Slashdot Mirror
Email Worse Than Marijuana For Intelligence?
wallykeyster writes "The Guardian is reporting that a recent study at King's College indicates that the average IQ loss of email users was 10 points (or six points more than cannabis users). Details on The Register as well. The Register has a related story about how computers make kids dumb and an apparent "problem-solving deficit disorder" observed in children who use computers. I thought it was television that rotted your brain?"
If anything was going to make you dumber, I would hav thought Google would be to blame. If you can't figure something out, just Google it.
I think these studies are purposely focused on certain areas where they know the outcome of their own study.
Like the difference in examining crime in a low income area vs a high income area. [ / suspicion ]
As someone who has dealt with diagnosing and fixing a lot of computer related problems caused by relatives who don't have a clue and by my own tinkering, I'd say that PCs sharpen your problem solving skills. Or maybe they're unrelated, and PC skills are just a reflection of one's problem solving abilities.
I once read that using a computer is a test of one's ability to follow directions. Probably true, but I do also think that maintaining a computer in an environment of changing hardware and software is a test of one's ability to use deductive reasoning to solve problems, as well as maintain a jumble of info in your head and connect seemingly disparate pieces of info to solve a problem.
Slashdot. Seriously its worse than email, at least email has an actual productive purpose, with slashdot we just waste our time posting things that will have no actual benefit - look im doing it now!
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
The Internet made me kill 27 people
The Internet made me go out and fuck the neighbor's cat
I always thought IQ was a relatively static thing. Obviously, a person's intelligence changes over time, but IQ is adjusted for age. A 10-point drop in IQ means the person would have actually lost some kind of mental capacity.
I don't buy that at all.
Most likely, the added distractions in these people's lives just made the test more difficult for them. I highly doubt that these people actually became dumber. As someone mentioned earlier, this is most likely just some scientist making his data fit his hypothesis.
I would love to ask these quacks how you temporarily lose IQ points. That is absurd.
This has got to be some study steered toward a desired result. Either the scientists or the funding organization wanted this result, so they made sure it came to this conclusion.
I have one word for you:
MUDs
These old text games have probably been the cause of more skipped final exams and lost study time than any two modern games together.
Trying to use sarcasm in text-based forums does not work.
is revolting. If you're naturally lazy or stupid and you use the computer, play video games, email obsessively, or smoke pot to excess, yes, you're going to get caught in it and probably get stupider over time.
But if you're naturally smart or motivated, the opposite is true. I've known people that smoked pot all through college and graduated early with amazing grades. I'm sure amongst the people you know, you can think of the video game addict that gets all A's and the video game addict that flunked out years ago.
These things are just enablers. That's why, especially with pot, you should be of sound mind and body before you turn the machine on or pack the pipe. It makes the difference between expanding your mind and escaping from it.
"[T]he single essential element on which all discoveries will be dependent is human freedom." -- Barry Goldwater
It's not that the potential isn't there for any of the technologies, but humanity has a governor, just like the Briggs & Stratton on my old go kart. It's called the 'Lowest Common Denominator.' One individual can reason in a unique manner that can advance the frontiers of human understanding, while a mob is well known for its inability to reason except in the most primative manner. The more connected we become, the more LCD we are tied to. The technology is inevitably bent to the will of the masses, regardless of the vision of the few.
Properly used, a search engine has the potential to function as an intelligence amplifier, but that way requires hard work and a singular vision which reaches outside the common vision. It's so much easier to just kick back and go with the flow. But each of the things that really changed the world were brought about through the individual thoughts of one person, who eventually shared it with a small group. For lack of a better term, an outsider, separate from the common environment; but somehow capable of seeing something that no one else was able to see and to carry through and realize.
So, for the vast majority of those out there who unconsciously embrace mediocrity, being dumber is just another wave of the cool. While those of us who seek truth on a Friday night, discuss the realization of the possible. They're just a tool. They can help the smart get smarter, and the dumb to get dumber. Depending on what you were after in the first place. It is all a matter of choice.
"Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
Sheesh. What in the hell happened to parents just saying "No" instead of treating kids like royalty? This Just In: you can love your offspring while still denying them things, despite what your idiot neighbor claims.
I am only a child of the 70s, but it's certainly a different, wussier, world out there than I remember.
-
Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
I hate, absolutely _hate_, laying blame on parents, but after working as long as I have in IT at a school district I can see that children are mirrors of their parents' behavior.
