How Do Thais Learn Not To Do Someting?

[Loz]

I see see thai kids all the time playing in traffic. daring each other not to get out of the path of cars or trucks. Walking deliberately with their back to traffic so they have to change course or slow or stop. I think anywhere in the west kids are taught to be careful of traffic. if you are on the path, you are safe, in the road, you are at risk. Why do so many thais not learn about the danger of playing in the road?

Also, you know dogs follow the example of their "masters", right? Well I wonder if the corresponding number of dead dogs in the road I see is due to them following the examples of their masters. "cars must get out of the way of soft fleshy things".

Don't get me wrong. PLoughing into a bunch of school kids taking the piss (however gratifying in theory) is WRONG. But kids putting themselves in harms way for a prank is far more wrong as the death toll and emergency room stats will support!

Ok, you have the floor.

[Soutpeel]

I remember as kid being tought all about traffic/roads etc and was fully aware of what could happen, did it stop me "playing chicken" with traffic or jumping on the backs of trucks and holding on.....No.....It took a mate of mine falling off said truck at 60km/hour and hitting the tar and the subsuequent hosptial visits to go and see him....

Kids generally will not listen and have to learn the hard way sometimes, this is one of the problems in the PC/HSE mad UK, they are putting kids in cotton wool and not letting them make "mistakes" to learn from.

When I was very young, I was always playing with the cigarette lighter in the and kept getting told, dont play with that, you will burn yourself and never listended and what stopped me doing it.....I burnt myself and still have the scar to prove it..

[IanForbes]

I don't know why it is that way, Loz, but I've seen it many times myself. The little nephew of the Thai family I look after is an accident waiting to happen. I hope he survives past his teenage years, but I doubt it happening. Even as a baby of 2 he was always darting onto the road. Luckily the home is on a not too busy road. For some strange reason many Thais don't seem to relate foolish actions with consequences. And, many of those consequences are fatal. I see school children of all ages riding scooters in traffic. It is nothing for a rural Thai family to send a 10 year old child on a scooter to buy something at the market.

[yabaaaa]

I remember as kid being tought all about traffic/roads etc and was fully aware of what could happen, did it stop me "playing chicken" with traffic or jumping on the backs of trucks and holding on.....No.....It took a mate of mine falling off said truck at 60km/hour and hitting the tar and the subsuequent hosptial visits to go and see him....

Kids generally will not listen and have to learn the hard way sometimes, this is one of the problems in the PC/HSE mad UK, they are putting kids in cotton wool and not letting them make "mistakes" to learn from.

When I was very young, I was always playing with the cigarette lighter in the and kept getting told, dont play with that, you will burn yourself and never listended and what stopped me doing it.....I burnt myself and still have the scar to prove it..

So how the hel_l did u get your hands ON a cigarette lighter to start with? Its a bit like telling a kid not to play with glass full of acid, they shouldnt be in reach of them period, or do you mean a kid aged 14+ as opposed to under 14?

[Travel2003]

Kids and youngsters (teens) will always do stuff that is exciting.

Doesnt matter if it is dangerous or illegal.

Children have always been fascinated by flames.

My mother told me she found a match box under my bed when I was a kid, and I had been playing with the matches.

I remember a few years ago a dangerous game popped up in Europe (maybe on other continents as well).

The "Air bagging".

Steel a car and see who dares to crash the car into a wall with highest possible speed.

Crazy? Yes.

Did they know it was illegal and dangerous? Yes.

[SeanMoran]

Kids and youngsters (teens) will always do stuff that is exciting.

Doesnt matter if it is dangerous or illegal.

Children have always been fascinated by flames.

My mother told me she found a match box under my bed when I was a kid, and I had been playing with the matches.

I remember a few years ago a dangerous game popped up in Europe (maybe on other continents as well).

The "Air bagging".

Steel a car and see who dares to crash the car into a wall with highest possible speed.

Crazy? Yes.

Did they know it was illegal and dangerous? Yes.

