200 messages over 25 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21 ... 24 25 Next >>
Abazid
Diglot
Newbie
Egypt
Joined 5009 days ago
16 posts - 23 votes
Speaks: Arabic (Egyptian)*, English
Studies: Russian
| Message 161 of 200 26 April 2011 at 6:59am | IP Logged |
Quote:
Too hostile around these parts I think. It would appear that some established members are too defensive and too quick to pounce on anyone they view as 'arriviste'. Almost as if they are petrified of being upstaged by a pesky new-comer.
I have learned from your experiment and conclusions, as I'm sure many others have. |
|
|
Thanks HMS , It isn't mostly about hostility that doesn't appeal to me but rather the fact that when you stay in an environment with people that are completely result-oriented , negative and are seeing the world through tunnel vision , It really cuts down on your creativity & productivity .
Quote:
| If I was new to language learning, I'd be thankful for more experienced members protecting me from snake-oil methods. |
|
|
I agree and I would do the same , But unfortunately in this case , The methods I'm tackling or were going to tackle were completely new territory to almost everyone here as I believe , So your so called advice/protection is based upon nothing but pure presumptuous speculation & your extremely limited view that all learning methods has to take incredible amounts of time & effort for it to go somewhere .
Quote:
But...
if you publically write some 'scientific' nonsense, you cannot expect to be exempt from criticism, even harsh one. |
|
|
Ignorant criticism based on speculation & pure belief based on no science is also non-sense , Once someone raises a supposedly scientific argument , Those who criticize such an argument has to use the same logic to disprove it , Did anyone do so , I don't think so .
Quote:
Teango:
Some interesting statistics on the subject of establishing and fixing connections in the brain. I might just have to browse through the GMS ("Giordano Memorization System") manual you recommended (although unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a bibliography or any footnotes for the experimental data in the copy I found just now). |
|
|
Check page 97 , It has more information in relation to that , In regards of refernces , They seem to be scattered inside the book , But it seems like most of these effects as I've checked the forum to be very true .
Quote:
| I think it's a good strategy to review what you've learned through the Michel Thomas courses over the next few days, and with continued progress, hope it won't be too long before you're able to follow the Russian documentary with ease. |
|
|
I'm always trying to use the material on the go everywhere whenever I'm working so that I'd be able to retain more & more of it , And I'm learning new vocabulary through many means , Mainly daily russian flashcards by email and the like .
Quote:
| How are your plans going for the next experiment - I recall you mentioned trying out photo-reading and syntopical reading? |
|
|
I'm currently completely focused on the GMS system as it seems it would be very very helpful with language learning not including too many more applications , It has about a 60 page about Russian that's to be memorized using the method which contains grammar & vocabulary ,So hopefully it will really come in handy .
Quote:
| major effort of memorization and muscle retraining that takes time. |
|
|
I think that this completely depends on person ability to memorize & retain information through mental associations , So time is a very flexible factor in such case .
Quote:
| I think the reason many people here were very critical is not because they are evil and close-minded but simply because no one ever saw any tangible results, how modest they were. |
|
|
Tangible ?! The whole thing around here is all about trust , Almost every single person in here claims to have a certain level of profieciency with every known language , It'd be ridiculous to ask every single person to prove it , If you don't trust a person coz you believe they aren't honest about what they're doing , Then you're simply wasting your time because nothing is going to be reasonable in anyway on the long run .
As much as a video could say , If you don't trust my current words or call it subjective , If what I've achieved in it doesn't match what is possible in your own beliefs , It's very simple to label it as a lie or that I prepared or made it up..etc, And nothing will ever suffice , As I'm very sure probably some people experienced this around here as well , So you could simply believe me or ignore me , And in both cases it's fine by me .
Finally , This is my "Journal" thread as I've clearly mentioned in my first post , It's not a debate, It's not a democracy so that every single person would lead it in the direction he thinks it should , It's primarily about me and what I choose to experiment with & share .
Quote:
| To call something the Ultimate Accelerated Learning Experiment and then produce a ton of discussion but not a single word of Russian is really asking for trouble. I think most people here are open to new ideas. But this one seemed doomed from the beginning because the premise for most people was so preposterous. I'm very supportive of this experiment, but I think it could have been handled much better. |
|
|
Preposterous ? When I called it so and mentioned such techniques , It was MEANT to defy common sense because 90 % of people follow the very slow method of language learning through rote memorization and the like , I didn't ask them to believe what I did , But it seems that my helpful attitude said otherwise .