That said, I think what you need to do at this point is take your son, sit him down, and start involving him in reading. Either that or grt him out away from computers for a bit. Anything to keep him from becoming some kid who lets extraneous things come between him and his school work.
Better yet, uninstall the game and get him some educational software. Math Munchers, Zoombies, or Carmen Sandiego are all excellent choices to get him to think. After his allotted playtime, ask him what he's learned.
"This food is problematic."
finished a discussion about how to remove the game from the pc whilst making it look like an accident
Perhaps what will help is insulting the intelligence of your "brilliant student" of a son, by refusing to be straightforward and upfront with him?
I imagine there is some sort of hardwired instinct at work here. I don't know the Bionicles game, but many games are so complicated now that they require complex thinking skills. There may be some internal switch which says, "I am doing this important task [e.g. hunting], so I should turn off my learning/artistic desire switch in order to focus on the task at hand."
Even games like Unreal Tournament or Grand Theft Auto require a lot of different brain processes and instincts to "survive." But these games may also draw upon our survival instincts, which tend to elevate hormone levels and whatnot. Those biochemical changes may have effects similar to a drug which last even for a few days after the game was played.
I guess that explains why I walk around the house in the morning and feel like I'm in a permanant vegetative state.
Seriously though, when I graduated from high school, just a mere 18 years ago, we had no such things as cellphones, and gadgets and doohickies and whatnot to distract us from the all important task of learning.
As for computers, too much emphasis is placed nowadays on being able to 'use it' and not enough on why one needs to use it in the first place. Until probably as recently as 10 years ago, there were still books and libraries to go to, but now everything is geared toward breeding a generation that can't be bothered with actually working for the answer, and education in 2005 requires internet access in the home. You need to do a book report on subject whatever, google-search, read up on it, keep doing a search until you find someone who has already solved the problem for you, then do the report. That to some is learning. There is a distinctive difference between a 'college' and a 'university' and one teaches you 'things', the other teaches you how to 'think'. When it comes to learning, it's essential to reinvent the wheel, again and again, and again until reinventing the wheel is as natural as breathing. The only way to make smarter people is to make them think for themselves. By getting someone to crack open a book and do some reading on the facts and only the facts, it gives the reader a chance to think out the problem in their mind rather than accept whatever opinion on the subject they happen to come across.
I look at the university entrance exam my dad wrote when he applied and in all honesty it's so far over my head, I have no idea what the question is asking. There seems to have been a pretty serious slip in mental discipline over the decades, computers and TV are only adding to the problem.
Also, I challenge anyone to find a child (under 18) who will primarily use the computer for actual work (study) as opposed to playing games, instant messaging and other such activities. The life of today's teen hardly requires a storm of neural activity anymore, so it's no big surprise to me that there's an apparent "problem-solving deficit disorder" observed in children who use computers.
You think that's bad... 2 of my college friends dropped out of college because of Everquest. They spent ALL day playing it and not going to class because they felt that they needed to keep up with their guild members, etc. They were on scholarship, which they lost. Eventually they dropped out of college. It's sad but games can be very addicting, just like a lot of things. Games are designed to be addicting, that's how they make their money. I'm guilty of being an addict as well, but to cycling. The good thing is that when I'm cycling, I'm in so much pain that there's a limit to how much I do it. Computer games, on the other hand, has no such mechanism. I think the pain comes later when the rest of your life suffers as in the case of my friends. So maybe instead of immediate reward and delayed punishment, they should make it delayed reward and immediate punishment, like cycling :-) Then again, a game like that will never sell.
EvilCON - Made Famous by
I can totally relate passthecrackpipe. (odd name for such a....umm...mature post). My little brother is 16 now and ever since he was about 11 or 12 he's had a problem with letting computer games controlling his life that has gotten progressively worse and worse. Although he does keep up with his grades (because if they plummet he knows he will lose his computer priveledges until they come back up). Try that with your son, that is remove or severely restrict his gaming time until he gets those grades up. I think that would help solve your problem.
But it won't end there, let me assure you. Even though my brother keeps his grades up, he spends *all* his free time playing games, reading about games, and pretty much nothing but games. He doesn't go outside. He doesn't socialize with others. He just wants to get online and "pwn pplz with hiz 1337 skillz". (-_-) In the past my parents had been pretty damn lax about this, even though they knew it was a problem, and I insistently pressured them to make him do something else, anything else but play games! I'm afraid that this problem is only going to grow exponentially for each generation as kids start to grow up on games and let them control their lives. As parents, guardians, or whatever you are, I urge you all to remind your younger family members that games are great, but they should try doing other things with their lives. Otherwise, they will never know how many great things they are capable of doing in this world.
Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
I think this is the big thing: educational games are dead, except for stupid multimedia treehouse and barbie games. Puzzle games are no longer things like The Incredible Machine and Lemmings, that actually give you _problem solving_ skills, but twitch-puzzles like Tetris and Chu-Chu Rocket (which are fun by their own right, but not mind-expanding).
Where's my Island of Dr. Brain?
I have trouble buying this.
I think a more important question is whether IQ and academic grades are a true measure of intelligence in general.
Moreover just because the people in the study used email, it does not mean that email is the cause for their drop in IQ score.
Why do you hate blaming parents so much? It's their job to raise their kids, and nearly every problem a child has can be directly related to his parents' (lack of) parenting. The original poster is a perfect example. Rather than addressing the problem, he's scheming with his wife to "accidentally" remove the game. What's his son going to learn from this? That it's okay to neglect his responsibilities (even at 5 years old, you have them -- education, playing, being a kid)? That mommy and daddy are real klutzes with the computer, so he should start learning how to hide what he's doing? In this case, it may or may not be the parents' fault that the kid got so wrapped up in the game (it probably is -- they didn't limit his play time, or set down ground rules), but if they go through with the planned course of action they are absolutely responsible for what that teaches the child.
It's not my job to parent your kids, nor is it the government's job, nor teachers, school administrators, day care employees, etc. It's your kid, you teach him how to be responsible. If you can't handle that, perhaps you should reconsider being a parent. Harsh? Sure. But throwing more tax dollars at poorly parented children isn't going to solve the problem, either. You have to fix the problem, and the problem is usually the parents (or parent, in more and more cases).
I had college friends who dropped out because of MUDs... couldn't stop playing them, even to the detriment of their schoolwork. It was easy to find them, though. They never left the computer labs..
:)
Of course all I call that is a lack of discipline. Like this "brilliant" kid. Tell him _NO_ once in a while so he can get used to it when he grows up... and maybe he won't be Everquest (or MUD) fodder.
Spoiled little brats... getting all that they can possibly want, and appreciating none of it.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
Children learn most from their parents. They spend the most time with their parents during the important periods of growth and development, of both body and mind ie, birth to 18 (at least up to 15/16 anyway). Therefore, it is parents who influence the behaviour and attitudes of children the most, and so MOST blame for disruptive or aggressive children lies squarely on the parents shoulders.
>>"not unacceptable"
>why the fuck didn't you just say acceptable?
"not full" != empty
the world isn't binary.
that's why.
Demonstrant's Open Source Tools
Go to flea markets, yard sales, and library sales (where they get rid of old books that are worn or no longer popular).
Our older two share a bedroom, and they have over 500 books just on their own shelves. I think the oldest has probably read 90% of them. My wife and I have at least 2000 on shelves around the house.
And yes, we let them play computer games. The oldest will play Zoombinis for a while, but then get tired of it and dig out a book. Good fiction includes complex characters and plots which just don't exist in the games I've seen, and satisfies a desire for interesting material in a way that gaming doesn't.
But we do avoid TV. I think TV is worse than computer games because they stop every 2 minutes for a bunch of 15-second commercials in which a dozen dancing bunnies sing about toilet paper. It's the constant shifting that wrecks your attention span -- playing a single game at your own pace for a while doesn't have the same effect.
It would be hard to convince me that playing chess against the computer for two hours is as bad for your brain as watching two hours of commercial TV.
I wrote my MA thesis ( link ) on a related subject, computers and writing. Though more geeky than most teachers, I firmly believe that computers have no place in the education curriculum. Now, as part of a technology core, or school-to-career, or electives, fine. But absolutely nowhere near a core classes. Okay, a little bias here because I teach history as well as programming, but students need to read books and learn to write the old fashion way. I am not surprised by the results, only that it is taking this ling for some common sense to creep back into the thinking. Considering how much money and effort from all sectors of the industry (including /.'s beloved Apple. disclaimer: I own two ibooks.) has been pumped into education, it should not shock anyone the level of beholdeness to technology that permeates our schools. For far too many teachers, a project is now powerpoint, and the lab is a week off. I really do want to scream.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
I avoid tv as well. I watch maybe 6 hours a month, all of that from DVDs. My problem with purchasing books (aside from reference material) is that after reading it once, I remember it for a long time. At most I'll reread it maybe a year or two later, after I've forgotten most of the details. As a result my shelves are full of only the books I really, really enjoyed.