I have a theory about risk-taking behaviour, that is completely untested, and probably won't make much sense to anyone else, but it's got to do with 'survival of the fit' and how there are wars from generation to generation. It's the genetics of the young blokes who jump out of trenches and attack enemy lines in the face of gunfire that either gets them killed or if they get lucky allows them to win those battles and go home to reproduce and pass those same risk-taking genes onto the next generation.

It seems to settle down if we can survive beyond our 20s but that's about the only logical evolutionary reason I can think for it. In peacetime, the genetic mutation that wins the war is still part of the adolescent equipment, albeit without much of a cause.

[Travel2003]

Kids and youngsters (teens) will always do stuff that is exciting.

Doesnt matter if it is dangerous or illegal.

Children have always been fascinated by flames.

My mother told me she found a match box under my bed when I was a kid, and I had been playing with the matches.

I remember a few years ago a dangerous game popped up in Europe (maybe on other continents as well).

The "Air bagging".

Steel a car and see who dares to crash the car into a wall with highest possible speed.

Crazy? Yes.

Did they know it was illegal and dangerous? Yes.

I have a theory about risk-taking behaviour, that is completely untested, and probably won't make much sense to anyone else, but it's got to do with 'survival of the fit' and how there are wars from generation to generation. It's the genetics of the young blokes who jump out of trenches and attack enemy lines in the face of gunfire that either gets them killed or if they get lucky allows them to win those battles and go home to reproduce and pass those same risk-taking genes onto the next generation.

It seems to settle down if we can survive beyond our 20s but that's about the only logical evolutionary reason I can think for it. In peacetime, the genetic mutation that wins the war is still part of the adolescent equipment, albeit without much of a cause.

I think you are correct about this.

The kid/youngster whom dares most will also gain respect, or even become the leader of the pack.

[GuestHouse]

Once flattened by a car they don't play in the road again.

So that's one way of learning not to do something that's dangerous.

[Mosha]

Once they've been killed doing something stupid. Statistics show they never do it again.

[toptuan]

Maybe they're wearing amulets?

And as proof, I've seen no amulets on flattened dogs.

(I know, I know: witnesses of the accident probably stole their wallets/watches/amulets and fled the scene.)

Edited February 13, 2010 by toptuan

[garyh]

Once flattened by a car they don't play in the road again.

So that's one way of learning not to do something that's dangerous.

Yes they don't have the guts to do it again.

[SeanMoran]

Once flattened by a car they don't play in the road again.

So that's one way of learning not to do something that's dangerous.

Yes they don't have the guts to do it again.

Well, not until after their reincarnation papers are processed anyway ...

[needforspeed]

Lazy

[Donnyboy]

i find thais in general risk takers, whether be it driving manners, gambling habits, walking/crossing on a busy street. Kids just copy the adults.

[SeanMoran]

i find thais in general risk takers, whether be it driving manners, gambling habits, walking/crossing on a busy street. Kids just copy the adults.

It drives me nuts sometimes, this unpredictability where more than a few people seem to be able to just do whatever they want whenever they want, and it happens to get on my nerves alright.

Then, last night I was sitting in my usual table at my usual restaurant in my usual drunken stupor, smoking a durrie in deep contemplation on all this, and it was then that I realised that the reason I returned here was for the freedom that this fine land offers ME!

So now I know that by the time I sober up on Monday afternoon, I will accept that I must live the remainder of my own life with the freedom that I came back to Thailand to find, while acknowledging that everyone else also has that freedom that is most important to me, myself, for we MUST be permitted to behave like fools at the appropriate times to us, ourselves, and nobody else, and that goes for all of us!

[needforspeed]

lazy, will explain.

At my condo to walk to the main road they made a walkway around the condo road for cars and moterbikes coming and going to the parking floors.

But than you need to walk 2 minutes more as this walk way makes a u-turn.

I always when i am home send my children to school and never going off from the walk way, explain my children why about a million times, and explain to my GF about 2 million times, still she and all the other thais with there children never walking on the walk way and just cross and walked at the road design only for cars and moterbikes.

