Unintended Consequences of Modern Value Shifts

The world has changed significantly in this millennium. What used to be considered normal, even self-evident, is today not always even acceptable.

A startling example of this change appeared in Finland when two schoolboys got into a fierce fight, throwing punches and kicks at each other. A teacher tried to break it up by ordering them to stop, but to no avail.

So the teacher finally grabbed one of the boys and lifted him out of the situation. The hitting and kicking stopped, and no one was seriously injured.

But then something completely unexpected happened. One of the parents filed charges against the teacher, claiming that milder methods could have been used. What those methods might have been—given that the teacher had already ordered the boys verbally to stop—has never been explained publicly.

In any case, at the parents’ initiative, a legal process began that lasted a full year and a half before the prosecutor decided that the teacher’s actions would not be taken to court. It is clear that this time was extremely difficult for the teacher.

We can only guess how such a case will affect teachers’ willingness to intervene in schoolyard fights—not in a positive direction, surely. And for that reason it must be said that, as a consequence of the case I have described, school life likely became a little less safe than it once was.

For my part, I see this case as yet another indication that the value shifts of the 21st century—BLM, DEI, Woke culture, intersectional feminism, and so forth—do not make the world a better place. Instead, they seem to be leading to a decline in care for one another, double standards, less openness, and increasing social polarization in all kinds of ways, despite the fact that the stated aim was the exact opposite.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Has Modern Education Strayed Too Far — and Is It Time to Change Course?
Library Scrubs Queer Creator’s Character from Moomin Exhibit
Why Finnish Youth Are Abandoning the Green Party

A Fair Game or Unfair Judgment?

In a primary school located in a medium-sized coastal town in western Finland, seven-year-old girls and boys were tasked with competing to see which group behaved better in class and kept their surroundings tidier. In other words, they were judged on adherence to behavioral norms that were taken for granted in the schools of my childhood.

The girls won the competition and were rewarded with a toy day. This, however, upset the boys’ mothers, whose little darlings couldn’t manage to be tidy or behave properly.

As a result, one mother contacted a national broadcasting company Yle, claiming that “the competitive setup and the criteria seemed unfair, and the group division went against the National Agency for Education's policies on segregation.” She also lamented, “Nobody does things like this anymore these days. Are boys wild and disobedient just because they’re energetic?”

Instead of having boys and girls compete in behavior and tidiness, she suggested rewarding the boys for, say, running a certain distance in the schoolyard as defined by a teacher. This, she argued, would allow them to please the teacher in a different way. Personally, I couldn’t see how this would promote children’s education or learning — unlike the competition at hand.

According to the principal of the criticized school, “The teachers certainly did not intend to act against the curriculum. This was a human error from which we will learn. We are all human and make mistakes.”

Undoubtedly, this was an effort to save face — and perhaps it succeeded. Time will tell.

* * *

To me, however, there was nothing odd or unfair about the competition. Calm and orderly behavior is something that promotes learning in schools. As such, it is an excellent — and learning-relevant — basis for competition, regardless of gender. Moreover, it is an event that especially helps wild boys improve their self-control.

Admittedly, the groups could have been divided without regard to gender, which would have prevented the boys’ mothers from blaming their children’s loss on their gender. But I believe that a competition between genders is the most motivating setup for seven-year-olds — especially for boys.

For this reason, I suspect that the mother who took her complaint to the national media should take a good look in the mirror. After all, the school competition reflected the general perception that mothers have long demanded better behavior and tidiness from their daughters than from their sons. The girls’ victory, therefore, was no great surprise — but hopefully, it offered a valuable lesson not only to the boys in the class but also to their mothers.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Safe Spaces or Freedom of Knowledge?
How to Increase Fertility Rates: A Finnish Solution
The Difference Between Left-Wing and Right-Wing Envy

G-index challenges the theory of the global climatic change

There are many kinds of estimates describing the development of the global temperature. You may follow statistics based on adjusted temperature measurements from worldwide network of stations, satellite data or - my favorite thus far - melting of arctic sea ice. 

Here I will introduce you - my respected reader - to a G-index developed by a Finnish teacher Simo Ruoho. I know, it sounds ridiculous to compare a school teacher´s achievement to those of huge scientific organisations like NASA - and that is what I thought myself, when I heard about him for the first time some half a year ago.

Now, after following his G-index thereafter, I have become highly interested due to its accuracy. During this time its prediction of the becoming global temperature has failed only once. And no, the prediction has not been changed afterwards. 

In addition, the G-index of Mr. Ruoho has also predicted amazingly well the annual mean temperature of Finland. That is, more accurately than the prediction of the governmental Finnish Meteorologial Institute. 

These evidence are impressive enough for me to share this information in this blog. However, only the accuracy of the future predictions will show, whether he has only had good luck with his index - or whether he has made a major finding on the mechanisms of the global climatic development. 

If the latter, the global atmospheric development does not follow from the carbon dioxide and other emissions due to human actions, but is driven by the exchange of energy between the oceans and atmosphere. In other words, if G-index-based predictions will hold also in the future, the current climate theory developed to explain the warming of the global climate will become falsified. That is, shown to be wrong.

As the global climatic change has a major effect on politics in the EU and elsewhere, that would probably be the greatest scoop ever. But also a sad example of scientists losing their objectivity after the big money became available for the climatic research. 

Therefore - as a professional scientist - I am not sure, should I cross my fingers for the success or failure of Simo Ruoho´s G-index. The fact, however, is that the position of my fingers does not affect the outcome. And therefore the only thing I can do now, is to continue my follow-up of his predictions and their accuracy.  

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Measurements of arctic temperatures and sea ice area agree with each other
Arctic ice sheet does not support greenhouse gases as the cause of accelerating global warming
A scoop to be kept out of daylight