Introduction
My propositions serve as elucidations in the following way: anyone who understands me eventually recognizes them as nonsensical, when he has used them—as steps—to climb beyond them. (He must, so to speak, throw away the ladder after he has climbed up it.) He must transcend these propositions, and then he will see the world aright.1
Only lies are simple. Truth is complex, messy, alive. And words are dead things, mere tools. Language is machinery put in motion by people engaging with it and responding to it. So don’t expect to find an ordered presentation of a simple system. This is an experiment in structure and method. If the words that follow have any value, that value is derived from the work they provoke you to do.
The Proof is in the pudding
The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Like father, like son. If you like how your children turned out, then you did a good job as their parents. Or if your children still like you when they grow up, then you were a good parent. If you are a felon, then your parents did a bad job. If you are not conversant with the classics of the English canon, then your parents could have done a better job. No, the true measure of successful parenting is survival – did your children reach adulthood physically healthy without having suffered abuse. Good parents raise geniuses. Good parents raise self-confident children. Good parents raise emotionally resilient children. Good parents raise children who are self-controlled, diligent and honest.
Books about parenting are generally practical tips based upon the author’s experience. Here’s what worked for me, though it is often phrased as “because this worked for me, it is the only right way to parent.” This book offers very little practical advice. I am much less interested in anecdotes about “what works” and more interested in the, often implicit, philosophical system underlying the claim that this or that parenting method works. When we say that Einstein’s theory of gravity “works” better than Newton’s, we mean that his story in which mass deforms spacetime enables us to, for example, more precisely predict the apparent motion of stars when viewed near the sun. Newton and Einstein offered different theories about the underlying reality of the physical universe and which of them was correct is measured by how useful each theory is in helping us achieve some desired goal. Likewise, a philosophy of parenting needs to explain who I am as a person and as a parent, who my kids are, what my responsibilities are as a parent, what success as a parent means, and what methods I am allowed to use in pursuit of that success. Consider how many parenting books begin with an assertion that the proper goal of parenting is a child who grows up to be X, and then proceeds to offer strategies for reaching that goal. The authors rarely question the validity of their chosen goal, and rarely question whether there are any moral limits on which strategies may be used.2
I do not intend to offer a complete or systematic philosophy of parenting. I will advance some claims and push back against commonplace ideas. But my primary goal is to give you, the reader, the space and tools to question and develop your own understanding about the nature of parenting, personal responsibility and the nature of authority.
My central premise is that kids are people too. They are not stones to be shaped, or pets to be trained. Parents and kids are made of the same stuff. Parents are not farmers while their kids are seeds to be grown. Parents are not shepherds and their kids sheep. Two primary implications of children being their own persons: 1) when you are called to give an account for your work as a parent, you will not be judged based upon how your children turned out; and 2) your authority as a parent is limited, the goals you may set for yourself are limited, and the methods you may use to achieve those goals are limited.
I begin by unpacking what it means to be a “person”, examining the topic primarily from the perspective of an adult person, and I claim that the defining element of personhood is moral accountability. I unpack some ideas about authority and the use of force by persons in authority. Then I advance the claim that kids are persons in the same way that adults are persons, and explore what implications that has on both what goals are appropriate for parents to hold, and what methods for pursuing those goals may be allowed or forbidden. I conclude with thoughts on the purpose and methods of discipline.