8 The predominantly co-operative, selfless child

How differently children and adults view behaviour can be seen in an article entitled When do detentions work? [21] which in turn cites Ariely, D. (2013). It begins by describing the perception an adult has of how a child calculates gain from misbehaviour:

‘A rational explanation for misbehaviour assumes that students calculate:

(1) the benefit that one stands to gain from the crime; (2) the probability of getting caught; and (3) the expected punishment if one is caught. By comparing the first component (the gain) with the last two components (the costs), the rational human being can determine whether a particular crime is worth it or not.’ (Ariely, 2013, P.14)’

Whilst the reality sees children presenting a different approach:

‘Dan Ariely (2013) has tested what influences misbehaviour extensively, focusing on cheating. In one experiment, students completing a task for financial reward saw a peer apparently cheating. If the peer’s behaviour wasn’t sanctioned, cheating doubled among the rest of the group. (p.198-204). In another condition, the peer (a collaborator of the experimenter) asks the experimenter if the instructions make cheating possible, but does not cheat themselves. The cheating rate decreased. So it’s not rational calculation but social norms which makes a difference.’

In this example the student following ‘social norms’ can be seen to present a level of co-operative, selfless behaviour which follows the path of ‘Integrative Meaning’, a term defined as ‘the ordering or integration … of matter into ever larger and more stable wholes’ (Griffith, J., 2016, para. 313):

‘… for a collection of parts to form and hold together, for matter to integrate, the parts of the developing whole must cooperate, behave selflessly, place the maintenance of the whole above the maintenance of themselves, ... Put simply … selflessness is integrative—it is the glue that holds wholes together; it is, in fact, the theme of the integrative process, and thus of existence.’ (Griffith, J., 2016, para. 320)

Its opposite, competitive and selfish behaviour, operates in defiance of Integrative Meaning, being divisive or disintegrative whereby ‘the whole disintegrates, the parts break down into the more elementary building blocks of matter from which they were assembled.’ (Griffith, J., 2016 Par. 320).

Though this might appear to provide a natural balance between the two behaviours across society, widespread evidence and experience suggests otherwise:

‘... if the meaning of existence is to behave integratively, which means behave cooperatively and selflessly, why do humans behave in the completely opposite way, in such a competitive and selfishly divisive way?’ (Griffith, J., 2016, para. 321)

Although children and adults occupy predominantly co-operative and competitive roles between the two absolutes of these behaviours (i.e. birth and death) - meaning that they behave more co-operatively or more competitively than not - there is a clear dividing line between the two: children occupy the predominantly co-operative and selfless state, and adults the predominantly competitive and selfish state.

Between the two states lies a tipping point (the moment in time sought) to which those occupying the co-operative state (children) are driven - currently quite naturally - by the decision making of those occupying the competitive state (adults) - who govern and audit their development.

An example of the extensive and largely unseen conflicts this causes and the extent to which a child’s condition is ‘unmanageable’ when reaching the tipping point follows in the next section. 

NEXT >

References:

21 https://improvingteaching.co.uk/2020/03/01/when-do-detentions-work/ citing The Honest Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone---Especially Ourselves (Ariely, D., 2013)