From: dakadldo2@gmail.com   
      
   On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 3:49:52 AM UTC-8, Ilya Shambat wrote:   
   > One argument that is used to discourage young people from having   
   relationships is that they don’t have relationship skills.    
   >    
   > That is true. In many cases they don’t. I ask this, “How does one learn   
   relationship skills?”    
   >    
   > When I suggested that such things be taught in school, someone said that I   
   was a loonie. In absence of formal education in the matter, the only way for   
   people to learn relationship skills is by being in a relationship. Sometimes   
   friendship can help    
   teach the same skills; sometimes having siblings can teach the same skills.   
   But there are things that happen in relationships that don’t happen in such   
   situations, and the only existing way to learn them is by experience.    
   >    
   > So of course we don’t want parents seeing their kids get hurt in   
   relationships with one another. I am a parent myself, and I don’t want such   
   a thing for my daughter. But care must be taken to differentiate legitimate   
   protection from being    
   suffocating. Many parents want to protect their kids from themselves, and that   
   can deny them growth opportunities.    
   >    
   > What then is the right way to learn relationship skills? I have seen some   
   useful thought on this matter in psychology; however psychologists themselves   
   are not always right. Like anything human these people are capable of all   
   sorts of foibles. Many do    
   wrong without realizing they are doing wrong.    
   >    
   > I want to see relationship skills taught in schools. It is inevitable that   
   people will have relationships, and people need to be equipped with skills   
   toward that effect. Many people don’t have relationship skills, and it works   
   badly against them. In    
   most cases what they’ve learned from observing their parents is wrong, and   
   they need a better perspective on the matter.    
   >    
   > I therefore advocate that relationship skills be taught in schools.   
      
   Not possible to teach specific skills for so many relationships, I assume.    
   Can go another route by looking at "communication" skills we develop.  One way   
   to analyze communications is to suppose there are two sources, and each has   
   sending and receiving    
   capabilities, like two radio stations or two on a telephone connection.  You   
   can then look at such things as type of communication, channels of   
   communication, mediums, messages, feedback, and "noise factors."     
      
   Like two animals meeding in the woods, using sight, sound, smells, insights,   
   suspicions, and getting reactions from each other.  The "message" could be   
   "warning", "danger", "attraction", or several things.  "Feedback" as a result   
   of interactions could be    
   several sorts, like identity characteristics, "noise factors" that complicate   
   matters, like tone, loudness, manners, other conditioning factors.  Could be   
   multiple messages being sent back and forth, with interacting feedback.   
      
   Suggesting that relationships are too complicated and changing to spell out   
   and have formula responses, except that we do recognize conventions, such as   
   dating, where a couple agree to meet, communicate in various ways, and get   
   feedback.  I think it was    
   Plato, who cosidered each of us as half of an identity, so that we look for   
   that other half, like exchanging looks across a crowded room.  Romanticism.   
      
   Don't want social engineering programming, do you?  Can't assume situations   
   are static, as propagandists want.  Need to be aware of feelings, suspicious   
   of other's intentions, yet understanding how to navigate, even with selves   
   that are aware.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)