Hello, folks. Hoping I can get some opinions on my situation.

My 12-yo watches a lot of YouTube. It is mostly streaming personalities who have a lot to say on a variety of topics. I have either watched these videos with them, overheard them from another room, or looked some up from their history and viewed them myself.

I have problems with them and want to do something about it.

I care little about the topics being discussed; my child is allowed to be interested in their own things, even those separate from ours (their parents), and it’s also reasonable for them to disagree with us. All of that is fine.

My problem is with how these streamers present their content:

  1. They do not provide critical scrutinization of the issues.
  2. They do not apply logical rationalization or reason to the stances they take.
  3. They do not cite sources of repute to justify their positions.
  4. They are needlessly hyperbolic.
  5. They examine no dissenting opinions.
  6. They present themselves as authorities on every topic with zero credentials to support that assertion.
  7. They succumb to, support, and repeat what is obviously propaganda.

To say nothing of the fact that the value the entertainment potential and viewership counts more than the content of their arguments.

I was raised allowed to moderate my own content because I was trusted to be intelligent and wise enough to critically select what I watched or read and learn from the mistakes I made if I consumed something negatively influential. I have tried to extend this same trust to my 12-yo, but their constant repetition of what they hear and their inability to form a cogent argument makes me feel like their YouTube viewing habits are teaching them to accept concepts at face-value simply because they are popular.

I don’t feel it would be productive to start out-right blocking content and pundits because this would feel more hegemonic than educational. I’d rather increase the likelihood that they’d critique and dismiss the content than decrease the likelihood that they’d view it.

I would love to hear what others have to say about this situation.

  • starlordOPEnglish
    2·
    9 days ago

    I think you’re probably worrying too much though,

    This could certainly be true, but I prefer to think of it more as a prophylactic approach to critical thinking. These videos show viewers that it’s okay to form volatile opinions absent fact, critical thinking, reason, context, or application. I don’t want my child be trained to think like a Republican or a Christian.

    When he says ‘I don’t know’ maybe you should believe that’s how he really feels,

    If that’s how they really feel, then I want to encourage deeper thought into something before forming opinions on it. I want to train them to sort through their feelings on something and be able to come to a rational conclusion. If that’s not how they feel and this is just a cop-out to not have to discuss something with a parent (I’d bet my mortgage on this), then I want to discourage the notion that an excuse can be used for everything and the concept that nobody can be held accountable for their stances on something.

    Your seven points you worry about are well and good but media doesn’t do that, politicians don’t do that, corporations don’t do that,

    These are not excuses or explanations, these are problems.

    life partners and lovers don’t do that, friends don’t do that,

    Which may be the cause for much strive in social interactions.

    I bet YOU don’t do that…

    I do do that. I am a scientist and a philosopher. I believe in reason, rationalization, context, applicability, utility, and equality/equity.

    we’ve got to learn why people do the things they do

    People do things because they either 1) Have a rationalized reason for doing so (someone who has critical thinking capabilities), 2) they have an irrational reason for doing so (someone absent reason and logic), or 3) they have no reason for doing so (someone absent sanity or care/investment).

    I listened to endless craziness like

    It sounds like all these sources did nothing but build up their own disrepute, and you knew it. Entertainment factor, sure, but the only value you get from listening to this stuff is to understand their motivations. They don’t contribute any new information, and justifiable hypotheses, any authoritative conclusions; they only instruct their listeners in how to copy their behavior. Which is exactly why I don’t want my child exposed to such garbage until they’re capable of the critical thought necessary to spot the fallacies.

    Yes maybe the entertainment is more important than the content of their arguments, being able to know the truth is useful but being able to entertain friends, girlfriends, bosses and authority figures is what can turn a hard life into a great and easy one.

    I can see the point you’re trying to make but I have to disagree. I’d much rather be able to form a cogent argument that fosters profitable discourse than post an adequately funny meme without understanding why the joke is inappropriate.