Kids These Days..

[swordpath]

Are they (kids) getting exponentially worse though with every passing year?

 

[Grayscale]

Crazy kids, get off my lawn! *shakes garden hose threateningly*

we were all kids at one point... yes they're immature and inexperienced, but they're vital to the influx of fresh perspective and progression. out with the old and in with the new.

 

[Atomic Fiend]

we were all kids at one point... yes they're immature and inexperienced, but they're vital to the influx of fresh perspective and progression. out with the old and in with the new.

We will bury you after all

...or burn you and spread you across the ocean I don't know what you wanna do with yourselves after you die.

 

[swordpath]

We will bury you after all

...or burn you and spread you across the ocean I don't know what you wanna do with yourselves after you die.

I'd like to be buried at sea, myself.

 

[FFF]

"Functional MRI images that compared young people age 9-17 with 20-40-year-old adults revealed that the young people processed emotions, instructions, and procedures much more consistently in the amygdala (the seat of emotions), whereas adults processed the same activities more consistently in the frontal lobe (the seat of rationality)."

There's also research that shows brain development during the teenage years starts from the back and moves towards the front where the front lobe is (the seat of rationality).

(from the Owners Manual for the Brain by Pierce J. Howard, Ph.D)

I read in this very book about how people spoke badly of the youth no matter what generation. It may just be a result of how young people's brain function, and also the lack of experience due to never having had the oppurtunity to have as many experiences.

 

[disregard]

I think young people's frontal lobe (executive decisions) isn't fully formed until the 20s? I'm not entirely sure.

 

[Nocapszy]

Dana makes such LOL threads

Socrates himself though, didn't differ much from what he described of the children.

He may have been using sarcasm or something.

 

[disregard]

Keen observation.. he certainly may have been.

 

[LunarMoon]

While basic qualities of a society linger from generation to generation, for the most part, the overarcing culture is constantly changing and the conservative older generation is all to quick to notice and dismiss this change. In many ways it's a product of rose colored glasses. Most people have an idealized image of the world as a youth and don't tend to notice the disrespectful tendencies they notice later on. Thus the future appears more cynical than the past when it's really just their views that have darkened. The youths on the other hand can only listen to the elders.

"Functional MRI images that compared young people age 9-17 with 20-40-year-old adults revealed that the young people processed emotions, instructions, and procedures much more consistently in the amygdala (the seat of emotions), whereas adults processed the same activities more consistently in the frontal lobe (the seat of rationality)."

There's also research that shows brain development during the teenage years starts from the back and moves towards the front where the front lobe is (the seat of rationality).

(from the Owners Manual for the Brain by Pierce J. Howard, Ph.D)

I read in this very book about how people spoke badly of the youth no matter what generation. It may just be a result of how young people's brain function, and also the lack of experience due to never having had the oppurtunity to have as many experiences.

I've become incredibly skeptical of studies such as this ever since reading of similar craniometrical research done for blacks and women during the 19th century. The goal of this type of science has always been to justify some form of prejudice or social expectation so in cases in which these studies are given, I'm always interesting in seeing the exact methods used to obtain the data. I've only found two but their exact methods are hard to dig up.

NIMH · Teenage Brain: A work in progress

Their sample size seems nice superficially (145) but the way in which they describe the consequences of their research definitely makes it seem as if they went into it with preset expectations. What really tips me off, however are the constant comments about how teens have an over-reliance on the back of their brain, the supposed antithesis of rationality. It's eerily similar to something else. During the before mentioned studies from the 19th century it was widely believed that blacks had such a dependence on this region, giving a lapse of logic with an increase in animalistic senses to go with it. One would think that by now, we would have advanced to the point where we realize that the brain isn't so simplistically organized as to house certain faculties in exact areas (there is no portion dedicated exclusively to memories for instance). And yet the entire back portion of the brain is still being used as the catch-all term for primitive whims and subhuman impulses.

 

[Martoon]

I've seen these quotes before, and they do illustrate the point quite nicely. As TheBeatGoesOn alluded to, if each successive generation was ten times as bad as the one before, over hundreds of generations, we would have self-destructed long ago.

We do tend to vilify young people. There's this generally held assumption that the current generation of young people are horrifically violent. Just listen to the politicians that use the "corrupting nature of videogames on our youth" as a cheap political bit. They claim that this explains why young people are so violent today. The fact is, the FBI crime statistics show that youth-committed violent crimes have dropped precipitously over the last couple decades. The 11-14 year old age bracket has especially dropped (a core videogame demographic, btw). The only age bracket that has increased in violent crimes is the upper-30s crowd (i.e., people who were teenagers a couple decades ago). The current generation of young people is the most nonviolent that we've had.

Actually, the graph of decreasing crime statistics just happens to line up nicely with the release dates of major gaming consoles. Coincidence? Well, yeah, probably.

 

[Seanan]

We do tend to vilify young people. There's this generally held assumption that the current generation of young people are horrifically violent. Just listen to the politicians that use the "corrupting nature of videogames on our youth" as a cheap political bit. They claim that this explains why young people are so violent today. The fact is, the FBI crime statistics show that youth-committed violent crimes have dropped precipitously over the last couple decades. of young people is the most nonviolent that we've had.

