Gaming World Forums
General Category => General Talk => Topic started by: Doktormartini on October 28, 2007, 08:05:09 pm
-
This is pretty amazing...apparently a baby has learned to recognize words at 9 months, and at 18 months she was reading them.
http://gigglesugar.com/670138
What are your thoughts on this? Like, should they be trying to get their baby to read at such a young age? Are there advantages/disadvantages? It's just seems like kids keep doing things at younger and younger ages.
-
Wow, if a baby can maybe the scientists will find a monkey that can read and write too, it would be awesome if they did this!
-
Yeah, the earlier the better. Infancy is such a crucial period for learning that a child can absorb so much information. The more you can teach them then the more prepared they'll be for future learning. Plus, it's easier to teach a child when they're younger, and if you instill within them the desire to learn they'll enjoy doing so later on.
-
Wow, that's pretty impressive. He does have a great point. It is kinda funny how we still follow the old tradition of starting school when we're 5 when children are doing more and more at a younger age. For example, the applicants to colleges now are increasingly more competitive. They were raised with better and better technology. It would make sense that they can also start learning at an earlier age.
-
I'm going to have a baby and teach him to do my job at 9 months so I can relax. Child work laws be damned.
-
maybe one day we can have baby scientists
-
I don't know, I think I'll prefer giving my children (should they appear at some point) a normal childhood of fun and games instead of learning about nuclear physics at the age of 3.
-
Why is this listed under humor, and why can't I find anything about it anywhere else?
-
My German teacher said that lots of times kids learn languages better than adults because adults are so focused on just translating shit.
-
I don't know, I think I'll prefer giving my children (should they appear at some point) a normal childhood of fun and games instead of learning about nuclear physics at the age of 3.
but think about how cute it would be
you could give him a little lab coat and glasses
-
Why is this listed under humor, and why can't I find anything about it anywhere else?
Because it's a HOAX duh
-
Because it's a HOAX duh
so... no baby scientists?
man
-
When I was in highschool, they would occasionally try to teach us how to recognize a good source on the internet. I always thought they were dumb lessons, because it's generally pretty simple to determine the quality of info online, but Doktormartini shows me again and again why those lessons were important.
-
Dang I don't see how anyone can see this and not even start to question whether or not it's true.
-
so... no baby scientists?
man
Not really, in fact there's a very serious documentary about this (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118665/), it's about babies that were genetic engineered to become "smart" and they fed them a lot of ritalin
-
I feel ripped off. I used to know Hebrew as a kid but then when I moved to Canada English replaced it and I forgot it all :(
-
I think this could become a great new television series:
"lil' scientists"
-
uh.. my sister could read by that age.
This is WAY OLD SHIT
EDIT: my mum applied the same procedure on me but a little later because she found about it after having me for a while.
The cons is that you become a very intellectual kid from early age, develop a huge amount of imagination, first grades are a breeze but you fail at social interaction because YOU ARE TOO FUCKING AHEAD OF YOUR STANDARIZED TIME
-
I don't know, I think I'll prefer giving my children (should they appear at some point) a normal childhood of fun and games instead of learning about nuclear physics at the age of 3.
Exactly. I dislike how people are rushing life in order to "stay competitive." Relax a bit, life shouldn't be only about work. Let the kid be a kid.
-
Yeah, the earlier the better. Infancy is such a crucial period for learning that a child can absorb so much information. The more you can teach them then the more prepared they'll be for future learning. Plus, it's easier to teach a child when they're younger, and if you instill within them the desire to learn they'll enjoy doing so later on.
jam packing your kid full of information isn't always the best, kids need time to think about things and develop an imagination else they'll just spout out what they were told when they grow up!
also: autism!
-
Read Related: baby humor George Bush Video Humor
-
uh.. my sister could read by that age.
This is WAY OLD SHIT
EDIT: my mum applied the same procedure on me but a little later because she found about it after having me for a while.
The cons is that you become a very intellectual kid from early age, develop a huge amount of imagination, first grades are a breeze but you fail at social interaction because YOU ARE TOO FUCKING AHEAD OF YOUR STANDARIZED TIME
This. My parents did this with me, I could read full books at age 2, and I went through the first few grades of school easily, but social interaction was awkward because I felt like I was on a different mental level than kids my age. Also ended up becoming a lot lazier later on in school.
-
(Dubious source, ho!?!?)
Intriguing, but this seems an entirely logical means of introducing your child to language and perhaps one not entirely novel if not for lack of adoption in formalized education. It makes less sense to attempt to teach a child to read by simply showing them words themselves, devoid of context and meaning, as they might appear in a text book. Still, it is interesting to see how early a child may be able to internalize such things.
Also, it's nice to see how many baby geniuses we have floating about the internet. I had no idea it was so common to be reading (and comprehending... that's pretty important too.) before the age of three. I wonder if there are any of us who can recall reading through War and Peace while safely tucked away in our mother's wombs. (I, for one, found it shallow and pedantic)
-
This isn't something new. I was reading at a young age like that, and so was a friend of mine. We totally ruled Kindergarden with our impressive reading abilities.
-
I learned to talk and walk before age 1, I think I was 10 months. Most of the people in my family were like that too. My little sister skipped crawling and was way on her way of walking at like the end of 8 months.