When the parants don't pay attention to there lovely children do the same as they don't know better, and yes as i told about 1 million times to my GF there was a accident where a 4 year old boy was hit by a moterbike.

They all include my GF blamed the moterbike.

Lazy, maybe not the biggest reason accidents happening, but sure one off them.

[Loz]

Lazy to teach safety. Yeah, I'd go along with that. Its easier not to confront them with the stark realities of what happens the day the risk is not in their favour.

I just think its also this inward looking state they live in. Not really knowing much about life outside of thailand. Like a friend of mine who was shocked when she went to visit her fiance in Australia. She was shocked that nobody had Honda Waves to run around on for convenience. Its one thing to find flaws in a nations behaviour, its another to begin by thinking that every nation is the same as your own. Never mind that it should or shouldn't be.

I doubt I'll ever see thais teaching their kids the green cross code but, I would like to.

ANyone else see the corrolation between human behaviour and dogs?

Cos I have NEVER seen a dog sleeping in the street in England and I've never seen one walking busy traffic seemingly thinking that traffic will avoid it. I have seen dogs chasing cars and what have you. But I have never seen a dog laying away in the path of traffic appear to be of a mind that the cars will find another way past. I think things are about to get crunchy, in my neigbourhood at least.

[Gaccha]

You invite the wrong answers from your wrong first position.

You make the mistake of believing you are right. You base this presumption on 'common sense' [Foucault's Episteme/Habitus/Gidden's practical consciousness]. Your framework for determining what is safe has been indoctrinated into you so it feels second nature and unproblematic. You as the docile, productive subject cannot imagine any other way.

So why do Thais appear to take elevated risks? It is not pushed into Thais' faces to not do otherwise.

Look, just think for a moment. Until 10 years ago it would be quite reasonable to say: "that is a good risk to take'. But the expression seems absurd now since you have been constituted to believe all risk is bad. Risk=hazard. But risk does not equal hazard. A risk is an opportunity.

Humans have a risk baromenter. It is set at a certain level. If you reduce risk somewhere (e.g. stop smoking) you will increase it elsewhere. What sets the baromenter are the social quirks that constitute the individual, This will not change by simply teaching that playing in roads in dangerous. And, as stated by other forum members, be careful what you wish for: the logical reductio ad absurdum of your position is to place people in panopticon, cotton-wool lined rooms only allowed out to go to the toilet.

Your question is then presumptous. Your position is preposterous. And your need to learn is considerable.

Edited February 13, 2010 by Gaccha

[Loz]

Verbose, yet interesting comments from Gaccha.

The very fact that I moved from England to Thailand having never been to Asia before shows the flaw in your assertion that I think risk is bad. I think calculated risk is healthy and allows for growth. What I question is risk where the payoff is not proportionate to the potential penalty.

Example. My first week in full time employment I took out a MIP investment. I thought the small monthly contributions would net me a nice nest egg ten years hence. The potentional of losing everything seemed small, the potential of getting back substantially more than I put in seemed high. Ergo it seemed like a good risk. As it turned out, I lost about 30% of my investment. But I still maintain at the time it was a healthy risk to take.

What is the upside of dancing with a 1/2 tonne truck? looking big in front of your mates or a girl you like? and the downside? Pain or death and lets not forget humiliation.

just not seeing how that is cool. Maybe I have WAY much more to learn before this makes sense as you suggest. Or maybe, stupid is as stupid does, Forest.

[Pakboong]

Not much different than bungee jumping. There really is not much to it other than falling with the possibility of bashing your brains out if something goes wrong.

Those that excel at the x sports have an aptitude for such things. You will find that they don't excel at traditional sports such as football, etc... They tend not to be happy unless there is some kind of physical risk involved.

Edited February 13, 2010 by Pakboong

[otherstuff1957]

I agree 100% with the lazy thing. Also, in school Thais are taught to memorize facts, not analyze actions and consequences. Therefore, they tend to not consider the consequences or potential safety of what they are doing at any given moment.

