Thank you. I welcome the debate.

I jump right into your responses.

I think that after a while one realizes one's own mistakes.

Through what exactly does the realization happen? Can you think of an example out of real life?

For example, one will realize the consequences of one's actions in the long run.

So, there are other people involved as the deliverers of such consequences, correct?

Even if I tell someone what's right and what's wrong, that person may not pay attention to me until their own experiences make them realize it.

What then is the exact experience? Is it a pleasant one?

How many times have we heard someone tell us something, only to pay no attention to it and ignore it, and finally, after many experiences, realize that they were right?

One can have endless experiences, actually throughout your whole life, but still lacking the insight of having been wrong, hence gaining knowledge about the self. Of what kind exactly must an experience be, in order to reach the individual on that self-realizing level?

Yes, the story may be an exaggeration, after all, we are not sure if it is completely real.

I state that it is deliberately exaggerated, it is a conscious attempt through its style to bring forward a certain message. In this sense, it serves as a provocation. It challenges the mind to question it, not to confirm the righteousness of the given message.

Think of, for example, of Buddhist monks. They honor every living creature. They safe a worm from a pathway not to be trampled to death. Now, is this something one shall take literally as a guidance for every day life, or is it an exaggeration in order to think about it?

Each young person is different and I could not give a general rule. I think it would take discernment to know what and to what extent to do. But at the same time I think he should have the freedom to make his own mistakes and learn from them. Again, it depends on each individual case.

I am having a clear objection here.
The general rule and experience is that every young person needs some form of discipline. Discipline in this context means that you make him feel the consequences of his actions or omissions. This already includes the freedom to make mistakes that you mentioned. You teach the young person in principle and explicitly about the rules. They must know it beforehand in order to realise it afterwards. If he has been taught and he inevitably makes his first mistakes, then he only recognises them as mistakes because the adults don't simply leave him alone with them.

You wouldn't recognise Plato in this story as an adult who gets his hands dirty, so to speak. He is completely in his noble element of not intervening.

You break a vase, whether it was intentional or unintentional. It is broken by your actions. The consequence of this is to replace it. If you don't have the money to replace it, then you look for a way to earn it. But what you won't be spared is to replace it in one form or the other.

Nothing is more damaging to young people who are left alone with these things. They get worse and more extreme in their actions because the truth is they want to experience a consequence. This is what adults owe them so that they can mature.

Therefore, my objection to the application of Plato's story here is that it is not very suitable for young people to read this story - without starting to question it - because they then run the risk of praising the evening before the day.

There may be exceptions from the rule that young people do not need this form of discipline. But then they are the exception from the rule.