Originally posted by kmax87What he said (more or less).
The impact that subconscious malaise has on the minds of the young, has probably been overstated.
A number of scientists and philosophers (like Popper) have challenged the existence of the subconscious/unconscious itself (at least as formulated by Freud). You can check the Wikipedia articles on these for more details.
Personally, I don't challenge the existence of the subconscious. But I simply don't think it's as big a deal as it's made out to be.
Originally posted by lucifershammerAs far as this thread is concerned, I can tell you that children are very quick to pick up on unconscious / non-verbal cues from adults, to the point that it can make them sick. I don't know whether that falls under the subconscious or not. (Jung's theory of the unconscious is the one that appeals to me the most; no surprises there I'm sure).
What he said (more or less).
A number of scientists and philosophers (like Popper) have challenged the existence of the subconscious/unconscious itself (at least as formulated by Freud). You can check the Wikipedia articles on these for more details.
Personally, I don't challenge the existence of the subconscious. But I simply don't think it's as big a deal as it's made out to be.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageDont you think that we can suffer paralysis of the analysis when we end up agonising over every nuance that may be conveyed by our our actions such that every ripple of a frown or a dark expression from our darling children is met with a hurried retreat to consult with some oracle to determine if their delicate sensibilities have been scarred.
As far as this thread is concerned, I can tell you that children are very quick to pick up on unconscious / non-verbal cues from adults, to the point that it can make them sick. I don't know whether that falls under the subconscious or not. (Jung's theory of the unconscious is the one that appeals to me the most; no surprises there I'm sure).
I have gone over the top there a bit but why do we as generation now have to be perfect as parents? Our speech has to be neutral, non sexist, non racist, non exploitative in the tiniest bit. Our raising techniques have to be constantly inventive, perfectly weighted and balanced in short a total packaged rearing assault that not even ten supernannies in concert could achieve.
I'm not saying we should return to children being seen and not heard, but I think we can cottonball and attempt to shield all the pain and trauma of existence that our children develop an emotional asthma, the way they have developed respiratory diseases physically in part because of our obssession to provide superclean sterile domestic environments.
Originally posted by kmax87I actually think that children need a certain amount of "emotional roughage". A certain amount of conflict does them good: it prepares them for conflict later on. Your "emotional asthma" is a good way of putting it. Then again people who try hide conflict and maintain a facade of amicability for the sake of the children are kidding themselves because the children sense it.
Dont you think that we can suffer paralysis of the analysis when we end up agonising over every nuance that may be conveyed by our our actions such that every ripple of a frown or a dark expression from our darling children is met with a hurried retreat to consult with some oracle to determine if their delicate sensibilities have been scarred.
I have gone ...[text shortened]... ysically in part because of our obssession to provide superclean sterile domestic environments.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIf pop psychology is to be believed then that preoccupation of maintaining a facade of amicability is an ingrained feminine technique of resolving conflict, which as a way of repressing feelings is now seen as a significant contributing factor to all the angst and susceptibility to peer pressure often displayed by younger women especially. Witness the success of various diets, fashion in general, the obsession with pleasing the group.
Then again people who try hide conflict and maintain a facade of amicability for the sake of the children are kidding themselves because the children sense it.
The male psyche however has held on to more ancient behavioural antecedents(cavemanisms) such that men learn how to have explosive outbursts amongst themselves, learn how to physically amnhandle each other, with the result that on the whole a group of blokes are typically more at ease with each other and less inclined to worry about how they are perceived by their mates.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageThe tension needed to make a child physically sick would have to be very high - commonly including domestic abuse. These would be high conflict situations.
As far as this thread is concerned, I can tell you that children are very quick to pick up on unconscious / non-verbal cues from adults, to the point that it can make them sick. I don't know whether that falls under the subconscious or not. (Jung's theory of the unconscious is the one that appeals to me the most; no surprises there I'm sure).
Nevertheless, the Glenn-Marquandt study focused on children in low conflict situations and they certainly had no conscious awareness of serious issues in their parents' relationship (whether they had a subconscious/unconscious awareness or not).
Originally posted by Bosse de NagePeople who bail from a low-conflict situation send a more serious message to their children - that it's okay to jump ship when the going gets slightly rough in a relationship. It's no surprise, then, that children of divorcees have twice the divorce rate themselves of children from intact families. Besides commitment issues, children from such divorces also typically have other psychological issues (depression, substance abuse, behavioural problems etc.) as well.
I actually think that children need a certain amount of "emotional roughage". A certain amount of conflict does them good: it prepares them for conflict later on. Your "emotional asthma" is a good way of putting it. Then again people who try hide conflict and maintain a facade of amicability for the sake of the children are kidding themselves because the children sense it.