And unfortunately I'm not a show-off .
abazid wrote:
The quantum holographic theory of the universe and the principles of
Resonance & Non-locality pretty much explains how all of these phenomena occur ,
Glossolalia or Xenoglossia are also possible through the scientific theories of the
Morphogenetic Universe that relates to collective memory and how any species have access to it all the time. |
|
|
It's amusing how it seems almost no body understands pretty much anything of what he calls non-sense , And can't disprove why it is, Which I believe is non-sense myself
In regards to Glossalia :
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossolalia
Learned behavior
The material explanation arrived at by a number of studies is that glossolalia is "learned behavior".[17][21] What is taught is the ability to produce language-like speech. This is only a partial explanation, but it is a part that has withstood much testing. It is possible to train novices to produce glossolalic speech. One experiment with 60 undergraduates found that 20% succeeded after merely listening to a 60-second sample, and 70% succeeded after training:
Our findings that glossolalia can be easily learned through direct instruction, along with demonstrations that tongue speakers can initiate and terminate glossolalia upon request and can exhibit glossolalia in the absence of any indexes of trance[…] support the hypothesis that glossolalia utterances are goal-directed actions rather than involuntary happenings.[22]
That glossolalia can be learned is also seen in the traces left behind by teachers. An investigation by the Lutheran Medical Center in Brooklyn showed that the influence of a particular leader can shape a group's glossolalia: where certain prominent glossolalists had visited, whole groups of glossolalists would speak in his style of speech.[23] |
|
|
Now that's really impossible eh .
What about Morphogenetic Universe & learning new skills/patterns of information :
Quote:
http://www.co-intelligence.org/P-moreonmorphgnicflds.html
More on Morphogenetic Fields
Experiment 1: In the 1920s Harvard University psychologist William McDougall did experiments for 15 years in which rats learned to escape from a tank. The first generation of rats averaged 200 mistakes before they learned the right way out; the last generation 20 mistakes. McDougall concluded that, contrary to accepted genetic science, such acquired knowledge could be inherited.
Experiment 2: In later efforts to duplicate McDougall's experiments in Australia, similar rats made fewer mistakes right from the start. Later generations of rats did better even when they were not descendents of the earlier rats. This wasn't genetics at work. It was something else. Nobody tested it further.
"Experiment" 3: In the 1920s in Southampton, England, a bird called the blue tit discovered it could tear the tops of milk bottles on doorsteps and drink the cream. Soon this skill showed up in blue tits over a hundred miles away, which is odd in that they seldom fly further than 15 miles. Amateur bird-watchers caught on and traced the expansion of the habit. It spread faster and faster until by 1947 it was universal throughout Britain. In a parallel development, the habit had spread to blue tits in Holland, Sweden and Denmark. German occupation cut off milk deliveries in Holland for eight years -- five years longer than the life of a blue tit. Then, in 1948 the milk started to be delivered. Within months blue tits all over Holland were drinking cream, a habit that had taken decades to take hold before the war. Where did they get this knowledge?
Experiment 4: In the early sixties psychiatrists Dr. Milan Ryzl of Prague and Dr. Vladimir L. Raikov of Moscow hypnotized subjects into believing they were living incarnations of historical personages. Such subjects would develop talents associated with their alter egos. A subject told she was the artist Raphael took only a month to develop drawing skills up to the standard of a good graphic designer.
Experiment 5: In 1983 Sheldrake showed two difficult-to-discern patterns to a group of test subjects to establish a base line for how easily the hidden picture in each could be recognized. Next he showed 2 million viewers of British TV what one of the hidden pictures was. He then tested thousands of people all over the world. By significant percentages, they recognized the image shown on television; the percentage recognizing the control picture didn't change.
Experiment 6: Psychologist Dr. Arden Mahlberg of Madison, Wisconsin, created a variation of Morse Code that should have been no harder to learn than the standard variety. Subjects learned the real code much faster than his invented one, not knowing which was which.
Experiment 7: Gary Schwartz, Yale professor of psychology, selected 24 common 3-letter words in Hebrew and 24 rare ones, all from the Old Testament, all in Hebrew script. For each word, he created a scrambled version (as, in English, one might do by scrambling "dog" to spell "odg"). Then he rearranged all 96 3-letter Hebrew words (half real, half fake) in a random order and showed them, one at a time, to subjects who didn't know Hebrew. The subjects were just told these were Hebrew words and were asked to guess the meaning of the word in English by writing down the first English word that came into their head. After guessing each word, they were asked to estimate, on a zero-to-four scale, how confident they felt in their guess. Professor Schwartz then discounted all subjects who got any guesses rights (since that meant they may have known some Hebrew). Then he analyzed the confidence ratings from subjects who'd gotten every answer wrong. Not only was the confidence significantly higher with the real words than with the false words (regardless of subjects, words, or experiments), but the common words got higher confidence scores than the rarer words. Finally Schwartz repeated the experiment telling the subjects that half the words were real and half were false and asked them to guess which was which; the results of that were purely random. The patterns the subjects had recognized unconsciously, they could not recognize consciously.