I also grew up with the habit of visiting the local public library for most of my book needs; I just can't justify paying money for something my tax dollars are already supporting free access to.
I browse Slashdot at +3, Funny
The parents who lie to their own children in order to avoid any emotional interaction with their child are the parents who need to learn. There simply is no way around it.
I've seen families with stronger parents and familes with weaker parents, and it is blatently obvious what the impact on the children is. The weaker parents have children who don't share well, who are difficult to be around, who are difficult to trust, and are generally just little shits all around. The children who have a more balanced home life are a pleasure to be around. It doesn't take a Ph.D. in psychology to see this.
On the contrary. Someone without kids can make a rational decision about what is right and wrong. If you don't want to do the right thing because you're too tired and can't stand to hear your kid crying and/or see him sulking that is your choice to knowingly do the WRONG thing in order to preserve your sanity. Maybe it will work out in the long run. Maybe not.
The only other thing I have to say is that I have great respect for parents. It is a huge amount of responsibility to bring a new human being into this world. All that I ask is that you try to raise them to know right from wrong even if you can't make that differentiation yourself.
Is it too late to consider giving up your kid(s) for adoption?
I've been teaching math and programming to high school students this year, and I like to have kids solve problems in which the answer can be typed into a computer. There are two really different approaches that I see kids use: the clueless kids who can't solve problems demand to be told what numbers to plug in where and I usually tell them instead of failing them and going to war with their parents. Others actually *come up with their own method* of solving the problem. I think the latter group is learning as fast or faster than any group of kids in history. The former is obviously not learning much at all. Not surprisingly, the students who come up with their own method can do well on cumulative tests without studying, and the others spend hours trying to memorize how to do each problem and still do poorly. It's actually kind of sad, but I'm not sure how to change the attitudes of the ones who refuse to develop their problem solving skills. I guess I blame the parents.
Games addictive? I don't buy it. It sounds to me like your friends don't have an addiction problem, they have a self-discipline problem. They want to forego stuff that is important but hard in favor of stuff that is entertaining and easy. It's a simple matter of short-term gratification (another level) versus long-term satisfaction (a degree). That paper can always be written tomorrow, one can always cram for the next exam, but my guildmates need me NOW!
If I were a betting man, I would wager that if they weren't invovled in Everquest, they would have found some other diversion to consume their time and cause them to drop out of college.
I think this kind of misses the point. Your son has acquired functional skills for manipulating the computer. This does not correspond to a gain in IQ points. In fact, TFA suggests that children who spend time (and by extension brainpower) on gaining these skills tend to lose IQ points as measured by our standard methods.
Now, there's a major argument to be made that these skills in current society may actually be much more valuable than the lost IQ points (which, in my opinion, have dubious value anyway), but it's really a different issue. Point is, you can't say your son is gaining IQ points faster than other children because he knows how to minimize windows.
And certainly not because he knows you run Linux.
Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
Don't lie to your kid.
There is no need to remove the game.
Limit his time on the game, use it as reward and punishment. If he won't respond to you when he is playing pull the plug out of the wall, it will get his immediate attention. Learn to say NO, don't appoligise for saying NO, and follow through. Your kid will have alot more respect for you in the long run.
I'm a child of the fifties, it may be wussier today but I'm glad bashing your kids has become an unacceptable practice.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
For those who don't know, that's what Ralph in The Simpsons says when he finds out he's failing English.
I will forever be greatful to 2 excellent high school teachers I had (in public school no less!), 1 in math (pre-calc, calc) and 1 in chemistry (chem1 and chem2AP). They wouldn't let us use calculators for anything, not on tests, not on homework, no where. This forced us to get good at doing all sorts of mathmatics in our heads, and to come up with creative solutions if we couldn't remember the specific function/equation to apply to a problem.
I often times would have to work around some equation I couldn't remember and basically derive the equation from smaller building blocks. This gave me a much greater understanding of the actual processes going on. This kind of problem solving/understanding completely disappears when children can use calculators to simply "get the right answer", but the important thing in the maths and sciences is not necessarily the answer, but the process of getting there, and the ability to problem solve, which has completely disappeared in US middle and high schools.
I think I agree with most of the posts here, especially Oliver's.
I am currently a high-achieving high school junior. I have liked to play games since I started playing MUDs at age 12. However, my parents never felt bad telling me "no". Because my parents were frank in what activities should be my priorities, I learned both to moderate my gaming and to put school work first.
