View Single Post
Old 06-27-2007, 05:45 PM   #12
ellies mom
Rose Trellis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,890
ellies mom is a splendid one to beholdellies mom is a splendid one to beholdellies mom is a splendid one to beholdellies mom is a splendid one to beholdellies mom is a splendid one to beholdellies mom is a splendid one to beholdellies mom is a splendid one to beholdellies mom is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: the natural-to-logical consequences continuum

Originally Posted by palil
i thought that WAS the difference
wellll... Maybe it is.. ? I'm truly asking... trying to sort it out in my own mind.

I think semantics get involved which makes it kind of confusing to have these conversations. See in my world, regarding my 3.5 yo DD, a logical consequence is what happens when I can't or won't allow the natural consequence to occur. It is a consequence that is logical to the situation. So putting away her toy after she throws it would be a logical consequence. Making the child wash the dishes or not letting her watch TV are not logical because they aren't related. And spanking her or putting her into timeout would be punishment because it goes the "extra step" So to me, at this point a logical consequence and "cause and effect" are very similar. I'm sure as DD gets older, my interpretation of "logical" will change. So I don't automatically view a logical consequence as bad.
I do understand what you're saying... I'm trying to grasp whether it is *ALL* a matter of semantics, or if there is some crucial element that distinguishes appropriate cause-and-effect responses to a pre-logic child from inappropriate logical consequences to a pre-logic child.

Not allowing a natural consequence to happen is what I consider blocking natural consequences or protecting something/one. That's different from generating an "effect" as a disciplinary response to a child's behavioral "cause."

(still mulling... thanks for the responses and I'm continuing to read/think)
OK let's see...

For pre-logic children, cause and effect and logical consequences should be the same. If a pre-logic child needs "cause and effect" consequences than a consequence that is not related is not logical, and is most likely inappropriate.

If Ellie colours on the wall, she helps me clean the wall and we put away the crayons and move on to something else. It is related and appropriate. She can make the connection between "I colour on the walls means I can't colour". Now say Ellie coloured on the walls and I told her she had to turn off the TV for the night. It is unrelated. There is no cause and effect. It would be an inappropriate logical consequence for a pre-logic child because they aren't going to make the connection. Now say it was an older child capable of a basic level of logic, it might be appropriate. It is still unrelated but the child can make the connection.

Ok, I need to come back to this, a certain pre-logic child is convinced she is going to starve and I can't think.

Mama to Ellie 11-03
Baby Audrey 4-08
ellies mom is offline   Reply With Quote