foo commented on this post:
An important part of getting what one wants is changing what one wants to better desires, including more relisable (sic) ones
How could you knowingly tell the difference between changing what you want to better desires, and coercing yourself toward them?
Rational thought? You may think that's a non-answer, but what would you say if I asked you, "How can you knowingly tell the difference between disagreeing with me because you hate me and disagreeing with me because I'm wrong?"
Well a good start is checking whether you feel distressed. Or if you feel conflicted. And consider why you changed your view. Again, it's just a matter of rational thought.
Does this "should" mean what it normally means? "Should" is coercive, in normal English language.
It means that's the way the world should be. You could swap in "ought to" if you like. It's just a statement about morality -- if children are free to disagree this is a morally good state, and if children are not that is a morally bad state.
That's coercive? Next you'll be telling me my inability to walk through doors is coercive. And gravity too. And all competitive sports. Just because you can't do anything at all doesn't mean you ought to be coerced; it's irrational to want impossible desires. And it's immoral to desire to do things you should not do. If you want it anyway and end up coerced that was your own wrongdoing at fault, not shoulds in general.
No, I was just not going to discourage or punish disagreement.
I dunno; how can you tell? (the difference between following my advice to make me happy, or because you want to)
How do those even contradict? Someone might want to feel safe.
You're worried people will go against my advice for the sole purpose of exercising their freedom? Why would anyone do that if he was never under my thumb in the first place?
Erm, the existence of obligations is not coercive. Next you'll be telling me not to make plans to meet someone somewhere. That's an obligation after all.
I'm pointing out they should want that, and if they don't they are immoral.
No, for all people.
Well, yes, bringing a child into this world does give a parent some responsibility. If a potential parent will not want to help his child, he should not have a child.
If I love you so much why don't I want to be accommodating to you?
Common preferences are not possible when I insist on making unreasonable demands of others. As long as I do that, I won't find any. But what if I stopped?
No common preference is reached in a rape because one of the parties is intentionally malicious. That is not the situation when parenting.