Could the internet raise a child?

[UlidEyes]

If you left a child entirely to his/her own devices, working with a 100% accessible and unfiltered internet, could s/he reach sane moral and logical conclusions about the world? Assume a few things here, such as basic instruction on how to use an internet browser, and a basic understanding of the english language. S/he would be assumed an otherwise healthy child in an average home/neighborhood. Parental involvement would optimally be very slim, aside from traditional shelter and nurture needs.

[kerowo]

You could do it but the end result would be fairly poorly socially adjusted. You would have to be more specific as to at what age the child was put into the pod to know just how screwed up they would be.

[bryan4967]

Depends on your definition of sane moral and logical conclusions about the world, but still omg, no.

[Nielsio]

omg, yes.

[UlidEyes]

[ QUOTE ]
You could do it but the end result would be fairly poorly socially adjusted. You would have to be more specific as to at what age the child was put into the pod to know just how screwed up they would be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, like, I'm wondering if you can still get that wholesome nature-loving outdoors childhood while still using the internet as the sole teaching tool. Of course a child will have to learn and grow with legitimate social interaction. Just subsitute grade K-12 with internet. I mean, home-schooled kids aren't necessarily poorly socially adjusted. You just need to incoroporate a lot of neighborhood social activities etc.

[Duke]

Absolutely. They'd be confronted with enough disparate ideas and random facts to be forced into some sort of critical thinking to make their decisions. This is actually better than what they'll get out of most households and schools. By the time a kid can type at all, their social development will have its roots already.

I think that too many people think that someone's nature can be changed later in life than is actually possible. I'm not saying that it's genetic or set in stone, but I'm fairly certain that the years from about 0-4 are more important than 5-18.

[kerowo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You could do it but the end result would be fairly poorly socially adjusted. You would have to be more specific as to at what age the child was put into the pod to know just how screwed up they would be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, like, I'm wondering if you can still get that wholesome nature-loving outdoors childhood while still using the internet as the sole teaching tool. Of course a child will have to learn and grow with legitimate social interaction. Just subsitute grade K-12 with internet. I mean, home-schooled kids aren't necessarily poorly socially adjusted. You just need to incoroporate a lot of neighborhood social activities etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahh, I misunderstood. I was assuming this was some weird "dropped in a well" situation where the only contact the kid had was on the computer. Not the "Mommy and Daddy are going to be home late" situation.

Yes, it's totally possible. The internet is self selecting though, so the kid could end up pretty narrow minded. Say he doesn't like people who disagree with him and post charming pictures of cats in his threads, he can just ignore them instead of realizing he is wrong. You can't ignore opposing views quite as easily in a real classroom, and if you're too big a jerk you'll get smacked.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
omg, yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nielsio was raised by the internet. Look at the results.

[AlexM]

[BeatUp]

if you want a pissed-off, antisocial, half-geek/half-retard, know-it-all hybrid then yea the internet could raise a child.

I wouldn't want to be friends with him though, not even on myspace.

It's down to about 40% porn right now, correct?

He could be the next youtube sensation.

Of course there's the problem that children need love, attention, structure, and to be taught right from wrong.