If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#601
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
dragonlady ) writes:
In article , Banty wrote: Do folks truly not see any middle ground between smash-and-crash and up on a shelf pristine in boxes like Madam Alexander dolls?? This is the fallacy of false dichotomy. It's some of why I object to this idea that 'precious' stuff should be hidden away (so that even the owner can't enjoy them!), else it's fair game for whatever use strikes someone else. There's a huge and livable middle ground of using things decently, such that they're not ruined can can continue to be used. Indeed, it's necessary to recognize that to ever be able to have nice things happen - to enjoy things, and enjoy them for a length of time. Hide-and-hoard or smash-and-trash doesn't allow for that. Banty I agree with this entirely. My question is how to know when something that *I* put play-with-in-a-normal way is in someone else's "play-with-very-carefully" category. I agree too, but my question is different. Obviously, I can find out whether something is in a handle-carefully category by asking about how it should be handled. My question is: how can I realize when there's something like that that needs to be asked about? Or to put it another way: I don't think it's reasonable to expect all people at all times to make this realization when they should. Sitting on a couch changes its state. Walking on the floor changes its state. I think people would think it was silly to ask about these things. I have, at times, assumed that metal is very durable and that it doesn't change when thrown. I now realize that that isn't true, especially when one considers the paint. However, some people might well believe that throwing a metal car into a toybox doesn't change the car in any detectable way. They would be wrong about that; but lots of people believe lots of things that aren't true. |
#602
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
Ericka Kammerer ) writes:
Watch. Observe the condition of the items. Ask. When in doubt, err on the side of caution. It may not be perfect, but it'll do the trick the vast majority of the time. Ah. That sounds very sensible to me. People are not perfect. |
#603
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
Nan ) writes:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 11:14:06 -0500, Ericka Kammerer wrote: It seems to me that it's much more polite, not to mention much more likely to keep you out of trouble, if the default rule is to treat things belonging to others as *they* wish them to be treated. At that point, the tricky bit is figuring out how the others might want them to be treated, and since we're not mindreaders, that is an imperfect science. But at a minimum, it's a very simple rule that works almost all of the time that you shouldn't engage in any behavior that might permanently change the condition of an object without asking the owner first. And I think that is asking a bit much for children to try and determine. Nan I don't think that's asking too much at all. It's rather simple: just ask the owner how they want their stuff treated. "Is it OK if I play with your lego? Is it OK if I take this apart?" Of course, it's a learning process. There will be many "first times", likely even as an adult, when one didn't ask because some possibility didn't occur to one. But if the goal is to treat the stuff as the owner wants it treated, one will learn; whereas if one is only expected to treat it as one treats one's own, one might tell the owner, "No, it's OK, I'm allowed to do this, because this is how I use my own toys." Which would be quite wrong. |
#604
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
Banty ) writes:
In article , dragonlady says... My question is how to know when something that *I* put play-with-in-a-normal way is in someone else's "play-with-very-carefully" category. Those should not be two different categories. Note your bias: "normal" isn't "careful". Banty Ooh! Good point. Maybe cheap second-hand furniture needs to be treated with lots of care, to prevent it from falling apart, for example. |
#605
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
Catherine Woodgold wrote:
Ericka Kammerer ) writes: Again, a red herring. It's very simple to figure out. The pristine basketball full of signatures doesn't get bounced, because bouncing would change its state. The scuffed basketball that has clearly seen use can be bounced with no problem. The brand new looking basketball with no signs of wear and tear, you ask the owner if it's okay to play with. I don't get why this is complicated. Oh, no! You mean, before I bounce a ball at someone else's house, I have to either check to make sure it's already dirty, or ask? I wouldn't have known that. I'm not sure I'd follow that guideline even now. I wouldn't want to look silly for asking a "stupid question". Someone wanted to know how you'd know whether to ask a question. I think it's not that complicated. You want to separate the "normal" basketballs from the "special" basketballs. How can you do that with a reasonable degree of accuracy? Basketballs that have signatures or look like they haven't been played with are much more likely candidates for special handling than basketballs that look like they've actually been used to shoot hoops. Since the vast majority of basketballs you encounter at someone else's house are likely to look played with, and most of the rest of the time the host will have made some clear indication of intent, you'll be left with a very small percentage of time that you'll encounter an unused-looking basketball with no other clues as to use. It's extremely unlikely to burden you or annoy your host if you ask for clarification that tiny percentage of the time. What if the floor is clean? Don't track mud on it ;-) Best wishes, Ericka |
#606
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
In article , Banty
wrote: My tea is made in a teapot with proper Irish teabags Some of us use *leaf*. withdraws hem of garment and leaves with nose in air "Leaf"?? Is your garment tie-die? Not that kind of leaf! Leaf *tea*! :-) -- Chookie -- Sydney, Australia (Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply) "... if *I* was buying a baby I'd jolly well make sure it was at least a two-tooth!" Mary Grant Bruce, The Houses of the Eagle. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|