I am now getting the chance to watch my parents do the same to my brother. He followed my lead and started gaming in the last year. My parents are still making it clear that school work must come first. He hasn't yet gotten it, but he will.
Meanwhile, I have friends who were also straight-A, honors students in 9th grade, but who are now B students in regents classes (the lowest level in my school) for six hours of the day, and are Everquest and World of Warcraft grinders for the other sixteen.
I bet their parents would be happier if they had just said "no".
Fitzghon
My son is about a year old. My wife became pregnant before we got married, so you might say he was unforeseen.
There are two things about watching people parent that never cease to amaze me.
The first is how many people can rise to the occasion and do a good job when it is not what one would expect of them.
The second is how otherwise intelligent and responsible people can completely fail to take responsibility for how their actions affect their children.
So I say that parenting is never something that people are ready for. It is something that people can rise up to do. But before you have a child of oyur own, you are simply unprepaired.
Now on to the rest of the discussion. The metaphore I use in looking at this is that of social laws and rules. If the government were to "accidently" confiscated our cars or our houses, we would have a fit and rightly so. If, however, this was based upon a conviction in a court of law, it would be different. One of the most difficult aspects of family building is focusing on how to create a system of rules which helps foster growth. These rules need to be in the open, and easily understood.
If your child is playing too many computer games, first talk to your child about it. Set rules regarding when your child is allowed to play the game and under what circumstances. If this fails, let the child know that the game will be uninstalled. Give, say, three opportunities for failure. If the game is abused such that the conversation must repeat three times, the game gets uninstalled. Make sure that this is all done in the open and that the system is transparent.
One of the most difficult things to do sometimes is to have enough respect for your kids to think that maybe they actually need to know why you are doing something.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
People are raised to be perpetual children, and infantilized throughtout their life. Then they knock up their SO, and think that to be an adult, they have to posess a thing called a kid. Rather than realizing its how they raise their kid that determines whether they are adults.
Being a parent is not about gratification from the love of a child. If you need that, get a dog. Being a parent is not about being the child's pal. You are not their pal, you are their parent. Its your job to provide for them, to protect them, and to teach them everything a school cannot, which includes morality & discipline. Finally, comes the bull crap that you shouldn't smack them one when they're out of line, and all this touchy feely studies that claim corporal punishment is unnecessary. They're the same assholes that 40 years ago said homosexuality was a mental illness, that margarine was better for you than butter, and that ulcers were caused by lifestyle stress.
This society is screwed up. Some odd reason they think its more important to keep kids infantilized. What they really should do is reduce the age of adulthood to 16. And then push parents to raise their kids to be more responsible so they can act like adults at 16. Much like they do in Europe and the rest of the world.
Kids, in a non-screwed up family situation, spent their waking hours learning how to be like their providers. Its how they are programmed. They stop doing this once they become teenagers because their GENES tell them to get the hell out of the house, procreate, and make a living for themselves. They stop being cute so that parent get the clue to kick them out the house; you don't need to breast feed them anymore.
That is, when the TV isn't telling kids that being an adult is being a sexual being who buys lots of products and reality is that being goodlooking and conforming is the secret to success in life which always ends up with the happy ending.
Do I have a kid? Hell no, I realize what's involved. Why the heck would I want to inflict that kind of misery on myself? But sure as hell if I had a kid, I wouldn't be trying to be his favorite pal. Let him love mommy more; its not a competition, its about raising the optimal kid.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
>>why the fuck didn't you just say acceptable?
>"not full" != empty
>the world isn't binary.
Acceptable is a binary in this context.
"not unacceptable" == "not not acceptable"
Double negatives cancel, so acceptable.
umm....not trying to be a troll, but acceptable/unacceptable *is* a binary option. Something is either acceptable or it's not. There's no in-between. Sure, there are a lot of times where it's difficult to make a decision, but when push comes to shove, it's either one or the other.
Actually, we covered it in my INtro to Psych class this semester.
Permissive parenting - bad, kids are underachievers, have low self-esteems, antisocial, drug users, etc.
AUthoritarian parenting (like the 50s) - still bad. Kids grow up with serious problems with authority. Kids split off, one group becomes criminals, the other group will conform for awhile and then during their midlife crisis completely uproot themselves and start fresh. All will have low self-worth and so forth.
So how do you win?
