Science Fiction Virtual Reality:  Email




Index

[return to main message page]



kids

Elenore Victoria Garcia <garcie@rpi.edu>

Wed, 04 Sep 1996 13:40 -0400

I was thinking about the fact that I think kids do think the way Ender did. Albeit yes I think he was a product of genetic selection and not all children think that way, however I think some do rationalize things on a much more complex level then adults give them credit for. I remember thinking about childhood bullies the same way Ender did... yea, and who didn't, I know. I'm referring more than anything to the conversations of Valentine and Peter. I know those who write and think slower now than they did when they were children, including myself ( so this may be a bit defensive). Maybe people are just forgetting that they were like this once too. I also think that unless you have company like Ender did, as in Val and Peter, then you won't develope the same way. I think Ender would have been an intelligent yet utterly boring and non ingenuitive if he hadn't had the influences he had in his early life. It's because he was encouraged in intelligent thought that he continued, or so is my belief. I think it's also possible that the situation that Ender was put in didn't allow for childish thoughts. If you ever compare children in the country who work on the farm from the age of three to children in cities with moms who pamper them, the difference in the actions is staggering. Remember the thoughts of Scout in To Kill a Mockingbird? Sure she didn't know lots of technobabble, but she was pretty intelligent for a kid her age. Maybe it's that children can THINK this way, but don't necessarily act or speak in the same manner. Their communication skills aren't always quite up there.

Any takers...

El

--

___

{~._.~} Sometimes you feel like a nut,

( o ) Sometimes you don't!

()~*~()

(_)-(_)

Elenore Garcia..................garcie@rpi.edu

http://rpinfo.its.rpi.edu:80/~garcie/

[return to message index]


Re: kids

Jesse Booth <boothj>

Wed, 04 Sep 1996 12:38 -0400

> I also think that as we grow older we do lose some abilities.

>

> After thinking about it my only conclusion was that as we gain learned =

> abilities, we lose some unlearned.

yeah, i would agree with this. as we get older, the ease of learning certain material becomes harder (e.g., foreign languages). there are particular age ranges in which one learns more readily - something about the sensitive period for learning new material...

Jesse

[return to message index]


Re: kids

Dennis Payne <dulsi@identical.stu.rpi.edu>

Wed, 04 Sep 1996 13:44 -0400

> I remember thinking about childhood bullies the same way Ender did...

Yeah but if you were confronted with them and beat one whould you continue to hit him. I don't know about you but that didn't occur to me. Ender was thinking futher into the future than most kids (and possibly adults). Peter did also although his thoughts were on domination.

> Maybe people are just forgetting that they were like this once too.

Maybe your right but I don't remember thinking too far ahead about the consequences of my actions.

> I think Ender would have been an intelligent yet utterly boring and non

> ingenuitive if he hadn't had the influences he had in his early life.

So to increase ingenuity we give every a bully of a brother, a nice sister, and lock 'em away in loneliness :)

> It's because he was encouraged in intelligent thought that he continued,

> or so is my belief.

[I left this in as explaination for the line above I took out of context.>

Dennis Payne

dulsi@identical.stu.rpi.edu

payned@rpi.edu

[return to message index]


RE: kids

Anthony Mrazik <mrazia@rpi.edu>

Wed, 04 Sep 1996 15:07 -0400

I definitely did not want to imply that I didn't think that kids aren't intelligent or don't have the ability to rationalize in a way that is not familiar to us. I am amazed at some of the stuff that my 2-year old does and says, and my response to my wife is always "where did he learn that?" I also think that as we grow older we do lose some abilities. I have found that when I'm home and get really angry the cats can sense it (this is before any action by me). When Peter was much smaller the same thing would happen: if either of us were angry he would get very upset. After thinking about it my only conclusion was that as we gain learned abilities, we lose some unlearned.

After thinking about it I do think that there was probably some kind of genetic processes occurring at the time. In ch. 2 (p. 24) Graff is talking to Ender and he talks about Ender's parents choosing a girl after Peter and then another boy later.

Tony

[return to message index]


Re: kids

BushBebi <takats2@rpi.edu>

Wed, 4 Sep 1996 23:57:43 -0400

In response to Dennis Payne's comments to Elenore Garcia's comments:

>> Maybe people are just forgetting that they were like this once too.

>Maybe your right but I don't remember thinking too far ahead about the

>consequences of my actions.

I think think that if a child is put into such circumstances, s/he would think as far ahead as needed. From the time I was four years old to seven years old, I attended a school in which I was the only minority. When I think back, I find that my situation closely mirrored Ender's situation--to a lesser extent.