Recently I went on a field trip to Ayutthaya with most of my school. We were supposed to take a boat tour around the island, but some of the parents objected. They were afraid that their children (who ranged in age from 10 to 15) would jump or fall off of the boat. So, why were they afraid of this sort of behavior? Obviously they were aware that they have not or not been able to teach their children any common sense.

Edited February 13, 2010 by otherstuff1957

[SeanMoran]

You invite the wrong answers from your wrong first position.

You make the mistake of believing you are right. You base this presumption on 'common sense' [Foucault's Episteme/Habitus/Gidden's practical consciousness]. Your framework for determining what is safe has been indoctrinated into you so it feels second nature and unproblematic. You as the docile, productive subject cannot imagine any other way.

So why do Thais appear to take elevated risks? It is not pushed into Thais' faces to not do otherwise.

Look, just think for a moment. Until 10 years ago it would be quite reasonable to say: "that is a good risk to take'. But the expression seems absurd now since you have been constituted to believe all risk is bad. Risk=hazard. But risk does not equal hazard. A risk is an opportunity.

Humans have a risk baromenter. It is set at a certain level. If you reduce risk somewhere (e.g. stop smoking) you will increase it elsewhere. What sets the baromenter are the social quirks that constitute the individual, This will not change by simply teaching that playing in roads in dangerous. And, as stated by other forum members, be careful what you wish for: the logical reductio ad absurdum of your position is to place people in panopticon, cotton-wool lined rooms only allowed out to go to the toilet.

Your question is then presumptous. Your position is preposterous. And your need to learn is considerable.

I appreciate your wise adjunct on my similistic theory. From what I gather, it seems from what you write that one one door closes, another one opens ie. when the war is over and peace prevails, we get juvenile delinquents who could have been good heroes if there was a war. What I understand from your explanation is that this innate behaviour will find its own way, and if one risky practice is outlawed then these unemployed would-be heroes will find alternative methods to release their bravado. I see now why this world is stuck in the state we are destined to live in, and thank you for helping me understand that essential part of mankind.

[JusMe]

I have a theory about risk-taking behaviour, that is completely untested, and probably won't make much sense to anyone else, but it's got to do with 'survival of the fit' and how there are wars from generation to generation. It's the genetics of the young blokes who jump out of trenches and attack enemy lines in the face of gunfire that either gets them killed or if they get lucky allows them to win those battles and go home to reproduce and pass those same risk-taking genes onto the next generation.

It seems to settle down if we can survive beyond our 20s but that's about the only logical evolutionary reason I can think for it. In peacetime, the genetic mutation that wins the war is still part of the adolescent equipment, albeit without much of a cause.

Interesting theory, Sean, and maybe works in the short term.

I'm in the process of reading the Will Durant series right now, and he explains what happens when a whole society is at war for a very long period. In essence, all the good brave heroes, i.e. those who take risks to show others what great survivors they are in order to reproduce, eventually die off in the extended battles.

The real survivors are the guys who say, "Ferk this <deleted>! I'm outta here!" and run off. They're the ones who have their genes in future generations, which causes a general degeneration in the society as a whole, obviously over a good series of generations.

Again, an interesting theory.

[SeanMoran]

I have a theory about risk-taking behaviour, that is completely untested, and probably won't make much sense to anyone else, but it's got to do with 'survival of the fit' and how there are wars from generation to generation. It's the genetics of the young blokes who jump out of trenches and attack enemy lines in the face of gunfire that either gets them killed or if they get lucky allows them to win those battles and go home to reproduce and pass those same risk-taking genes onto the next generation.

It seems to settle down if we can survive beyond our 20s but that's about the only logical evolutionary reason I can think for it. In peacetime, the genetic mutation that wins the war is still part of the adolescent equipment, albeit without much of a cause.

Interesting theory, Sean, and maybe works in the short term.

I'm in the process of reading the Will Durant series right now, and he explains what happens when a whole society is at war for a very long period. In essence, all the good brave heroes, i.e. those who take risks to show others what great survivors they are in order to reproduce, eventually die off in the extended battles.

