ChrisWebb Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6264 days ago 181 posts - 190 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Korean
| Message 385 of 430 08 May 2008 at 4:36am | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
Quote:
If looking for evidences, even consensus between experts, is a bad thing. What we are talking about? Religious faith?
|
|
|
To be honest I think it's you who has the religious faith here, it's perfectly reasonable to reach a conclusion based on personal experiences where those experiences do not conflict with the other evidence available. The thread has a lot of testimony from people whose experiences say you are wrong, you offer no evidence to contradict their conclusions, instead preferring to demand ever more vigorous proof from those you disagree with in place of actually making any real case yourself. |
|
|
What's the 'other experience available'?
I am wrong... about what?
What are 'their conclusions'?
What you are taking about?
ChrisWebb wrote:
Can we say that the existence of best methods is proven? Apparently not but then you offer nothing of the sort for your view either. |
|
|
I am saying that there is not consensus about best methods. We only have input+output+time.
You say we don't have proofs about best methods. You agree with me and you don't give us anything.
Then you say I am wrong :-)
I am wrong about...what?
ChrisWebb wrote:
Conversely we can in fact see that it's entirely rational to believe there is variation in the effectiveness of different methods, that belief is based on various personal testimony that you may not consider conclusive but which is still weightier evidence than anything you yourself offer. |
|
|
What do I offer and what do you offer?
ChrisWebb wrote:
At best all this demand for scientific evidence from others could ever possibly get you would be to say it's unreasonable to assume your opponents are correct but that would be a long way from making the assumption we are incorrect a rational conclusion. As it goes it doesnt even get you that far because inference to the best explanation of what we do have makes it rational to assume variation amongst methods rather than otherwise.
|
|
|
I gave you some point withs evidences: spaced repetition, mnemonics, graded input, some grammar...Some meat to talk about.
You give us...I don't know....
What are you talking about? About learning languages? About religion? About politics? About soccer? About Korean?
Yet again, maybe you are talking about sex between angels...
|
|
|
Obfuscation cant save a weak case my friend.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
ChrisWebb Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6264 days ago 181 posts - 190 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Korean
| Message 386 of 430 08 May 2008 at 4:41am | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
I will give you something more and more concrete about some specific methods. When we are talking about best methods, the first question is:
Compared to what?
So here we go:
What's better?
1-Distributed practice (spaced repetition) or over learning.
2-Rigid distributed learning (SRS or manual) or informal distributed learning.
3-Mnemonics or rote repetition or learning by context.
4-Graded input or raw input.
5-learning grammar explicitly or implicitly
6-Error correction or non-error correction (speaking and writing)
7-Output from the very beginning or later (after some silent period?
8-Passive listening or not passive listening at all.
What evidences do we have? Consensus between experts? Trials? Nothing?
These points are something concrete. We can talk about something useful. We have some meat...
|
|
|
Why would anyone be fool enough to allow you to shift the burden of proof from your own shoulders to theirs? It's your thread, you have the contentious view so please feel free to make your case, this should be good as you have set the evidential bar so high at this point and cannot really dodge your own demands without the appearance of utter and complete hypocrisy.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
slucido Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Spain https://goo.gl/126Yv Joined 6676 days ago 1296 posts - 1781 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan* Studies: English
| Message 387 of 430 08 May 2008 at 4:42am | IP Logged |
ChrisWebb wrote:
Obfuscation cant save a weak case my friend. |
|
|
Obfuscation about what?
What weak case?
What are you talking about? About agriculture?
Please read my previous email and write about something concrete and useful.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
slucido Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Spain https://goo.gl/126Yv Joined 6676 days ago 1296 posts - 1781 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Spanish*, Catalan* Studies: English
| Message 388 of 430 08 May 2008 at 4:50am | IP Logged |
ChrisWebb wrote:
Why would anyone be fool enough to allow you to shift the burden of proof from your own shoulders to theirs? It's your thread, you have the contentious view so please feel free to make your case, this should be good as you have set the evidential bar so high at this point and cannot really dodge your own demands without the appearance of utter and complete hypocrisy. |
|
|
This is not 'my thread'.:-))
This thread is administrator's thread
I can understand that you are scared.
