nope I was saying nope, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch and not nope, there are free lunches, yes?

Nope.

I thought you were saying nope, there are free lunches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QqkrIDeTeA

[henry quirk]

Nope.

I thought you were saying nope, there are free lunches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QqkrIDeTeA

[Age]

Age, the way I figure it, this thread is about teaching your children well, not teaching adults not yours well, even if the teaching isn't contracted.

The younger the child the more they already know 'well'.

That's not how I remember it.

This is because you are only thinking of what was 'consciously known', in 'thought' alone.

What is 'unconsciously, or instinctively known', is where the good, True, and Right knowledge is. And, not just 'in the past' this still exact 'same instinctual knowledge', still, exists, and 'known' but with some of it still only 'unconsciously known'. But, all of 'the knowledge' is, ever so slowly and gradually, coming to the forefront, or in other words gradually coming to be 'consciously known'. Exactly like absolutely all previous 'knowledge' was never consciously but all of it has evolved into coming to be 'consciously known'.

[Harbal]

The younger the child the more they already know 'well'.

That's not how I remember it.

This is because you are only thinking of what was 'consciously known', in 'thought' alone.

What is 'unconsciously, or instinctively known', is where the good, True, and Right knowledge is. And, not just 'in the past' this still exact 'same instinctual knowledge', still, exists, and 'known' but with some of it still only 'unconsciously known'. But, all of 'the knowledge' is, ever so slowly and gradually, coming to the forefront, or in other words gradually coming to be 'consciously known'. Exactly like absolutely all previous 'knowledge' was never consciously but all of it has evolved into coming to be 'consciously known'.

I have no idea what that means, but it sounds like something you have just dreamed up.