Reasoning with Kio and Gus

Abstract

Introduction:  The question of what rights children have or even whether they have rights at all has always been an issue of legal, sociological and philosophical debate.  Hobbes held that children and other dependents, whom he considered incapable of reason, have no power to make contracts and hence have no rights.  Locke and Mill alleged that children have rights to adequate subsistence, i.e., nutrition, shelter, clothing and care, but that they have no right to decision.  The assumption seems to be that rights belong to those who reason and that rational behavior comes - perhaps naturally - with age.  To this effect, Locke holds that parental authority is temporary and ceases when children grow up.  Mill claims that liberty rights are restricted to those who are in the maturity of their faculties.  Hence, one may conclude that 1) rights are tied to reasoning capabilities; 2) children are incapable of reasoning; and 3) maturity of reasoning faculties is to be naturally expected to be the outcome of maturity of years.