Hmmm... from what? That's 20 years. I don't recall discussions about school safety... metal detectors, cameras in class rooms or turning on the TV to see terrified faces on students who've scrambled to stay alive... more than 20 years ago. I lived in a world where I could, as a female, go shopping at night alone... not so now... not in a metroplex and the perps are young. I grew up in a time when "respectful" wasn't a dirty word to youth (I was one.) We didn't lock our doors and our handshake was our word... and it was good. We learned from our elders and took their lead. There were inner city gangs, sure, but now they're everywhere. I'm not saying this is due to video games, certainly, its a complex phenomena but I seriously question those stats. That very complexity is due, in part, to the fact that stats are just about worthless today. They're cleaverly manipulated for varying agendas. When I want to know the "truth," I ask someone who lived the history.

 

[Martoon]

Hmmm... from what? That's 20 years. I don't recall discussions about school safety... metal detectors, cameras in class rooms or turning on the TV to see terrified faces on students who've scrambled to stay alive... more than 20 years ago. I lived in a world where I could, as a female, go shopping at night alone... not so now... not in a metroplex and the perps are young. I grew up in a time when "respectful" wasn't a dirty word to youth (I was one.) We didn't lock our doors and our handshake was our word... and it was good. We learned from our elders and took their lead. There were inner city gangs, sure, but now they're everywhere. I'm not saying this is due to video games, certainly, its a complex phenomena but I seriously question those stats. That very complexity is due, in part, to the fact that stats are just about worthless today. They're cleaverly manipulated for varying agendas. When I want to know the "truth," I ask someone who lived the history.

I'm 40 years old, so I certainly remember back 20 or 30 years. And what I remember, and what I see now, lines up pretty much exactly with what you described.

So you, me, and a lot of other non-young people remember back when young people were basically decent, and the world was more or less safe. And we see how the young today are out of control, violent, and insolent.

But Peter the Hermit saw the same thing. And so did Socrates. And so did Hesiod. And so did every other generation going all the way back through history. In fact, most of your post sounds remarkably similar to the three quotes in the original post, and you could pretty much add it as a fourth quote. Don't misunderstand me; I'm not trying to pin this on you. Like I said, everything you said resonates with me, and most other people my age. So we all see it this way.

But clearly, each generation can't have been drastically worse than the one before it. But every generation has "seen" that the younger generation is. Obviously, at least some of these generations must be wrong.

So, basically, we're perceiving the same thing that every generation has through history. And they all saw all of the evidence to back up their perceptions. How can I just assume that my vision is somehow more clear and accurate than theirs? If they were wrong without knowing it, why should I suddenly be right?

 

[Seanan]

I'm not saying that, historically, elders haven't seen problems in the youth of their day. (They've also seen the positive but that's not the discussion.) I was pretty specifically addressing violence in the youth today and most "experts" regardless of age agree with that. I actually don't get the point. Is one's actual experience to be discounted because one is an elder? What does that, then, say? And just because a thing has been said before, does that make it untrue when said again? I'm not following. Also, what does it mean when even the youth of today express the same opinions regarding their own generation as those expressed by elders? In terms of your arguement that is. I also don't think, in testing a theory, one can do selective spot checks on statements unless historical perspective is noted/included. What was happening in the world of the day? Either that or one must note what elders of every generation regarding the youth of their day would have to be considered to prove the theory. (Sorry, I really should have broken this out in paragraphs but am in a rush... maybe will come back later.)

 

[Martoon]

Also, what does it mean when even the youth of today express the same opinions regarding their own generation as those expressed by elders?

Now that's a very good point. That does seem to be a bit different than previous generations. Also, I think an observation made on one's own side of the generation divide carries a little more weight.

You're probably right. I think there really are some significant problems today that weren't an issue in the past.

But I also think there's a tendency to just vilify young people in general, and that's every bit as wrong as generalizing about any other group that doesn't happen to be you. If we want to make sure that members of the younger generation do all turn criminal, the best way to ensure that is to keep drilling that identity into them. I just don't believe that the majority of kids out there are all thugs and meth dealers. There are a lot of really decent, conscientious kids. And sure, there are also some really arrogant, self-centered dicks. Just like there were when I was that age.

 

[GZA]

Come to my high school and start ranting about all this stuff, you'll quickly find it isn't true. Just as you could say young people are asshats and are representative of a crumbling society or that they are worse than previous generations, I could argue that the real phenomenon is that older people have gotten progressively whinier and angrier at young people over history.

But that would be rediculous, so I'm not going to.

I think that its really one of those "boys will be boys" things (although girls are far from excused). Ever read A Clockwork Orange (don't think about the movie because it doesn't include this ideaology for some reason). The... moral of that story is that some young people may act out but that it is not a new thing and it will continue in the future. The main protagonist comes to a realization that he has outgrown his violent phase and wants to live a safe, secure, mature adult life, and he says he knows his children may very well act as he did as a young man.

So I think its human nature that some young people act out, just as its human nature for previous generations to look down on the new one.

You don't recall metal detectors, well, neither do I (not even discussed around here). I do recall that a hundred years ago there were lynchings and that that has largely disappeared. Maybe for every new bad thing that comes an old one dissapears. This is speculation, of course, but I seriously doubt any drastic or even minor changes have occured in the overall tendancies of young people across history.

 

[Nonsensical]

I'm a 15 year old male, going into my sophomore year in High School. My mother, who died of cancer in 1996, was an INFP, and dealt a lot with Myers Briggs, for she was a family therapist. My father, an ENFP, is an Anthropologist, and used MBTI for a while, too. I have picked up on it, and want to focus my up-coming career in psychology.