I will give more meat.
I think there is MORE objective evidence in favor of:
1-Distributed practice.
2-Mnemonics at the very beginning.
2-Non-error correction (speaking and writing)
4-Output from the very beginning.
5-Adding passive listening when you can not do active listening or study.
But I am not sure if these points overcome SUBJECTIVE feelings...
1 person has voted this message useful
|
ChrisWebb Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6264 days ago 181 posts - 190 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Korean
| Message 389 of 430 08 May 2008 at 4:54am | IP Logged |
slucido wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
Why would anyone be fool enough to allow you to shift the burden of proof from your own shoulders to theirs? It's your thread, you have the contentious view so please feel free to make your case, this should be good as you have set the evidential bar so high at this point and cannot really dodge your own demands without the appearance of utter and complete hypocrisy. |
|
|
This is not 'my thread'.:-))
This thread is administrator's thread
I can understand that you are scared.
I will give more meat.
I think there is MORE objective evidence in favor of:
1-Distributed practice.
2-Mnemonics at the very beginning.
2-Non-error correction (speaking and writing)
4-Output from the very beginning.
5-Adding passive listening when you can not do active listening or study.
But I am not sure if these points overcome SUBJECTIVE feelings...
|
|
|
You were the thread starter.
No one is scared ( though I will grant that your logic errors are indeed scary ).
This is my last post in reply to you.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
CaitO'Ceallaigh Triglot Senior Member United States katiekelly.wordpress Joined 6858 days ago 795 posts - 829 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, Russian Studies: Czech, German
| Message 390 of 430 08 May 2008 at 6:28pm | IP Logged |
I would like someone to answer this question, because no one has.
If there "is a best method", what is it? How have you come to that conclusion?
Everyone says Slucido is wrong, that there is a a "best method," but no one can say what it is. Free icecream to whomever gets it right.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Serpent Octoglot Senior Member Russian Federation serpent-849.livejour Joined 6598 days ago 9753 posts - 15779 votes 4 sounds Speaks: Russian*, English, FinnishC1, Latin, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese Studies: Danish, Romanian, Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Croatian, Slovenian, Catalan, Czech, Galician, Dutch, Swedish
| Message 391 of 430 08 May 2008 at 7:28pm | IP Logged |
No one denies it that there's no single best method, but that doesn't mean that sensible methods (that involve input+output+time) are equally effective.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
reineke Senior Member United States https://learnalangua Joined 6448 days ago 851 posts - 1008 votes Studies: German
| Message 392 of 430 08 May 2008 at 7:45pm | IP Logged |
CaitO'Ceallaigh wrote:
I would like someone to answer this question, because no one has.
If there "is a best method", what is it? How have you come to that conclusion?
Everyone says Slucido is wrong, that there is a a "best method," but no one can say what it is. Free icecream to whomever gets it right. |
|
|
You are making two claims that are wrong. One is absolutely right :) Several people tried to explain regarding the "best method", I am not aware that anyone claimed there was one - except slucido himself. Your need to identify or rather deny the existence of the best method is a philosophical conundrum that obscures the real truth. Chris made it crystal clear, I prefer the metaphores about butchering whales. Here's another example:
From Summa Theologica: Beings in the world have characteristics to varying degrees. Some are more or less good, true, noble, and so forth. Such gradations are all measured in relation to a maximum, however. Thus, there must be something best, truest, noblest, and so on.
I will spare you the rest, you should be able to see where it's going. While theologians are breaking their heads with the absolute, it should not be difficult to understand that some things may be good/better/ and best and that this "best" very often means simply "very good".
A simple answer is that there is no single practical best thing unless you're into philosophy and that the best of something is in reality often a combination of many (good) things. This is especially true for methods, since many target a single skill or a specific situation.
Slucido needs to learn a few things, adjective comparison included but that's the least of his troubles. He needs to understand cause and effect, basic logic and the difference between wasting time and "letting it fly".
Edited by reineke on 08 May 2008 at 8:09pm
1 person has voted this message useful
|