The Gift of Language Learning Family “today / strong> We all fully understand that we live in a society increasingly global is our neighbor to the Ecuador, our colleagues in France and the person who teaches our children is, of Sweden! We know as adults how hard it is to learn a new language, after our youth, but we keep reading that this is the perfect time for our own children to start learning a language! serials

Time and Newsweek ran years on the window of time to learn a second language, somewhere between birth and ten years. It is so true and yet so many parents continue to exist only in English for the first years of life. It’s all a matter of educating today’s parents, help them realize that a growing number of studies of the brain show that young children learn languages easily and keep them longer if they are exposed to new languages early in life. Experts agree that if a child learns a word of an article that is just as easy to learn for his young brain for a second term for the same item.

Find a new mom about studying at York University shows that children who receive instruction in two languages twice as high shot on language tests than their monolingual peers, and that mother again look at you with fear. Then go to the mother that these bilingual children read sooner and demonstrated prior knowledge of problem solving skills. (Dr. Ellen Bialystok, 2001)

I remember a mother, two preschool children, the fact that children learning through a bilingual format with their monolingual peers in the Primary school outperform the action as they experience cognitive development advanced. She could not keep her hidden in disbelief when I went to share it with the fact that the advantage of learning a second language before the middle schools that their children speak the language or debate near-native.

We have programs on television for children, how long they take, has a new language as they cry on television and share their new found words! We see how our children learn new things so quickly, at the age between birth and five represented as sponges and soaking everything around them in. So why should we not think this could be a new language on the list of the most important things in life beside a child? Offer this gift early enough, and your child will read sooner, score higher on standardized tests and have better chances in life. agree with many linguists, educators and experts is better to start early bilingual fun now!

The baby of six months has the ability, all of the hundreds of languages of our world to learn. Approximately eleven months the brain can begin to specialize and, as we all witnessed in person, it becomes increasingly difficult to imagine a new language every year. Until the age of five, a child has the ability to learn five languages simultaneously. In schools, we all know, learning a new language is not as easy as it used to be in primary school. The children, whose brains are wired, languages early in life to learn the advanced experience of learning the language of their choice later in life.

A fun and easy way to put language in your everyday life is often a challenge. Many new mom tell me they do not have time to have attended an extra class with their children much less, add one hour more per week a course can be fit in. The key to multimedia, bilingual available for introducing the language to children aged birth – five format. Find Car CD and DVD, the participation of many senses and learning styles. Experts agree that both languages should be in bilingual format, because your child still has the skills in their native language, the new language should be presented in bilingual format seamless addition to his mother tongue. This allows better retention often, self-esteem and fun for the whole family.

Order

The preservation of human life is the ultimate value, a pillar of ethics and the foundation of all morality. This held true in most cultures and societies throughout history.

On first impression, the last sentence sounds patently wrong. We all know about human collectives that regarded human lives as dispensable, that murdered and tortured, that cleansed and annihilated whole populations in recurrent genocides. Surely, these defy the aforementioned statement?

Liberal philosophies claim that human life was treated as a prime value throughout the ages. Authoritarian regimes do not contest the over-riding importance of this value. Life is sacred, valuable, to be cherished and preserved. But, in totalitarian societies, it can be deferred, subsumed, subjected to higher goals, quantized, and, therefore, applied with differential rigor in the following circumstances:

1.. Quantitative – when a lesser evil prevents a greater one. Sacrificing the lives of the few to save the lives of the many is a principle enshrined and embedded in activities such as war and medicinal care. All cultures, no matter how steeped (or rooted) in liberal lore accept it. They all send soldiers to die to save the more numerous civilian population. Medical doctors sacrifice lives daily, to save others.

It is boils down to a quantitative assessment (“the numerical ratio between those saved and those sacrificed”), and to questions of quality (“are there privileged lives whose saving or preservation is worth the sacrifice of others’ lives?”) and of evaluation (no one can safely predict the results of such moral dilemmas – will lives be saved as the result of the sacrifice?).

2.. Temporal – when sacrificing life (voluntarily or not) in the present secures a better life for others in the future. These future lives need not be more numerous than the lives sacrificed. A life in the future immediately acquires the connotation of youth in need of protection. It is the old sacrificed for the sake of the new, a trade off between those who already had their share of life – and those who hadn’t. It is the bloody equivalent of a savings plan: one defers present consumption to the future.

