Forceful logic - Good or bad?

[MoonChild]

Okay folks, picture this. There's a really crappy public school a kid is forced into attending. Now, because said child's parents are afraid of losing any reputation they may have gained, they quickly hire a scientict, mathematician, or graduate of a high profile college, in order for their kid to be labelled as the next mini-einstein.

Now, we all know that a child's mind is somewhat like a sponge. This sponge, exactly like a highly advanced circuitry system, is capable of soaking up quite a lot of information at a time.

The child in this hypothetical situation is not of regular mental capacity; he is, as non P-C as you could put it, mentally challenged.

Now in order for the child to be accepted into a very high-profile classy private school, he has to have average, if not super intelligence. Being a mentally incapacitated child, he was subjected to these professionals hired to teach him.

But think of it this way. When there is a pathway blockage to the sponge of a child's mind, is it not even remotely unkind to force said child to learn?

I say, it is. Normally, a child of full mental capacity would be able to somewhat take in ridiculous amounts of information fed to him through Einstein's clones.

However at this rate of a child's mind, would he not be unable to withstand the high amounts of advanced tutoring being fed to him each day?

Think about it in a way of iPod vs. first computer ever.

When feeding information to an iPod, it would be able to take in and accept these peices of information normally, without breaking down. However, doing the same to the first computer ever built, would cause it to crash and become further uncapacitated, to the point of which repair is either nearly impossible or impossible altogether.

Think of this hypothetical situation in the situation of mentally incapacitated children being forced into the title of 'mini-einstein' just so their parents would impress others when their five year old would be accepted into Oxford Uni.

Should a "mental upgrade" by force be considered child abuse, retardation of what was human civilization, or just plain stupidity?

Note that this situation is purely hypothetical, from the back of my mind.

[Yakuza]

So you're saying like parents should be held responsible for their child having a mental breakdown? For living vicariously through their children?

Parents really do love living vicariously through their children. It's the reason that a lot of kids play sports too. But there is a trade-off point to... too many stimuli. Sometimes when you present a lot of different factors into a kids environment, it sparks an interest. Sometimes mentally incapacitated children can be savants like that. They can be really good at one thing they do, but they are inept in everything else.

Ansel Adams, probably the greatest landscape photographer to ever live and die, had a severe case of ADD. Played the piano for a lot of his life and then he just couldnt focus on it anymore. So his parents gave him a camera to entertain himself. He turned out to be bloody amazing.

It's just a risk.

[MoonChild]

See though, the thing is, if you over-exert a slow computer, it could crash so badly that repair would be useless. The same is of a child of mental capacity impairment who, when showing signs of bad reputation for his parents (ie. cheapest school ever) is forced to take in so much that his already full-to-the-brim brain melts down. <_<

[Yakuza]

But one key characteristic is the rebounding ability of children. When a computer crashes, you just get a new one or you take it around just to hear it's hopeless and then you put it down.

I will give you that if you over work a child, they could actually lose their minds and they do go beyond repair. Especially when the parent is trying to live vicariously through their child. This could stem back to a never-ending chain of parent living up to parent. My mom loved to show my sister off to her mom just to prove to her that she could raise a child. Never me though, and I never really got into trouble :/

But I'm not sure how the school thing fits in... like other people go "your kid goes to THAT school?" and the parent gets all mad and then loads all these personal tutors on the kid?

[MoonChild]

The parents want to send the kid to a school for mimi-geniuses. Due to the kid's mental incapacity they need to hammer knowledge into his brain.

[Gran Gran]

Well, having minimal knowledge over brain function...

Some brains just don't work right. While it is true that a child's brain absorbs knowledge of any kind like a sponge, this capacity decreases from the 3 year on, too. So any brain stuffing needs to be done when you don't even know there is a deficit.

I don't see any success in the plan you proposed. While I don't think the brain will melt down, the child is likely to suffer from the effects. With that heavy weight tutoring, *I* would expect the child to do ok in a regular school - ok, not stellar, but gifted school....I have serious doubts.

[MoonChild]

That was my point.

[travellingfay]

I...I don't even know where to begin.

Okay, first - you don't actually mean "forceful logic", do you? You mean "forced learning". Right?

Now, we all know that a child's mind is somewhat like a sponge.

Despite the fact that this metaphor is much-used, a child's mind is, in fact, remarkably UNlike a sponge. However, the human brain is at its most flexible and capable during those early years, when neural pathways are still being formed, and before braincells have started to die off. So, yes: humans are better at learning things when they are young. That's what you meant, right?

This sponge, exactly like a highly advanced circuitry system, is capable of soaking up quite a lot of information at a time.

...I fear that I am swiftly turning into a mean witch here, but - PICK ONE! Is it a sponge, or is it a highly advanced circuitry system? Because, I must inform you, a sponge is remarkable for NOT being exactly - or indeed moderately - like a highly advanced circuitry system. Your metaphor is not only mixed, but also laced with crack.

As I understand it, your premise is as follows: hypothetical parents try to cram too much data into the brain of their idiot offspring, and thus make their child's inadequate little brain go boom.

But...a child's brain is not an iPod, a Commodor 64 or a blank page. It is a complex system, and the way that it functions varies from individual to individual. Some children learn some kinds of information and skills very quickly and easily; those same children generally have other areas in which they find it more difficult to learn. Very few are all-round prodigies. The world is not divided into 'smart kids' and 'thick kids'. It's a heck of a lot more complicated than tht.

Now your hypothetical child has learning difficulties. The nature and severity of learning difficulties vary wildly from person to person. In many cases, children can and do progress (albeit more slowly) when the teacher adapts their teaching style to the child's needs, incorporating visual, auditory and kinaesthetic elements into their lesson. It's not a question of employing Stephen Hawkin and Richard Dawkins as private tutors, it's a question of teaching the child in an effective way - perhaps cranking up the kinaesthetic and visual activities, rather than depending upon auditory and abstract learning.

In those cases where a child has severe cognitive difficulties, and genuinely cannot retain learning/make appropriate connections - even in these circumstances, their brains are not going to explode. The teacher may feel like THEIR brain will explode, out of frustration at trying and trying and fruitlessly trying to help the child to learn, but the child's brain is NOT going to go boom.

Yes, they may be bitterly unhappy if their parents are trying to force them to do something that makes no sense to them, but they are not going to blow a fuse. Because they are not iPods or Commodore 64s.

People develop and learn at their own paces. Some people have developmental and cognitive difficulties that DO preclude them advancing academically. Others have developmental and cognitive difficulties that require a teacher to adapt their teaching strategies in order to help them make appropriate links and master skills.

It's incumbent upon the teachers to try everything they can think of to help children to fulfil their potential. And, no, this potential isn't going to be the same for everyone - but that doesn't mean that we should just wash our hands of the kids who have learning problems.

[Consonant***]

It's pretty obvious you have no idea what you're talking about. People aren't robots, they don't "crash". Autistic people can "crash" in a different sense, but they just need to be removed from the offending sensory stimulant for a few minutes and they'll be back to normal. You don't specify what a "mentally challenged" person is, and you clearly don't understand what its effect on the human ability of comprehension might be. And what is Forceful Logic, anyway? Obviously not what you're implying it is.