Um, read Oliver's post? ;)
Personally, I think my wife and I are on the riht track. My daughter spent 4 hours rebelling aainst cleaning her room tonight, a typical 20-minute cleaning job. In the process she missed a movie and storytime. She was pretty upset about it and whined a bit about "I can't sleep because I didn't read a story", but it didn't take her long to figure it out. She's starting to come around. :)
Her brother, in contrast, cleaned his room immediately and was done in 10 minutes. He got to watch the movie and had storytime before bed. He also got to play with both his parents a little bit along the way. He's 1 1/2 years younger than his sister. The 1-year old (almost 2) helped pick up a bit too. :)
Like what I said? You might like my music
That's funny. I thought I understood the point very well. I simply disagree with it. I disagree that right and wrong is relative. I didn't attempt to judge the parent. I attempted to put perspective into making right and wrong decisions. You're attempt to say that I am unable to judge is like saying that I can't say that killing someone is right or wrong unless I have killed. Or that I am unable to judge that it is wrong to fabricate financial reports company if I have never been a CEO of a public company.
Nobody likes to be judged. Nobody thinks that outsiders can understand their situation. I understand that and your frustration. It however does not change right or wrong.
But now that you bring up Santa... I think you're right... I had NO IDEA that the parent post was talking about Santa Claus. Yes, I did believe in Santa Claus. I thank God that I was able to experience Santa Claus, can you imagine how I would have turned out without him?
If you are trying to say that parents must make wrong choices to ease their child's socialization, I also disagree. Isn't it obvious to anyone who has every had the responsibility for another whether as a parent, or manager that very often you must insulate someone from the truth? There's a difference between insulating from the truth and lying.
Look at the context of the original post. You're saying that it is wrong to be straight forward with a child in teaching them the value of moderation? Even if they do not understand it, you must enforce it. Is it wrong to stop them from eating all their Halloween candy in one night? Is it wrong to protect them something from something that will hurt them in the long run? Is it right to allow them to do something that will hurt them in the long run?
If or when I reproduce, I shall pray that I am able to implement my beliefs. I will reproduce not to show the world how damn smart I am but rather to make my best attempt at bringing out the good in humanity. To emulate as much as I can what my parents attempted to do for me. If I am unable to, maybe then I can at least articulate what EXACTLY it is that causes reason to escape the thought process instead of talking about cheerios and juicy-juice and Santa. To articulate that which causes some parents to hold their reproduction as their greatest achievement instead of their greatest gift.
School work has no value and my parents could not argument otherwise I think I'll have to "argument" for the value of a grammar class.
Nunchucks don't kill people NINJAS kill people
Permissive parenting - bad
Children learn from their parents in many ways the parent doesn't expect. The problem with "permissive" parenting - if the parent has broad values then not necessarily any problem, but in this sense I think the meaning is submissive parenting - avoid confrontation even when you think the child is wrong. In this case, the child will learn the same pattern of behaviour, and will grow to not argue his case as a teenager. This leads to the low self-esteem etc, that you're talking about.
The authoritarian approach? Your child will learn that power equates to right, that the ability to punish replaces the need to justify.
The middle approach? Always speak up, never act without explanation. Listen to child so that child learns to use reason to get her way. Above all, avoid yelling and other resorts of force / power. 'Cause very soon, your child will be using the same techniques on you.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
You're saying that overly permissive parenting leads to lowered self-esteem? You lost me, there. If, as a sibling post to this one said, what you mean by permissive parenting is submissive parenting, avoiding confrontations with the kids, it seems like you'd end up with spoiled children, with inflated self-esteem, too damn full of their own egos.
People with low self-esteem aren't a threat or a problem to anyone but themselves. It's people with inflated self-esteem that are the problem.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Instead of limiting someone's gaming to x hours per day, what I would do is say, "Your GPA needs to be greater than 3.5", or something like that. Let him figure out how to manage his time, and don't try to manage it for him unless he fails.
Of course, he might be able to maintain good grades and still play games all day...but I say, let someone get addicted. If he's human, he'll get bored eventually. It's sort of like letting a child touch a hot stove. Whenever you can, allow a kid to learn a lesson on his own.
Before hurling around "back up your opinion" you may consider doing the same yourself. You've presented no evidence that physical punishment harms children when properly applied. I present myself as evidence of a perfectly happy individual, without authority problems and with self-esteem but (I hope) without an overinflated ego, who was smacked when small.
Obviously overuse or inconsistent use of physical punishment will be adverse, just as with any other.
im in ur