Ive been pondering something that Carl Sagan said: Every child starts out as natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. This quote circulates quite a bit. As a point about encouraging a child to ask questions and maintain a sense of wonder about the world, I completely agree. But is every child really a born scientist? Mozart began composing when he was 4 years old without any knowledge of the physics of sound. Picasso was allegedly able to paint in the style of Raphael before he was a teenager and didnt need to be able to explain the electromagnetic spectrum to utilize the colors that he needed. A child may love to dance, but not because they first understand physiology. Im not attempting to downplay the importance of science by any means. Im merely pointing out that if a childs aptitude lies in another area, science may not be emphasized as much as Carls quote seems to imply. There are many types of intelligence. If there are many types of intelligence, there are many types of knowledge and understanding. It would be a pity if we didnt recognize a childs natural genius only because we couldnt describe his or her ability in scientific terms.
Posted on: Thu, 15 May 2014 04:44:51 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015