The Institute is a non-profit, educational institution for the public promotion of the ideas and concepts put forth within the context of the Sanctuary Project. This forum is to discuss the structure of the Institute, requirements and the teach/learn and learn/teach systems.
- Posts: 360
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:19 pm
The Overprotected Kid
PeacefulMe wrote:I don't how to accurately describe what education has become in this day and age. It can be downright scary. Kids are not allowed to think on their own. I'm not sure how many of you are familiar with the Common Core Standards, but they don't allow kids to find their interests or passions in a public education setting. It's basically the government educating them to be little machines.
: A preoccupation with safety has stripped childhood of independence, risk taking, and discovery—without making it safer. A new kind of playground points to a better solution.
In 2011, she published her results in a paper called “Children’s Risky Play From an Evolutionary Perspective: The Anti-Phobic Effects of Thrilling Experiences.” Children, she concluded, have a sensory need to taste danger and excitement; this doesn’t mean that what they do has to actually be dangerous, only that they feel they are taking a great risk. That scares them, but then they overcome the fear. In the paper, Sandseter identifies six kinds of risky play: (1) Exploring heights, or getting the “bird’s perspective,” as she calls it—“high enough to evoke the sensation of fear.” (2) Handling dangerous tools—using sharp scissors or knives, or heavy hammers that at first seem unmanageable but that kids learn to master. (3) Being near dangerous elements—playing near vast bodies of water, or near a fire, so kids are aware that there is danger nearby. (4) Rough-and-tumble play—wrestling, play-fighting—so kids learn to negotiate aggression and cooperation. (5) Speed—cycling or skiing at a pace that feels too fast. (6) Exploring on one’s own.
This last one Sandseter describes as “the most important for the children.” She told me, “When they are left alone and can take full responsibility for their actions, and the consequences of their decisions, it’s a thrilling experience.”
To gauge the effects of losing these experiences, Sandseter turns to evolutionary psychology. Children are born with the instinct to take risks in play, because historically, learning to negotiate risk has been crucial to survival; in another era, they would have had to learn to run from some danger, defend themselves from others, be independent. Even today, growing up is a process of managing fears and learning to arrive at sound decisions. By engaging in risky play, children are effectively subjecting themselves to a form of exposure therapy, in which they force themselves to do the thing they’re afraid of in order to overcome their fear. But if they never go through that process, the fear can turn into a phobia. Paradoxically, Sandseter writes, “our fear of children being harmed,” mostly in minor ways, “may result in more fearful children and increased levels of psychopathology.” She cites a study showing that children who injured themselves falling from heights when they were between 5 and 9 years old are less likely to be afraid of heights at age 18. “Risky play with great heights will provide a desensitizing or habituating experience,” she writes.We might accept a few more phobias in our children in exchange for fewer injuries. But the final irony is that our close attention to safety has not in fact made a tremendous difference in the number of accidents children have.
This article reminded me on the supposed playfulness and drive for discovery of the "Little People"/LMs.
"You talk the talk ... do you walk the walk?" Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket
- Legatus Legionis
- Posts: 3640
- Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
- Location: Utah
I went through all those things when I was a kid. I still CLEARLY remember when I got to wondering why grown-ups didn't want you to put your finger in a light bulb socket... after all, it's electricity, so you should just get all charged up! So for the heck of it, I dropped a lead fishing sinker into an empty light bulb socket, with the switch turned on... I tell ya, after the cord exploded in flames before the breaker blew, I developed quite a respect for electricity!
But I've noticed how "scheduled" kids lives are, these days. As a consequence, not only do they have a lot of fear (which tends to result in criminal activity to cover it up), but a strong lack of creativity. From what I've seen, most kids cannot even use basic tools, nor invent a game to play (must be purchased with instructions). Long gone are the days of Calvinball
4 8 15 16 23 42
- Posts: 133
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 11:18 am
daniel wrote: ↑
Sat Apr 19, 2014 12:24 pm
Did you realize that the camera actually caught the image of an LM in that video? Many times, people "look" but do not "see." The LMs are field effects, so you have to look for what I call "convenient distortions" from the background... about 8 minutes in:
Now if you don't see what I see... look closely at the tree in the center, right where the small branch forks off to the left. If you look close enough, you can also see a body and arms behind the tree.
It is ture, it does look strange in the youtube quality. But I think that distortion is the result of bad video compressing. Although...it is curious why the effect would occur exactly that place!? Here is the video in a slightly better quality: http://www.veoh.com/watch/v20962866XngcCeDE
(8m 20s into the video)
There is nothing there, at least I
don't see anything unusual. And I am sure the narrator would have said something if he saw anything when he was pointed directly to the position of a possible field effect.
And that "Grey alien" as deepfsh put it is only the composition of background and tree.
But nonetheless, it is good to know what to look for, if you should expect an encounter or have one by chance.