Sun. 10/03/21 18:59 EDT
.post #15
The words “child” and “reason” aren’t defined clearly enough for this question to make a whole lot of sense. Also, while the word “child” could be defined objectively, I don’t think the word “reason” can be.
“Reason,” as a verb, seems to be a certain type of thinking that adheres to certain rules; sort of like the verbal equivalent of solving mathematical equations…but, it is a subset of “thinking.”
Thomas Szasz has said that thinking and language are closely related, and possibly equivalent; Oliver Sacks, in his book Seeing Voices, makes a similar case. This makes sense to me. If we substitute “use verbal or non-verbal language” for “reason,” the question “Can children reason?” becomes “Can children use verbal or non-verbal language?” and the answer is, obviously, “yes.” Note that this reformulation would include, not just young humans, but most if not all living, non-plant life.
The question isn’t really “Can children reason,” but rather, How well does (a particular) child reason?", and I believe the ability to reason improves as the individual’s literacy and vocabulary improves.