/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19079744]

Is it ethical to mold your kid to be intellectually exceptional?

[Anonymous No.19079756]

yes
why wouldn't it be?
will you also let him starve so that he won't grow stronger than another?

[Anonymous No.19079762]

>>19079744
just help them get a good education. don't do anything crazy.

[Anonymous No.19079765]

>>19079762
>don't do anything crazy.
why?

[Anonymous No.19079797]

It’s unethical to not

[Anonymous No.19079798]

>>19079744
Mill was born a prodigy, not made one.

[Anonymous No.19079816]

>>19079798
sure thing bud

[Anonymous No.19079840]

>>19079816
>all it takes is to read Greek next to a filled womb to create a genius
I wonder why no one has created an army of them yet?

[Anonymous No.19079857]

>>19079840
people have replicated this thing many many times with success lol, before and after Mill

but don't worry, that's not for you. say it's all genes and move on, we don't need an idiot attempting anything dangerous

[Anonymous No.19079875]

>>19079840
needs a lot of ressource, time and care. Personnaly tutoring a child from a very young age is not something you can easily mass produce

[Anonymous No.19079905]

>>19079744
Pic very much unrelated, you chose the chief bugman of England

[Anonymous No.19079927]

>>19079840
>I wonder why no one has created an army of them yet?
Because it's frowned upon and most people don't care to do it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A1szl%C3%B3_Polg%C3%A1r

>He is the father of the famous Polgár sisters: Zsuzsa, Zsófia, and Judit, whom he raised to be chess prodigies, with Judit and Zsuzsa becoming the best and second-best female chess players in the world, respectively. Judit is widely considered to be the greatest female chess player ever as she is the only woman to have been ranked in the top 10 worldwide, while Zsuzsa became the Women's World Chess Champion.

[Anonymous No.19079933]

Is childbirth ethical?

[Anonymous No.19079948]

>>19079875
>Personnaly tutoring a child from a very young age is not something you can easily mass produce
Why not? Nowadays nearly everyone is at least reasonably well educated, and housework doesn't require a fraction of the time it used to. Why couldn't any stay at home parent do this?

[Anonymous No.19079957]

>>19079927
This. People are good boys who give in to social pressure easily, so they think it's better to let their kids spend over a decade in a normal school where they'll leave barely understand basic maths and with their morals completely destroyed than bypassing the system in any way shape or form

[Anonymous No.19079978]

>>19079744
Yes

[Anonymous No.19080013]

>>19079978
>Posts pic of most mass produced society ever

[Anonymous No.19080017]

>>19079948
>Why couldn't any stay at home parent do this?
They can. They reason they won't is because the vast majority is unaware that this is a possibility and think intelligence is genetically determined, and the few who are aware were made to have a kneejerk conservative reaction against it due to constant exposure of some cases that encountered with negative consequences (e.g. William Sidis, read the retarded comments section in any video made about him)

And yet, of the few who know this method and would like to attempt it, 95% will not achieve any results for the same reason they won't achieve results with things as straightforward as learning spanish or getting in shape: they're lazy, sporadic, and can't live up to something that requires daily, consistent effort like this. For example a common method is to start teaching the kid how to communicate with flashcards or something equivalent before they have even completed their first year, and I doubt an average american mom can attempt that without eventually throwing the baby out of the window. You need turn of the century jewish autism to stick to something lke this

[Anonymous No.19080080]

It doesn't work.

Intelligence is largely genetic, with most of the rest up to randomness and things beyond our control.

[Anonymous No.19080095]

>>19080080
>muh study
fuck off kid

[Anonymous No.19080144]

>>19079744
If your kid's exceptional, let him discover it for himself. If you just "give" him that sense of exceptionalism, it won't be as powerful as if he organically finds it out on his own. Remember that children almost always want to rebel against the parents in some way or another. Also, it's just fucking gay. You set a kid up for a lifetime of difficulties and heartache if you instill in him something like that.

[Anonymous No.19080165]

>>19079744
In my opinion, no. They may grow to deeply resent you for it and do something stupid just to spite you.

[Anonymous No.19081513]

>>19079927
>>19079957
Part of it is laziness on the whole yes. But also part of it is that many really have no clue where to even begin, and even if they did find out, they are too dumb and undisciplined to teach their kid themselves. And then the very real issues of socialization problems born from trying this.
I think it works better with girls. I believe (part of) the reason polgar girls didn't end up massive autistic spergs like sidis is because girls are genetically more socially inclined. Having siblings probably helped too.

