There’s nothing unjustified about appealing to your parents’ authority. Parents are legally responsible for their children: they have literal (not epistemic) authority over them, although it’s not absolute.
Technically true, but it’s a very unagentic way for a five-year old to respond to something they should have the capability to justify through argument.
My prediction is that giving such population-level arguments in response to why they are by themselves is much less likely to result in being left alone (presumably, the goal) than by saying their parents said it’s okay, so would show lower levels of instrumental rationality, rather than demonstrate more agency.
I presume the stated goal of schooling your child in this way is to set the grown-up’s mind at ease, rather than ensuring the child is left alone (which is probably the default outcome), and I expect both responses would suffice for this instrumental purpose.
There’s nothing unjustified about appealing to your parents’ authority. Parents are legally responsible for their children: they have literal (not epistemic) authority over them, although it’s not absolute.
Technically true, but it’s a very unagentic way for a five-year old to respond to something they should have the capability to justify through argument.
My prediction is that giving such population-level arguments in response to why they are by themselves is much less likely to result in being left alone (presumably, the goal) than by saying their parents said it’s okay, so would show lower levels of instrumental rationality, rather than demonstrate more agency.
I presume the stated goal of schooling your child in this way is to set the grown-up’s mind at ease, rather than ensuring the child is left alone (which is probably the default outcome), and I expect both responses would suffice for this instrumental purpose.