A question about the morality of children

[Mogget]

To talk about children as "moral" or "immoral" makes no sense. They are innocent, and therefore cannot grasp the whole of morality. To a child, if a person does evil things, they are evil, and if they do good things, they are good. Children can't see the subtlety created by the interplay of intention and action. Is Lord Asriel evil because he commits atrocities for the greater good? Is Lord Boreal good because his actions spur Will and Lyra on to the greater parts of their quest? I don't think a child (and by that I mean an Unsettled one) could answer those questions. As Mary Malone said, "good and evil are names for what people do, not what they are." Children can't see that yet.

[Riali]

To talk about children as "moral" or "immoral" makes no sense. They are innocent, and therefore cannot grasp the whole of morality. To a child, if a person does evil things, they are evil, and if they do good things, they are good. Children can't see the subtlety created by the interplay of intention and action. Is Lord Asriel evil because he commits atrocities for the greater good? Is Lord Boreal good because his actions spur Will and Lyra on to the greater parts of their quest? I don't think a child (and by that I mean an Unsettled one) could answer those questions. As Mary Malone said, "good and evil are names for what people do, not what they are." Children can't see that yet.

I'm sorry, I have to give this a big, resounding, bollocks! Certainly most kidds don't have the experience of an adult to analyze all the facets of a situation or a person, but this doesn't mean they see people as one dimensional. For the most part, a child doesn't yet have the language to explain intention vs action, but that doesn't mean they don't realize it exists.
If a child sees someone who does evil things as a purely evil person, and some one who does good things as a purely good person, this is entirely the fault of society, and not a child's natural makeup. Media, for example, especially children's media, is comprised almost entirely of purely good or evil characters, (Cinderella vs Captain Hook, etc), which skews all of our perceptions from a young age, and to add to that, there are an awful lot of grown-ups out there who add to the problem simply by using the wrong syntax when speaking to children.
I remember vividly an incident when I was about five and my little brother got into something he shouldn't have, and I yelled at him, calling him "bad boy!" (I had of course heard other children called "bad" by their parents when they misbehaved, and picked up the phrase.) My mum sat me down and explained that my brother was not a bad boy, but he had done something bad. What's more, I completely understood this difference, and the differentation stuck.
What child feels like an evil person when they accidentally break a vase? They probably feel sorry for it, but they know perfectly well that they didn't do it on purpose and it is not a character flaw to make a mistake. Unless, of course, the role models in their life berate them as bad because of it, in which case another stone is laid on that foundation of misunderstanding that bad actions = bad people.
Kids can understand things, and definitely people, often better than adults, if only we give them a chance. Most of the limitations attributed to children, I believe, are simply reflections of adults' own limitations and predjudices.

[Mogget]

One of the greatest things I have come to realize about the world is that reasonable people can differ. I'll hold my opinion, Riali, based on my experience and my assumptions (I certainly know I couldn't think on a level this subtle until I hit puberty), and you'll hold a different opinion based on yours. I think I am right, and you think you are, but that doesn't make either of us wrong.

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding on the definition of "child." Perhaps not. It doesn't really matter. I'm not going to try to win you over with logic, and I hope you feel the same way. (because I happen to be a very stubborn and opinionated cat-thing, and I'll scream if you try.)

Anyway, well met on the journey, and peace be to you!

[Riali]

Fair 'nuff, Mogget! Agreeing to disagree is a favourite pastime of mine, I figure it fosters peace and diversity in general. (Or at least, I'm a big supporter of it after I have had my rant!)

[Mogget]

I think I stated my opinion in the wrong way. I didn't mean to say that children can't see intention/action or can't understand people, I meant that when they do these things they do not realize what they are doing in their minds. Adults, on the other hand, know exactly what is going on in their heads as they make those distinctions. At least, that's what I think.

Thanks for arguing with me, Riali. I needed it, as I haven't had a real intellectual discussion (much to my chagrin) since school started.

[Riali]

mm, Yes, i see what you're trying to say, Mogget. (or I think I do) A Child may see and understand the shades of gray and conflicting elements of a situation, but may not yet have the language or experience to articulate and analyzye it, even internally.

And yes, intellectual debate is a better way to give the day a lift than even Cheerios!

[Mogget]

Glad it's Settled, then. (pun intended)