When people bullied me, I made sure that my retaliation "took care of" that person--meaning, s/he would never think about hurting me again. In Ender's game, Graff believed that isolation would keep Ender from becoming tainted by the others and push him to excel. Well, my isolation certainly kept me from thinking like the other children around me... it kept me from learning what a real friend was until I was in college. However, it also forced me to excel so that I at least had a place of isolation as the best... Ender and I were best friends in our isolation.

--Sarah

PS I hope this isn't completely out of context of the thread. I'm just trying to keep up with what's going on...

PSS Sorry for any duplicates of this message...

--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@}~~~)~~~~~ @}~~~)~~~~~ @}~~~)~~~~~ @}~~~)~~~~~ @}~~~)~~~~~

"The soul would have no rainbows if the eyes had no tears."

~Anon.

Sarah TC Takatani

E-mail: takats2@rpi.edu

Professional Work: http://www.lrc.rpi.edu

Homepage: Temporarily off-line for reconstruction

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[return to message index]


Re: kids

Kenneth W. Flynn <flynnk@rpi.edu>

Thu, 05 Sep 1996 23:53 -0400

At 06:44 PM 9/4/96 -0400, Dennis Payne wrote:

>> I remember thinking about childhood bullies the same way Ender did...

>Yeah but if you were confronted with them and beat one whould you continue

>to hit him. I don't know about you but that didn't occur to me. Ender was

>thinking futher into the future than most kids (and possibly adults).

>Peter did also although his thoughts were on domination.

I was hit by bullies a lot. I struck back occassionally. Unfortunately, I was rather punny (still am, actually.)

When I struck, I was by no means as coldly rational as Ender, but I did want to hurt them, hurt them badly enough so they would fear me, and wouldn't pick on me again. I wanted to be left alone. If I hurt one bad enough, they would just go away.

Fortunately, I never hurt anyone, and I learned better. To be above violence (killing is not the answer), or to try to be. Ignore them.

>> Maybe people are just forgetting that they were like this once too.

>Maybe your right but I don't remember thinking too far ahead about the

>consequences of my actions.

I don't think this is a function of intelligence, but personality. People as adults still don't think ahead, except for some. I think Ender just had forethought, which will probably stick with him throughout life.

>> I think Ender would have been an intelligent yet utterly boring and non

>> ingenuitive if he hadn't had the influences he had in his early life.

>So to increase ingenuity we give every a bully of a brother, a nice sister,

>and lock 'em away in loneliness :)

Suffering does build character. It is an unfortunate truth, but suffering teaches one the misery of pain. Empathy is important.

However, we should not torture our kids! Ingenuity is not something we need everyone to have anyone. Some people are, some aren't. We shouldn't force everyone to be.

>> It's because he was encouraged in intelligent thought that he continued,

>> or so is my belief.

>[I left this in as explaination for the line above I took out of context.>

This is clearly true. There must be a place to share ideas.

Anyone see Clueless? My impression was that of an intelligent person stuffed fool of pathetic valley girl notions, and convinced that traditional intelligent thought had no point.

>Dennis Payne

>dulsi@identical.stu.rpi.edu

>payned@rpi.edu

Kenn

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------

Kenn Flynn

flynnk@rpi.edu

http://www.rpi.edu/~flynnk

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------

Welcome to the human race. Nobody controls his own life,... The best you

can do is choose to fill the roles given you by good people, by people who

love you.

--_Ender's Game_ by Orson Scott Card

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------

[return to message index]


Re: kids

Sick Boy <boothj@rpi.edu>

Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:40:24 -0400

On Sep 6, 12:53am, Kenneth W. Flynn wrote:

>

> Anyone see Clueless? My impression was that of an intelligent person

> stuffed fool of pathetic valley girl notions, and convinced that traditional

> intelligent thought had no point.

Clueless rules.

[return to message index]


kids and combat

Mick Doherty <doherm>

Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:00 -0400

SFVR3,

My colleague Greg Ritter at Vorginia Commonwealth recently wrote an artilce in which the first paragraph reminded me of _EG_ ... just thought you might be interested.

Here 'tis:

-----

A friend on the Internet told me this story: as part of the test of a computerized flight simulator, a group of fourteen- year-olds were evaluated against a group of experienced fighter pilots in a simulated combat situation. The fourteen-year-olds outperformed the fighter pilots in almost every respect. Their superior performance was attributed to an ability to interact with the simulation as a game instead of as a representation of an actual combat situation--whereas the fighter pilots showed a professional reluctance to engage the simulated enemies, the kids, raised on Sega and Nintendo video games, were more likely to take risks and, because of this, were more successful.

[return to message index]




© 1996. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. All rights reserved.
Class web site created Fall 1996 by:
Ted Cooper, Brian Mardirosian, Tony Mrazik, and Sarah Takatani.