The mirror image of this temporal argument belongs to the third group (see next), the qualitative one. It prefers to sacrifice a life in the present so that another life, also in the present, will continue to exist in the future. Abortion is an instance of this approach: the life of the child is sacrificed to secure the future well-being of the mother. In Judaism, it is forbidden to kill a female bird. Better to kill its off-spring. The mother has the potential to compensate for this loss of life by bringing giving birth to other chicks.

3.. Qualitative – This is an especially vicious variant because it purports to endow subjective notions and views with “scientific” objectivity. People are judged to belong to different qualitative groups (classified by race, skin color, birth, gender, age, wealth, or other arbitrary parameters). The result of this immoral taxonomy is that the lives of the “lesser” brands of humans are considered less “weighty” and worthy than the lives of the upper grades of humanity. The former are therefore sacrificed to benefit the latter. The Jews in Nazi occupied Europe, the black slaves in America, the aborigines in Australia are three examples of such pernicious thinking.

4.. Utilitarian – When the sacrifice of one life brings another person material or other benefits. This is the thinking (and action) which characterizes psychopaths and sociopathic criminals, for instance. For them, life is a tradable commodity and it can be exchanged against inanimate goods and services. Money and drugs are bartered for life.

It was mentioned on a biology blog that archaeological engravings from the Tiwanaku civilization in Bolivia are unlikely to be depicting an ancient astronaut for the reason that, even with an aquatic tail, the creature still looks too much like a human. The underlying argument was that the evolution of life forms is so diverse that it is highly unlikely an alien would come out looking even remotely like us. In essence, this is the opposite side of the pendulum to Hollywood’s consistent imaging of aliens as humanoids.

The biologist ignored the decorative and symbolic imagery added by the Tiwanaku artists and did not consider the given premise of an aquatic alien inside helmeted spacesuit. I have to assume, therefore, the biologist noted that the creature had two arms and two eyes, and since humans have two arms and two eyes, the biologist concluded that this cannot be an alien.

What should intelligent aliens look like? Or, to phrase it another way, what should we expect interstellar travelers who come here to look like? This is not a complete unknown. If the aliens are capable of interstellar travel, they obviously achieved higher technology. What is necessary to achieve technology? My opinion on this is that to achieve technology, a life form would need a complex brain and the ability to see and manipulate objects. This implies eyes, fingered appendages, and perhaps a head relatively large compared to overall body size. The Tiwanaku alien has all these features.

The biologist might counter that the issue is not that aliens have eyes, but the number of eyes. Here on Earth, higher animal forms evolved with two eyes. For example, mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and insects all have two eyes, but on another planet the number of eyes would be different. There, perhaps, the life forms would randomly have one, three, four, or even ten eyes. Is that true? Is the number of eyes a random event in the evolutionary process?

Astronomers searching for extraterrestrial intelligence are looking for planets similar to Earth regarding temperature and chemical composition because they know life evolved here, so it is logical to assume that life might also evolve on other similar planets. Likewise, with similar planetary history, we might expect the evolutionary process on those other planets to progress similarly to how it progressed here.

Question: Was the evolution of animal life with two eyes on Earth a random event, so much so that we should expect extraterrestrial life to have a different number of eyes? I think not. Why? It is called natural selection or survival of the fittest. Two eyes are the minimum required to give depth perception and concentrated focus. Perhaps early on Earth there were animals with five or ten eyes, but with a brain too small to orientate five directions, such species quickly became extinct. Only two eyes survived. Should we expect something radically different on another Earth-like planet? No. It is reasonable to expect intelligent aliens to have two eyes, just like humans.

It is also reasonable to expect alien life forms to be imaginable from the diversity of life forms we see on Earth, past and present. The Tiwanaku alien has features similar to a fish (fish mouth that seems to be breathing inside a water-filled helmet), features similar to a lobster (sea creature with two forward appendages for manipulating objects), and features similar to humans (large head and fingered upper appendages). Only four fingers are depicted in the Tiwanaku drawings, versus our five, but this easily falls within evolutionary feasibility. The alien’s three-pod aquatic tail is also an imaginable evolutionary development.

I think the biologist’s appreciation for the potentially enormous diversity of life forms in the universe is admirable. For those life forms that develop higher technology, however, it is likely, not unlikely, that they will have something in common with humans.

This article referred to Bella Online Biology comments on the Tiwanaku Alien pages of the CrypticThinking.com website.