5 things

[capri0mni]

One: Thought which came to me, this evening --

What it means to be Human: to Ascribe Meaning to Everything Else (whether we get it right or not is immaterial).

Two: The English noun, "Sweet," has meant both 'an edible high in sugar' and 'a beloved person' for about an equal amount of time (since circa 1300, C.E.)... I think that's rather ... sweet.

Three: Dragon.

Four: Caught a YouTube video the other night, where some professor dude was explaining about dyscalculia by comparing it to dyslexia... And he said that dyslexia really had nothing to with how the eye scans across the page, but its just that children with it have trouble understanding the proper connection between sounds and letters.

I'm sorry, but (no, correction - not sorry) -- I make a very strong Vexation Face at anyone who discounts and/or tries to explain away reports of people's own experiences in their own words.

My philosophy teacher in college had dyslexia, and so, when we handed in a typed paper for grading, it had to be in a font with serifs. The way she explained it to us (paraphrased, if I recall correctly) was that the arrangement of serifs in relation to each other in a word gave her eyes something to focus on, so she could scan a line of text without the letters going in and out of focus.

That doesn't sound anything like an incomprehension of phonics to me -- especially since she could read handwriting just fine (or with much less trouble).

So naturally, I have my doubts about how he tells us to cure dyscalculia, too...

Five: And the opposite of vexation comes in the form of this post, from last month -- it makes me very, very happy: Choosing lessons.

Comments

[raze]

#4 annoys me because it is a massive oversimplification and trivializes symptoms that people with DRD experience. While proven to be related to phonics (the earliest stages of reading require an ability to associate symbol and sound, and this has proven difficult in individuals with DRD), it's also and perhaps more importantly a cognitive inability to properly recognize and interpret symbolic language. My cousin has severe DRD and in addition to having a huge amount of difficulty interpreting letters and distinguishing their orientation, she self-describes her experience as often only perceiving part of the word or letter because of how she tracks, visually. Basically: I want to punch that guy a little.

[capri0mni]

Basically: I want to punch that guy a little

Ha! Only a little?! It's people like this that (imnsho) makes "I want a flamethrower for my wheelchair!" such a common meme...

[smw]

Re: four, I am highly suspect of experts in one area commenting on things outside their specialty. Even if there is some factual basis for their statements, the lack of the (inevitably much) larger picture makes whatever they're saying empty and useless. Or plain wrong (not to break in with my own peeve, but: anthropologists commenting on animal behavior, I'm looking at you).

Re: five, <3

[capri0mni]

(Sorry I'm replying to this so late... actually thought I replied while the sun was still over my head)

You know... I think your pet peeve may actually be linked to Number One: that we're each driven to give meaning to everything we see -- and what has meaning for us is constrained by the context of our own limited experiences...

I love the take-away message of Five: You don't "have" to learn every thing, if knowing that thing does not serve you.