[lit-ideas] Re: The Order of Aurality (ratification of fiction?)
- From: Andy <mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
I think the issue isn't so much truth as trust. A child knows whether its
primary caretaker is trustworthy by the time it's nine months old. At that age
mother is the child's world so by extension the world is seen as trustworthy or
not. Unfortunately, children (at any age really but especially that young)
can't discern reality, can't know that mom's busy, tired, worried, depressed,
is simply doing what she thinks parents do, whatever, so children blame
themselves, always; if I were good enough mom would [take care of me,
etc.]. It's a survival technique, i.e., if mom is untrustworthy, I, child,
will die because I'm so utterly dependent on her. But if it's my fault that
they're [not taking care of me], then I have a better chance at survival,
because they're not crazy, I am. The not good enough becomes
permanently ingrained in the child's concept of self. That's why it's such a
big deal when children are left to cry themselves out
or whatever. Needless to say, the rich do as bad a job as the poor.
Andy
________________________________
> So there may be fictive elements to ego formation, but they rest on
> assumptions about the world being largely truthful. (Later modified by
> experience.) Otherwise there is no learning. And no civilization.
WO: At the formal operational stage of cognitive development, children learn
that persons can be truthful or not. I don't think that the idea of a *world*
being truthful makes sense at that stage or any subsequent stage.
Walter O
MUN
Other related posts:
