The Childhood
0
Data Zero
Valkyrie Forces CO
After reading this from our local news site:
Teaching Babies (used google translator so you can check it yourself.)
I have a question: What do you all think about it?
In my opinion, I think the entire thing about teaching the children when they are couple of months old, is wasteful and actualli causes harm (you can read about it in the last part of the article).
Children should develop with their parents and exploring, not thrown into schools as soon they have tasted the air. I like imagination and i dont think this will help much in that department. And the funny thing about the school is that it is in english not in our native language.
Feel free to discuss about it since for me, it means a lot.
Grammar Nazis are welcome to point mistakes in my post.
Teaching Babies (used google translator so you can check it yourself.)
I have a question: What do you all think about it?
In my opinion, I think the entire thing about teaching the children when they are couple of months old, is wasteful and actualli causes harm (you can read about it in the last part of the article).
Children should develop with their parents and exploring, not thrown into schools as soon they have tasted the air. I like imagination and i dont think this will help much in that department. And the funny thing about the school is that it is in english not in our native language.
Feel free to discuss about it since for me, it means a lot.
Grammar Nazis are welcome to point mistakes in my post.
0
The first few years are the time when learning is easiest. the older you get, the harder it is to learn new things. children who grow up in bilingual homes will be fluent in both languges. i don't know how the schools there go about the teaching, but it has been proven that the earlier you learn, the more likely it is to stick.
i know quite a few people who grew up in households of three generations. the first speaks only one language, the second is fluent in two, and the third can speak only one, but also understand the first generation. it's kind of wierd how they can hear and understand a language, but not speak it.
i know quite a few people who grew up in households of three generations. the first speaks only one language, the second is fluent in two, and the third can speak only one, but also understand the first generation. it's kind of wierd how they can hear and understand a language, but not speak it.
0
I believe it is just pure nonsense what these people are spreading.
Kids should enjoy their childhood, sure discipline must be taught to them, but that's what parents are there for right?
I don't take these motherfu***** serious because all they do is spread bullshit but if they keep this up I might as well just slice em and dice em.
Kids should enjoy their childhood, sure discipline must be taught to them, but that's what parents are there for right?
I don't take these motherfu***** serious because all they do is spread bullshit but if they keep this up I might as well just slice em and dice em.
2
If I may interject, what you were saying about the learning capabilities of youngsters is indeed true. But not at such a young age, and not in front of such a quantity of information.
The enormous amount of learning ability that a child exposes when he is growing up is merely a natural selection process that has come to be normal in almost every living creature on the planet, humans being the slowest in that respect(will come back to this later).
When born, an instinct of survival is spawned by the creature and it harnesses uncounciously the whole power of its brain to devellop the necessary skills to survive in the world as we know it. So yes, it is true, because baby snakes can slither off about 30 seconds after hatching, that it only takes a day and a half for a calf to stand on its feet and walk. Tremendous capalities are spawned when it comes to ensure the survival of oneself.
Now one could note that humans, as well as chimps, differ somewhat from that evolutionary rule. Society has replaced instinct , to a small measure with chimps, who care for their child only for a few months (but some can take years before letting go of their child, preparing him cautiously), but with us it has become decades before a human being can correctly survive in the world in which we live.
Now I'm going off subject, quite sorry about that.
The point here is, the benefits of learning at a young age to speakj many languages is true and recommended. But to my opinion (which is humble, as I have no children and only a rabid ferocity for information), the teaching should at least wait for until the child has walked past his modulating years (can you say that? I'm french, I don't know for sure, read as"years that shape the mind") which expands for some up to the age of three.
Now some would agree that that should be the best time to instruct a child, but we mustn't forget that these few years of indolence are the years in which strong emotional links are formed between parents and their child, and that it must not be interfered with for fear of pertubating the childs mind whereas the role of his parents.
In conclusion to my boring and extenuously long exposé, I would conclude that it would be better to wait until the ages of two or three to start tutoring children in this way(this is not meant as a critic, not sure how it sounds^^').
