|
|
|
|
|
|
by philliphaydon
4854 days ago
|
|
|
Maybe generalizing like that is bad. Take English for example: In school we used to analyze poems from World War 1 / 2, and we had to explain why the poet used this word, that sentence, this style, etc. The truth is, there's no English Answer. The person wrote what he felt, what he smelt, saw, heard, etc. He felt that those words and sentences best described the what he wanted to say. Yet we butcher these poems on speculation and assumptions. We don't learn anything from this in my opinion. The entire process of analyzing books/poems/movies in English class is silly. With math we are forced to learn how to measure the volume of a triangle... Sure there may be some time in life where you might put this to use, but MOST people would never need to know this type of math, we need to instill general maths but we need to de-emphasize math and allow kids to focus on things they are interested in and allow them to be creative and learn to their full potential, if that means they want to go learn advanced math! By all means let them! |
|
|
I have conversations with people (adults) who clearly never had to do these things (or any other similar study of the written word). It's like having a conversation with a child; they miss puns, subtext, irony, sarcasm, struggle to consider more than one conflicting opinion at a time, struggle to interpret beyond the purely literal and struggle to communicate their own thoughts to others. An inability to communicate beyond such a low level is crippling.