The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Should Children be Taught Life Skills Before Entering the "Real World?"

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Greco-Saxon1 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/6/2016 Category: Education
Updated: 3 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 245 times Debate No: 93428
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Life Skills are things like: multilingualism; knowing how to cook, sew, balance a chequebook; play Devil's Advocate (see both sides of an argument before establishing an opinion); basic political skills; and so forth. It is important the children learn these skills at an early age and build them up as they progress in school. Reason One: They may or may not be more excited and willing to attend school; Reason Two: When the children grow up, they will be more self-reliant; and any other reason you can think of.


Firstly, I would like to reject the premise of the question that children would need to enter the "real world". I do not accept the idea that children need enter the 'real world' as if it is a strange and dangerous geographical location that they will suddenly enter once they reach a certain age. Children never needed to 'enter' the so-called 'real world' because they are already in it, and have been in it ever since the time of their birth. The notion of the real world is much rather a construction of the human mind, a person who is in denial of self evident truth and chooses instead to live in his or her own fantasy world, will automatically by default have constructed at least two different worlds or realities in his or her mind.

Before any sort of life skills should be taught, it is crucial for parents and teachers to not disguise how the world is to the children, in other words children should not be educated to believe that there could be an alternative world to the one we live in, but rather be taught how the world actually is and how the child would contribute in it. Subsequently, the children would understand from a very young age that anything they learn or any action they take is in fact creating a direct consequence to their future selves as they doing it. Although this may not abolish the notion of the real world, it would likely to diminish the children's chances of subconsciously constructing the ideology of two coexisting worlds (the fantasy and real world), they would understand that there is just one world that they live in and anything they do will have a realistic consequence in the future.

Bearing this in mind, it would almost be impossible to determine how people across the globe would perceive the real world as they would have different levels of protection from or exposure to the world at a very young age. So the central questions to this topic are these: what sort of 'life skills' should be taught, to who's real world are they being taught for? If life skills are to be taught should it be officially recognised within our current education system? And for a deeper question, do life skills necessarily have to be taught? Can they not be developed instead through modelling our natural day-to-day lives instead?

If we are to acknowledge that life skills can be any skill that may help children survive and thrive in their current society, one could argue that all the subjects being taught at schools, colleges and universities are potentially life skills because they could help one get a job and earn money to buy the necessities for survival, such as food and water. Therefore, under this particular argument, one does not need to emphasise on teaching life skills as an extra part of education as they are already being taught. Even if life skills are not part of our current education system, it is perfectly feasible for a child to learn life skills without necessarily be taught. For example, hunting skills can be considered as a life skill and a necessity for survival for individuals who live in the depths of the Amazon rainforest, children do not necessarily need to be taught how to throw stones or a spear whilst hunting, they could instead learn through imitation and modelling. A similar argument can be made for cooking, in theory if everybody in the world was taught the same life skill of how to cook in a particular way, we would all be eating food that was cooked similarly. It is because that throughout all the years of history, majority of humans have not been taught the so-called life skills in which has enabled or forced our minds to think creatively when faced with difficult challenges.

Above all, considering that life skills could consist of any sort of skill depending on where the children have been brought up, I believe it is far more important for children to understand that they live and belong only to one world, and that any skills they learn within their life would have an direct impact upon their future selves, thus any skills they learnt can also be categorised under the 'life skills' heading. And as one knows, nobody in this world ever stops learning, we learn something new every day, and we learn life skills every day as we move on with our lives regardless to whether or not we are being taught them by other individual.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by lord_megatron 3 months ago
Except that at most schools life skills=moral values, and not something useful like balancing a chequebook
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.