What is going on here?
Sheldrake has hypothesized a field of morphic ("pattern-related") resonance in which patterns of knowledge, structure or behavior of a certain kind of thing (whether a salt crystal or a human mind) become increasingly embedded as a "habit," an ingrained pattern of information which influences and is accessible to other members of that category of thing. In commenting on the rat experiments, Sheldrake said: "If rats are taught a new trick in Manchester, then rats of the same breed all over the world should show a tendency to learn the same trick more rapidly, even in the absence of any known type of physical connection or communication. The greater the number of rats that learn it, the easier it should become for their successors."
A minority of biologists have been suggesting the possibility of morphogenetic (form-generating) fields for decades. Sheldrake's unique contribution has been to create a testable hypothesis regarding such fields. Despite the fact that it seems to violate all broadly-accepted principles of science, the experimental evidence is rapidly mounting that, indeed, something of this kind is at work.
Sheldrake has ventured some guesses as to the relationship between morphogenetic fields and our individual memory and intelligence. He suggests that our brains may not contain memories and knowledge, per se, but may be devices for tuning in to relevant sections of the morphogenetic field for human memory, much as a radio tunes into radio waves. Our own personal memories would naturally be more accessible than those of other people or cultures (since, in morphogenetic resonance, like resonates with like), but theoretically the memories of every human (and other entities?) would be available to anyone capable of tuning in.
Sheldrake further wonders if natural laws are the evolving habits of the physical universe. An increasing number of scientists are believing that, ever since the Big Bang, the contents and processes of the universe have been evolving, and are evolving still. Sheldrake notes that it is an act of incredible faith to believe that all the laws governing the universe are so eternal and immutable that they existed prior to any of the contents of the universe. It is much more "natural" to believe that the readily-observable evolution of life, culture and our own selves are merely manifestations of an evolutionary tendency deeply embedded in the very nature of things.
In short: We are all learning. Not just we people -- but we, everything in the universe. And our learning is shared. That's the bottom line of Rupert Sheldrake's work.
We can't get much more co-intelligent than that.
|
|
|
Quote:
But Abazid spouts nonsense about holographic universes and morphogenetic whatevers and how you can brainwash a language into your head in 61 hours
If the universe is holographic, we're all still living in that same universe. Other learners haven't mastered a language in 61 hours. Nothing in his study program seemed specially designed to take advantage of that fact of a holographic universe, so why would his simple knowledge of that fact allow him to accelerate his learning? ? |
|
|
If you've bothered to read my own posts , You'd understand that I didn't spend 61 hours continuously , And also BW & the other theories are completely unrelated , The other methods I intended to tackle had these elements , And I'd be interested in having a wise scientific answer as to why exactly they're non-sense if you're making a lot of sense .
Quote:
| So really all I see out of this is an epic cram session. Nothing more. |
|
|
It is all about that .
Quote:
| I would consider this as publishing results. However author never did that, that's why I consider whole that topic as a waste of my time, as I cannot trust judgement of someone who get some much involved into it, however I'm not denying that author might be satisfied with he's results and that's all what's important for him, however for me this topic is completely useless. |
|
|
Mainly , It's very well-known even before starting this what would exactly result from Michel Thomas training(Watch The Language Master if you haven't) in regards of results as of it's very systematic layered approach and anybody can tell you that , This is why I thought that posting the manual would be very much show the level I believe I've reached as very plausible , Seeing that no one trusts my words even though most know so , I have no reason to prove anything further , Like I said , It's all about trust anyway .
Not including the fact that my own goal clearly was different from what most seems to aspire to .
Quote:
| However as there was no results published I will stick to what I'm doing as I see no reasonable arguments to try any idea if I have pretty good experience with learning languages, so if I know I'm doing something correct I'm not going to try unproven methods. |
|
|
How open-minded is that !
Quote:
And with the turning of another winter's cold into a fragrant bounty of spring, another batch of new members band together to protect each other from the harsh and cynical long-timers of the tribe....
And so it goes... ;) |
|
|
lol , You guys seriously got superiority issues
Edited by Abazid on 26 April 2011 at 7:30am
1 person has voted this message useful
| aerozeplyn
Senior Member
United States
Joined 5140 days ago
141 posts - 202 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: Spanish, Mandarin
| Message 163 of 200 26 April 2011 at 7:49am | IP Logged |
Yaaa, someone mentioned earlier that this thread became very distracting due to the hostility and skepticism. Whether one person was right or wrong, the core message was definitely distracted. However, I have learned a lot from this thread: if you want to share information with people, focus your energy on updating the progress of your current information. Once you put energy into responding to people that are distracting your message, your focus is no longer your message, and your original intent to share information to help others is then lost.