So, yes, lets teach our children. But not too early, and not too much either.
After all, all we wish for is their happy childhood, and their glorious future.
(This was long, but damn, that felt good, should do some more serious posts)
The enormous amount of learning ability that a child exposes when he is growing up is merely a natural selection process that has come to be normal in almost every living creature on the planet, humans being the slowest in that respect(will come back to this later).
When born, an instinct of survival is spawned by the creature and it harnesses uncounciously the whole power of its brain to devellop the necessary skills to survive in the world as we know it. So yes, it is true, because baby snakes can slither off about 30 seconds after hatching, that it only takes a day and a half for a calf to stand on its feet and walk. Tremendous capalities are spawned when it comes to ensure the survival of oneself.
Now one could note that humans, as well as chimps, differ somewhat from that evolutionary rule. Society has replaced instinct , to a small measure with chimps, who care for their child only for a few months (but some can take years before letting go of their child, preparing him cautiously), but with us it has become decades before a human being can correctly survive in the world in which we live.
Now I'm going off subject, quite sorry about that.
The point here is, the benefits of learning at a young age to speakj many languages is true and recommended. But to my opinion (which is humble, as I have no children and only a rabid ferocity for information), the teaching should at least wait for until the child has walked past his modulating years (can you say that? I'm french, I don't know for sure, read as"years that shape the mind") which expands for some up to the age of three.
Now some would agree that that should be the best time to instruct a child, but we mustn't forget that these few years of indolence are the years in which strong emotional links are formed between parents and their child, and that it must not be interfered with for fear of pertubating the childs mind whereas the role of his parents.
In conclusion to my boring and extenuously long exposé, I would conclude that it would be better to wait until the ages of two or three to start tutoring children in this way(this is not meant as a critic, not sure how it sounds^^').
So, yes, lets teach our children. But not too early, and not too much either.
After all, all we wish for is their happy childhood, and their glorious future.
(This was long, but damn, that felt good, should do some more serious posts)
0
Data Zero
Valkyrie Forces CO
Gubi wrote...
If I may interject, what you were saying about the learning capabilities of youngsters is indeed true. But not at such a young age, and not in front of such a quantity of information.The enormous amount of learning ability that a child exposes when he is growing up is merely a natural selection process that has come to be normal in almost every living creature on the planet, humans being the slowest in that respect(will come back to this later).
When born, an instinct of survival is spawned by the creature and it harnesses uncounciously the whole power of its brain to devellop the necessary skills to survive in the world as we know it. So yes, it is true, because baby snakes can slither off about 30 seconds after hatching, that it only takes a day and a half for a calf to stand on its feet and walk. Tremendous capalities are spawned when it comes to ensure the survival of oneself.
Now one could note that humans, as well as chimps, differ somewhat from that evolutionary rule. Society has replaced instinct , to a small measure with chimps, who care for their child only for a few months (but some can take years before letting go of their child, preparing him cautiously), but with us it has become decades before a human being can correctly survive in the world in which we live.
Now I'm going off subject, quite sorry about that.
The point here is, the benefits of learning at a young age to speakj many languages is true and recommended. But to my opinion (which is humble, as I have no children and only a rabid ferocity for information), the teaching should at least wait for until the child has walked past his modulating years (can you say that? I'm french, I don't know for sure, read as"years that shape the mind") which expands for some up to the age of three.
Now some would agree that that should be the best time to instruct a child, but we mustn't forget that these few years of indolence are the years in which strong emotional links are formed between parents and their child, and that it must not be interfered with for fear of pertubating the childs mind whereas the role of his parents.
In conclusion to my boring and extenuously long exposé, I would conclude that it would be better to wait until the ages of two or three to start tutoring children in this way(this is not meant as a critic, not sure how it sounds^^').
So, yes, lets teach our children. But not too early, and not too much either.
After all, all we wish for is their happy childhood, and their glorious future.