All of us were reading by age 2 or less too. Reading at 9 months is kinda ridiculous but at 18 months it's not impossible.
-
i didn't learn to read until summer between kindergarten and first grade
does this mean im dumb
-
well talking and walking is generally relative to how much interaction the infant gets and how much motivation he/she gets to walk as well.
I come from a pretty large family so there was always the interaction. Plus, I guess seeing so many people walking around the house... We all were like "I want to do this shit too".
I had a lot of people helping learn to read too.
-
my brother started reading when he was 18 months as well... :O
he was a pretty amazing baby, so i hear. he could say all his colors (including ones like aqua, fuschia, mauve, etc...) by the time he was 12 months old. he could do all the basic math operations by 3 years old (me too :D​). he showed that he could read simple words when he was 2. he was in the mall with my grandma and he was in a stroller, and he pointed at a sign nearby and he read out loud "watch your step", just as it was on the sign.
so it only makes sense that he's a math professor at michigan state now.
get 'em started early!
-
Actually learning to read before the age of 6 or 7 doesn't provide a statistically significant edge to students later on in life (as opposed to kids who learned to read around 6 or 7).
-
Man, I can't get Autumn to sit down long enough to even THINK of looking at a book let alone actually read one. I've tried to do exercises and stuff like that to teach her letter and numbers and, at this point, she'll only count to three and that's only if she feels like it.
Just because a child can't read at the age of two (I didn't start reading until I got in to school) doesn't mean they are, in any way, smarter or dumber than other children. Kids are all different and, as such, learn differently.
-
I started walking at 8 or 9 months, yet I couldn't speak in full sentences until I was 3. I also learned how to read during 1st grade (6 years old), and by the end of the year I was one of the best readers. Also, in first grade I was like 8 chapters ahead of everyone else in the math book; the teacher would teach a section of the book I had done like 2 months before while I worked alone at my desk.
Talking and reading do not correlate (at least in my case) to intelligence (I am one of the smartest kids in my grade [rank ][/rank]).
-
Man what
I thought babies didn't even recognize their parents until they're a year old
-
Man what
I thought babies didn't even recognize their parents until they're a year old
then how do you explain "MAMA" and "PAPA"?
the first thing they wind up seeing is generally their parents so yeah
-
I remember there is a period of time though
maybe it's only like 3 weeks or something :/
-
no child's education is complete without Safari Goku's multivolume treatise on philosophy and it's so many volumes you better Get Them Started Now!!!
-
This. My parents did this with me, I could read full books at age 2, and I went through the first few grades of school easily, but social interaction was awkward because I felt like I was on a different mental level than kids my age. Also ended up becoming a lot lazier later on in school.
wow wtf you are me.
-
I learned to read sooner than most other kids. English was the first language I started to learn besides my native language, and I started at around the age of four, by playing Leisure Suit Larry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leisure_Suit_Larry_in_the_Land_of_the_Lounge_Lizards). Granted, the things I had to type in were along the lines of "open door", "talk to girl" and "drink whiskey", but at some point I had memorized all of the game's dialogue boxes, so I guess that was a big help, since I made my parents constantly explain to me what they all meant. I can't remember a single time I seriously tried to study English in school, anyway.
-
I remeber teaching my little brother to read 2 years before he actually should learn it. But I don't think it's needed to teach a child to read at that age. I mean, what is the goal for that?
-
puberty killed me i knew my alphabet by like 19months, how to do some simple addition by 3 and i was the 4th highest marked CCAT (mandatory govt test in Canada) in my Grade 3 year. so i was in special "advanced" courses from gr4 to gr6 then halfway through gr7 i went all lazy and got kicked out, now i can barly do math for my life so im just abandoning it and hoping i can graduate by doing my math @ night school or supplementary exam
-
so... no baby scientists?
man
If babies could read, there would be baby philosophers before baby scientists.
One of them would probably post here showing how he's finally "figured it out" and how he has a plan for the perfect religion.
-
I learned to read sooner than most other kids. English was the first language I started to learn besides my native language, and I started at around the age of four, by playing Leisure Suit Larry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leisure_Suit_Larry_in_the_Land_of_the_Lounge_Lizards). Granted, the things I had to type in were along the lines of "open door", "talk to girl" and "drink whiskey", but at some point I had memorized all of the game's dialogue boxes, so I guess that was a big help, since I made my parents constantly explain to me what they all meant. I can't remember a single time I seriously tried to study English in school, anyway.
Leisure Suit Larry. Haha, that's one hell of a game for a four-year-old to play. (I didn't get a chance to play it until I was...seven, I think.)
Anyways I don't know about reading babies. My Mom tells me that I could "read" as soon as I learned how to string together sentences and understood what "reading" meant, but she noted that I only recognized symbols I'd been told the meaning of. Like I could tell what a logo of a familiar corporation said, but I'd hold fast to my opinion even if the letters were switched around, and God forbid if someone changed the font I'd be lost. But well, I suppose reading is just an extension of that ability to recognize symbols so it's not that implausible. My mom taught me to read in the two weeks before my first year at primary school anyway.
-
I could read and write many english and greek words when I was 2, only capitals though, I always seemed to dislike lwer-case letters for some reason. No-one really FORCED me to, I just saw them a lot around me and decided they were a fun thing to get into
boy was I fucking wrong