5 persons have voted this message useful
| aerozeplyn
Senior Member
United States
Joined 5140 days ago
141 posts - 202 votes
Speaks: English*
Studies: Spanish, Mandarin
| Message 165 of 200 26 April 2011 at 8:19am | IP Logged |
szastprast wrote:
aerozeplyn wrote:
and your original intent to share information to help others is then lost.
|
|
|
He should have done his brainwashing experiment quitely first, see what happened, then deliver results. Then,
probably, he would have helped himself, and helped the others. |
|
|
i am typically not one to disagree with information, but if the act of posting about an experiment BEFORE you
actually execute it helps motivate you to follow through.... then pre-posting is likely a good motivator :)
1 person has voted this message useful
| leyus
Diglot
Newbie
United Kingdom
Joined 5429 days ago
21 posts - 31 votes
Speaks: Polish*, English
Studies: Spanish
| Message 166 of 200 26 April 2011 at 12:29pm | IP Logged |
rapp wrote:
leyus wrote:
Of course whole that pseudo-science put me off a little bit but I decided to ignore ridiculous theory and some overstatement as I did liked the idea.
|
|
|
Really? What was so intriguing about the idea? Because the pseudo-science is the part that annoyed me the most.
|
|
|
I don't personally consider immersion as a best idea for learning at the very beginning. So the whole idea was interesting. In my opinion Immersion should be mixed with other methods of learning English and at the very beginning translations are actually the best. So I was curious how will that workout for him because it was different approach then one that I'm using. About pseudo-science? Read last three sentences of my post and you will know what I'm thinking about, but I don't let myself judge not a bad idea based on stupid theory, not to mention that if there will be any satisfying results posted I would go for 5 x 12 h sessions instead of what I'm doing now (everyday 15-30 minutes with Anki + busuu + some bilingual texts with audio). As there was no results provided I'm not going to waste my time over it as theory on which it was based was rubbish, so I don't believe that it worked as well as author trying to convince us.
1 person has voted this message useful
| leyus
Diglot
Newbie
United Kingdom
Joined 5429 days ago
21 posts - 31 votes
Speaks: Polish*, English
Studies: Spanish
| Message 167 of 200 26 April 2011 at 12:58pm | IP Logged |
Abazid wrote:
Quote:
| However as there was no results published I will stick to what I'm doing as I see no reasonable arguments to try any idea if I have pretty good experience with learning languages, so if I know I'm doing something correct I'm not going to try unproven methods. |
|
|
How open-minded is that !
|
|
|
Well I consider myself open-minded to whole experiment, I expected good results of cramming session even if I didn't consider going to lack of sleep necessary, also after modification I was willing to try it myself (without part of sleep deprivation). However you didn't published results, and after seeing yours attitude I don't think that any of your words are objective. I anyway gave you more credit then I suppose to by reading topic on which every second page is about telepathy, levitation and other subjects connected with results of DMT overdosing.
After this subject I have two options:
1. Stick to something what worked for me well with English learning. And which other people have done thousand times and published there results.
2. Try something (cramming+immersion at the point where I have 0 knowledge of Spanish) that was published by guy who recommends telepathy and time travelling as a second choice for language learning and he fights like a lion against publishing results of his experiment.
Sorry, if choosing former is being closed-minded, then I guess I just made my mind, because background of whole idea doesn't sound realistic, whole experiment was like example from a book of bad science methodology and results wasn't published.
Edited by leyus on 26 April 2011 at 1:00pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
| hrhenry
Octoglot
Senior Member
United States
languagehopper.blogs
Joined 5122 days ago
1871 posts - 3642 votes
Speaks: English*, SpanishC2, ItalianC2, Norwegian, Catalan, Galician, Turkish, Portuguese
Studies: Polish, Indonesian, Ojibwe
| Message 168 of 200 26 April 2011 at 1:32pm | IP Logged |
leyus wrote:
After this subject I have two options:
1. Stick to something what worked for me well with English learning. And which other people have done thousand times and published there results.
2. Try something (cramming+immersion at the point where I have 0 knowledge of Spanish) that was published by guy who recommends telepathy and time travelling as a second choice for language learning and he fights like a lion against publishing results of his experiment.
|
|
|
Well, in fairness to him, he did sort of publish his results - he said he failed in much of the experiment. But, he still considers it valuable experience and maybe this will be reflected in his continuing studies.
As others have said here, it was probably a good jump-start to learning the language, but I personally don't believe it was brainwashing as he suggests and certainly not revolutionary. The one positive I've seen from it really came after his experiment, and that is that he's continuing on with his studies.
R.
==
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.3594 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|
Language Learning Forum : Learning Techniques, Methods & Strategies
Printable version
