MODULE 2: Carefreeness & review

 While you have your phone out, please add review questions to workbook.  Use the lower QR code -->

Or if on a laptop, use tab above.

_________________________

Luara Ferracioli, "For a child, being carefree is intrinsic to a well-lived life"

Let's start with some concrete questions

1. Should a young child be asked to mind a grandparent with dementia (Ferracioli's example)
2. Should a young child be allowed to star in a TV show?
3. Should young children compete in high-level sports?
4. Should kids have as much homework as they do?

Assume in all cases: the child is stressed and not carefree

_________________________

Internal question: how will these things affect wellbeing for the child during childhood?

External question: how will these things affect the child in later life?

All our authors: 

• we ought to ask the internal question
• childhood is not just preparation for later life
• childhood wellbeing matters!

_________________________

Stage neutral perspectives

1. hedonism - pleasure
2. objective list theory - pleasure, accomplishment, self-knowledge, loving relationships, autonomy
3. enhanced objective list theory - add carefreeness, innocence, play to list

Stage-relative perspectives 

1. Indigenous stage views (Arnett)--must pick a culture



2. Philosophical stage views (Tomlin) -- children have different goods and different lives

_________________________

Ferracioli: main points

1. Adults and children are "different kinds of creatures" (stage-relative)
2. Children need carefreeness for wellbeing, but adults don't
3. But why?

Why children need carefreeness (but adults don't).

1. The contributors to X's wellbeing are (a) intrinsically good, and (b) affirmed by X. (Affirmed means: I care about that, I value that, I "endorse that")
2. Without carefreeness, children can't affirm anything
3. But adults can affirm things despite stress (neurotic author, brain surgeon)

Implications

_________________________

Review (use passage and exam tabs above)