[Anonymous No.19081616]

>>19079744

A big as fuck IQ does not solve mediocrity. The majority of very intelligent people will end up shamefully and utterly buying into the fables of their own society. A high intellect and an active intellect very often do not come in the same package, or sparingly if they do. And if somebody highly intelligent with an active intellect, they often use their intellect for personal fancy, deception, and invention. Something you might not know is the tendency for highly intelligent and spergy scientists to privately believe in unusual conspiracy theories. Something I've observed anecdotally, this is especially true for boomers since they grew up with nothing but television and radio, so even realizing the norms of their own society are semi-arbitrary (merely customary) is some great feat requiring a lot of intelligence and careful skepticism. While if you grew up with the internet, realizing that "blacks have low IQ and it's probably partially genetic if you've read some of the literature" for example is completely trivial if you're an intelligent young man.

Anyways, my point is that "IQ elitism" really doesn't live up to its aristocratic ambitions. There are many other important and exclusive qualities, a dominant social elite of the biggest nerds is genuinely very lacking. Although at least moderately high intelligence is probably a necessary criterion for most forms of excellence. And the bare likelihood of success and its likely magnitude keeps increasing with higher intelligence (there is no cutoff or glass ceiling with intelligence-success correlations in most intellectually demanding tasks, fields, jobs).

Despite that all being true, intelligence is probably valued far too much in contemporary society. Even if you're being really strict and demanding about it, "realistic" or "meritocratic" or something. It still stands that most intelligent people are incredibly petty and unremarkable and end up amounting to very little. And pride in ones intellect is mostly informed by positive experiences in school during adolescence. The dopamine hit of being a good quizboy and your rabble classmates voting you most likely to succeed or something petty and gay like that. Why do most adult men never grow out of childhood? What the fuck is wrong with them??? Anyways, IQ threads should be banned and IQ posters should be given a wedgie by some tall and fat mental retard. Or gangraped by niggers or whatever

[Anonymous No.19081622]

>>19081616
Mucho texto

[Anonymous No.19081630]

>>19081622

Low IQ or case in point. Btw rap and anime are gay grande and mucho subhuman. Ask me how I know you were born in the 21st century

[Anonymous No.19081721]

>>19079744
No, and that's why it's a good thing to do so.

[Anonymous No.19081757]

>>19081622
I'm with this guy. A lot of words, but nothing really being said.

[Anonymous No.19081761]

>>19079744
depends on how you do it

[Anonymous No.19081782]

>>19080144
Never got this meme. I never wanted to rebel against my parents and they never tried to put fences around my behavior.

They didn't teach me much in terms of useful skills and mostly let me to my devices (which included a lot of books), but my dad taught me to read and write when I was just 3 and always helped me with math classes even when I was in highschool, whereas my schoolmates had to wait until they were 6 or 7 to start putting A and B together.

[Anonymous No.19081788]

>>19079905
>you chose the chief bugman of England
No he didn't lmao, try again.

[Anonymous No.19081873]

>>19081757

If you think my post is incoherent or off topic, I would disagree. And my general point was that it is not noble or wise to place so much importance on intelligence and adolescent academic success, at least not reasonable in its broad sense as a social custom. But my post didn't directly address the OP "Is it ethical to mold your kid to be intellectually exceptional?" because I thought the question was vague and meaningless. Why would it be unethical?

[Anonymous No.19081889]

>>19081873
>And my general point was that it is not noble or wise to place so much importance on intelligence and adolescent academic success, at least not reasonable in its broad sense as a social custom.
Much better.

[Anonymous No.19083591]

>>19080095
>fuck off kid
I'm a father.

Who is under no delusions I can make my child smarter.

[Anonymous No.19083603]

>>19079744
No.

[Anonymous No.19084115]

>>19081616
this is a great post well written

>>19081622
>>19081757
this is wounded pride

>>19083591
this is a bad father attempting to justify his inadequacy

[Anonymous No.19084414]

No because he'll end up a social retard with no interpersonal skills.

[Anonymous No.19085312]

>>19079840
>I wonder why no one has created an army of them yet?
anon... because we are the ones who are going to create it.

[Anonymous No.19085419]

>>19079744
Well, they failed. So that would be a no from their consequentialist perspective.

[Anonymous No.19085699]

>>19079744
No. It's ethical to raise your child so that he's capable to survive in the world.

[Anonymous No.19085780]

>>19085699
this but change instead of survive, so yes

[Anonymous No.19085809]

>>19079840
dont u realize what mankind's story arc is for the next 300 years? we have the interner bro. u must raise a demi god now while u can to shape the future aquarian age. u must learn and join us before its too late

[Anonymous No.19085900]

>>19084115
Nonsense, I acknowledged and agree to his condensed statement.