Little Einstein Project

[Random Queen]

Originally Posted by ∞

I think I can safely say that being stupid is not a choice, there are other factors that shape how intelligent you are, and I'm not talking about just school and who you hang out with.

It's how lazy you can be or how lazy your parents are as well.

[∞]

It's not just a matter of being lazy. That's a massive and false generalisation to say so.

[Random Queen]

Originally Posted by ∞

It's not just a matter of being lazy. That's a massive and false generalisation to say so.

Really?? Because parents need to teach the kid to talk and the kid needs to be willing to learn...

Okay there are those busy parents but those ones that don't teach their kids due to laziness....are idiots.

And as for this project....They are just starting to understand things at 7 months. 10 months is the real age to teach reading to firmarlize the baby with words. As long as they can read when they start school it's fine.

[∞]

I meant things like genetics, or just unhelpful traits of the child, not things that can be changed over time, but ones that are unavoidable but perhaps beatable.

[krexia]

Originally Posted by terra99032

so what do you think, should parents be able to teach these young unknowing, innocent children to read.

Since when is being able to read a bad thing? My dad taught me to read by the time I was 3, and I loved it. I read everything I could get my hands on, and still love getting stuck into a new book. I wish I could've been able to read earlier.

Originally Posted by Random Queen

4) Kids get brain power from the point you start teaching them to the day they kill over and die.

Actually, exposure to new stimulus in very early childhood is vitally important to the developing brain. In early childhood more your brain is more able than at any other point in life to create new connections between neurons, setting up its wiring systems for the future and facilitating all kinds of mental functions. 'Letting kids be themselves' and waiting to see if they like reading when they are older isn't ideal for their development.

[Du Soleil.]

I'm all for it. It's not like you're forcing the child to like books, anyway, because being forced to like something is a non-existent concept in itself. If you don't like something, you don't like something. At least the kids would've experienced it which is more of a good thing than a bad thing. If they're going to be taught how to read or whatever at a young age, it doesn't mean that it will take over their entire lives and remove their identities. I was reading books at the age of three and it didn't take over my life.

[Happy Holocaust]

Who ever says that George W. Bush is a retard is both a retard and stupid, man's probably smarter than you'll ever be.

At any rate, I think this is a pretty cool thing to do. I'm for it. 'Nuff said.

[Du Soleil.]

Holocaust is right. Bush had enough of a brain on him to know how to get fucking loaded off his country.

[terra99032]

Originally Posted by krexia

Since when is being able to read a bad thing? My dad taught me to read by the time I was 3, and I loved it. I read everything I could get my hands on, and still love getting stuck into a new book. I wish I could've been able to read earlier.

Actually, exposure to new stimulus in very early childhood is vitally important to the developing brain. In early childhood more your brain is more able than at any other point in life to create new connections between neurons, setting up its wiring systems for the future and facilitating all kinds of mental functions. 'Letting kids be themselves' and waiting to see if they like reading when they are older isn't ideal for their development.

I didn't say that it was a bad things. all i was trying to say is that kids should be able to have fun. youre only young once.

[Aqua.]

how.../

im amazed.

so you guys DONT want your child to be smart?!

it's ridiculous.

i would do anything i can to make my child smart and intelligent as young as possible.

i wish i could have been exposed to these things when i was a new born..

to me it's a bit like wasting time just seeing when they'll start talking, when you can teach them and do it quicker..they could be more smarter..

of course, they can still get that loving childhood someone mentioned.

but still..

i can't believe someone saying that they DONT want their child to be able to go under this...

and oh hell no, only 168$? that's it? that's like psp go or something! the fuck, im pretty sure it was way more than that...

when i have my children, and im going to start teaching them ass soon as possible.. especially some sort of instrument..

but hell no, to just let them slip by the most important learning times, the time when they'll be able to learn the quickest as possible.. and to let it slip by with them playing outside or watching some stupid ilttle kid show?

oh hell no. u must think im crazy to let such a thing happen.

take advantage of that short time to teach them as much as possible..

[Aqua.]

Originally Posted by terra99032

I didn't say that it was a bad things. all i was trying to say is that kids should be able to have fun. youre only young once.

it's people who think like this who think "ughh school's sucks learning sucks ima go have FUN"

when you can still learn and have fun at the same damn time. try understanding that.

if you teach your kids to have fun in learning, then they'll WANT to learn, and they'll have fun. plus they'll be really smart.

[terra99032]

Originally Posted by Aqua.

it's people who think like this who think "ughh school's sucks learning sucks ima go have FUN"

when you can still learn and have fun at the same damn time. try understanding that.

if you teach your kids to have fun in learning, then they'll WANT to learn, and they'll have fun. plus they'll be really smart.

Now that was uncalled for. i love school and i love learning. i just think that kids need to have a bit of fun.

[Aqua.]

omgod see.

you separate both with the "and"

you can love learning. not love school and like learning or w/e.

they can have fun later as long as they get good grades and are at the top of their class.

[∞]

Originally Posted by terra99032

Now that was uncalled for. i love school and i love learning. i just think that kids need to have a bit of fun.

School exists so that children may learn. Having fun is a side effect of having multiple children of the same age gathered together.

[Seeshinamaru13]

In puritan times children had to memorize and recite numerous three line scripture type verse things as apart of their education, which at that time was pretty much based on religion and the bible, at around the time they were 3. I'm certainly not religious but I found it interesting that they did this when they were so little. I think american society has become very lax on education and the development of their children.

I'm all for this Little Einstein Project thing. Something like this could help your children a lot down the road and also possibly in some way help our educational system.

I could pretty much read by the time I was three ( i could also draw a pretty good horse )... mainly because my parents took the time to actually teach me how...

They also did something very interesting, at bedtime (around 8:00pm) my parents would put me and my sister to bed but they would not force us to go to sleep at that very moment. They would leave a couple of books on our beds for us to read. They were very smart when they did this with us because we would always be happy when it was bedtime and we learned how to read earlier on in life. Not that this has too much relevance but I also ate oatmeal and various other nutritional food products most the time when I was growing up and I didn't really have my first taste of junkfood until I was four... (fruit loops tasted so good in comparison to oatmeal). It wouldn't hurt parents these days to give their children the proper nutrition they need and I'm sure it would help their kids progress more.