05-17-2003, 04:27 AM
I think part of the problem with the "competitive parent" syndrome that seems so prevalent in our current society is that society, in general, tends to underestimate children mentally and seeks to fill the void of time with physical activites.
I recently read that in Medieval times, it was quite common for children of nobles to learn up to 4 languages by age 6. An impressive feat, to say the least. Now though, children don't even enter school until... age 6 is it? Why is that? Obviously our genetics haven't changed in a mere 800 years so that children are less able to assimilate knowledge. Granted, it's a parent's job in those pre-Kindergarten years to teach the child, but few parents are well-equipped, much less capable, of teaching their children something as advanced as 4 languages (or whatever equally as technical).
If it has been proven that children are capable of learning these things, why is society not following through?
Or is it just modern day teaching methods? Or genetics (it has been shown that children can learn languages better at a younger age... my knowledge is imperfect as to whether it would extend to mathematics and such)? Think of the advances are society might be capable of undertaking is the thresholds of child learning ability are pushed. It almost awes me to think of children learning Riemann Sums and antidifferentiation at age 6 instead of 18. That would be a true picture of the future.
Hmm, sort of strayed from the point at hand... but, what the hell :)
I recently read that in Medieval times, it was quite common for children of nobles to learn up to 4 languages by age 6. An impressive feat, to say the least. Now though, children don't even enter school until... age 6 is it? Why is that? Obviously our genetics haven't changed in a mere 800 years so that children are less able to assimilate knowledge. Granted, it's a parent's job in those pre-Kindergarten years to teach the child, but few parents are well-equipped, much less capable, of teaching their children something as advanced as 4 languages (or whatever equally as technical).
If it has been proven that children are capable of learning these things, why is society not following through?
Or is it just modern day teaching methods? Or genetics (it has been shown that children can learn languages better at a younger age... my knowledge is imperfect as to whether it would extend to mathematics and such)? Think of the advances are society might be capable of undertaking is the thresholds of child learning ability are pushed. It almost awes me to think of children learning Riemann Sums and antidifferentiation at age 6 instead of 18. That would be a true picture of the future.
Hmm, sort of strayed from the point at hand... but, what the hell :)
--Mith
I would rather be ashes than dust! I would rather that my spark should burn out in a brilliant blaze than it should be stifled by dry rot. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time.
Jack London
I would rather be ashes than dust! I would rather that my spark should burn out in a brilliant blaze than it should be stifled by dry rot. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet. The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time.
Jack London