(This was long, but damn, that felt good, should do some more serious posts)
Good points represented. I have to agree on the time for teaching the child. Young mind is moldable.
0
Gubi wrote...
If I may interject, what you were saying about the learning capabilities of youngsters is indeed true. But not at such a young age, and not in front of such a quantity of information.The enormous amount of learning ability that a child exposes when he is growing up is merely a natural selection process that has come to be normal in almost every living creature on the planet, humans being the slowest in that respect(will come back to this later).
When born, an instinct of survival is spawned by the creature and it harnesses uncounciously the whole power of its brain to devellop the necessary skills to survive in the world as we know it. So yes, it is true, because baby snakes can slither off about 30 seconds after hatching, that it only takes a day and a half for a calf to stand on its feet and walk. Tremendous capalities are spawned when it comes to ensure the survival of oneself.
Now one could note that humans, as well as chimps, differ somewhat from that evolutionary rule. Society has replaced instinct , to a small measure with chimps, who care for their child only for a few months (but some can take years before letting go of their child, preparing him cautiously), but with us it has become decades before a human being can correctly survive in the world in which we live.
Now I'm going off subject, quite sorry about that.
The point here is, the benefits of learning at a young age to speakj many languages is true and recommended. But to my opinion (which is humble, as I have no children and only a rabid ferocity for information), the teaching should at least wait for until the child has walked past his modulating years (can you say that? I'm french, I don't know for sure, read as"years that shape the mind") which expands for some up to the age of three.
Now some would agree that that should be the best time to instruct a child, but we mustn't forget that these few years of indolence are the years in which strong emotional links are formed between parents and their child, and that it must not be interfered with for fear of pertubating the childs mind whereas the role of his parents.
In conclusion to my boring and extenuously long exposé, I would conclude that it would be better to wait until the ages of two or three to start tutoring children in this way(this is not meant as a critic, not sure how it sounds^^').
So, yes, lets teach our children. But not too early, and not too much either.
After all, all we wish for is their happy childhood, and their glorious future.
(This was long, but damn, that felt good, should do some more serious posts)
Rep+ my friend... you explained that in a sincere and professional matter.
0
John titor said that in his futur , kids were starting school only at the age of 8-9 because kids should live their childhood and not be put into learning prisons .
And i think it's a great idea , i'm totally against the fact to teach young children things that they have no interest in learning. Mozard was pushed by his father to learn music , he became a historical figure , but at what cost ? Childhood is the most important part of our life and should be lived fully .
"but children learn faster when they are young"
Don't take me wrong , i love learning , i never went to university or anything like that but i know a lot abouth phisics/quantum physics/cosmology/biology/hystory/philosophy/general knowlege and english (those who finish schools here in quebec (french canada) only know how to say "hi" "yes" "toaster"). I learnt all that ,not at school ,but in my free time , because i was interested in it , not becaused i was forced to learn it . You can start teaching kids things younger but what will that change ? They will learn things that they don't want to learn at the price of a happier childhood . And in the end , the will probably forget abouth it since they have no interest in it ...
I prefer a happy society than an really educated society but that's my own opinion .
And i think it's a great idea , i'm totally against the fact to teach young children things that they have no interest in learning. Mozard was pushed by his father to learn music , he became a historical figure , but at what cost ? Childhood is the most important part of our life and should be lived fully .
"but children learn faster when they are young"
Don't take me wrong , i love learning , i never went to university or anything like that but i know a lot abouth phisics/quantum physics/cosmology/biology/hystory/philosophy/general knowlege and english (those who finish schools here in quebec (french canada) only know how to say "hi" "yes" "toaster"). I learnt all that ,not at school ,but in my free time , because i was interested in it , not becaused i was forced to learn it . You can start teaching kids things younger but what will that change ? They will learn things that they don't want to learn at the price of a happier childhood . And in the end , the will probably forget abouth it since they have no interest in it ...
I prefer a happy society than an really educated society but that's my own opinion .