The real survivors are the guys who say, "Ferk this <deleted>! I'm outta here!" and run off. They're the ones who have their genes in future generations, which causes a general degeneration in the society as a whole, obviously over a good series of generations.

Again, an interesting theory.

Those realist cowards are the losers of wars. Natura non facit saltum.

[Nouie]

It's simple. Parent supervision/guidance fails... miserabally...

Kid runs out onto the road, and parent's think "Meh..."

I don't see adults scolding many kids for diving in front of cars.

The drivers either honk, smile, nod or shake their heads which makes the child want to do it again cause' it's fun being mischevious.

Parents really need to grab ahold of their kids and let them know "A BOO BOO BY A MOTOR VEHICLE SERIOUSLY HURTS!!!"

(teachers should probably enforce the same thing)

Putting down the harsh truth is mostly effective

Edited February 13, 2010 by Nouie

[Loz]

I agree 100% with the lazy thing. Also, in school Thais are taught to memorize facts, not analyze actions and consequences. Therefore, they tend to not consider the consequences or potential safety of what they are doing at any given moment.

Recently I went on a field trip to Ayutthaya with most of my school. We were supposed to take a boat tour around the island, but some of the parents objected. They were afraid that their children (who ranged in age from 10 to 15) would jump or fall off of the boat. So, why were they afraid of this sort of behavior? Obviously they were aware that they have not or not been able to teach their children any common sense.

I knew I couldn't be alone in noticing this...

Why oh why is this basic kind of common sense not taught at a young age?

I took some kids from school in my car as part of a project we were engaged in. The amount of fannying around they got up to in the back of my car made me think if I had done that in a friends parents car (let alone a teachers) I'd have had my behind warmed severely!

There is not thought to negative consequences among much of the youth here. They make the spoiled brats of yesteryear look like genius saints today.

Roll on darwinism...

[SeanMoran]

I agree 100% with the lazy thing. Also, in school Thais are taught to memorize facts, not analyze actions and consequences. Therefore, they tend to not consider the consequences or potential safety of what they are doing at any given moment.

Recently I went on a field trip to Ayutthaya with most of my school. We were supposed to take a boat tour around the island, but some of the parents objected. They were afraid that their children (who ranged in age from 10 to 15) would jump or fall off of the boat. So, why were they afraid of this sort of behavior? Obviously they were aware that they have not or not been able to teach their children any common sense.

I knew I couldn't be alone in noticing this...

Why oh why is this basic kind of common sense not taught at a young age?

I took some kids from school in my car as part of a project we were engaged in. The amount of fannying around they got up to in the back of my car made me think if I had done that in a friends parents car (let alone a teachers) I'd have had my behind warmed severely!

There is not thought to negative consequences among much of the youth here. They make the spoiled brats of yesteryear look like genius saints today.

Roll on darwinism...

This is why we have buffalo races!

[Ijustwannateach]

I would add in terms of the reasons for the problems noted on this thread:

The lack of a belief in a scientifically-based reality, where the future can be predicted based on actions from the past or present.

It's taught in schools, but I think the problem is that it isn't really adopted as a reality.

[yabaaaa]

It's simple. Parent supervision/guidance fails... miserabally...

Parents really need to grab ahold of their kids and let them know "A BOO BOO BY A MOTOR VEHICLE SERIOUSLY HURTS!!!"

(teachers should probably enforce the same thing)

Putting down the harsh truth is mostly effective

Yeah its called a good hard smack followed by the words " if you think thats hurts remember it because when a car hits you it will be like that but 100 times harder/worse"

No it aint pc.............. and I couldnt care less!!

[Pakboong]

These same kids would be riding down the handrail of the BTS stairs on skateboards if they lived in Bangkok and could afford skateboards. They have to make do with the traffic due to limited resources. Kids with this X aptitude in my country will try pretty much anything dangerous to fill whatever this need is. Has nothing to do with parenting.