Customer Discussions > Education forum

Personal development for kids


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-21 of 21 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Feb 4, 2012 9:55:05 AM PST
What is the opinion of readers here about Personal Development for kids?
I think that our Society has changed and we are confronted earlier in life with life challenges. The realities of economy, like unemployment of parents, Social challenges like bullying in school and family challenges like divorce of parents are just 3 examples of what kids might have to face and overcome. They are unprepared, inexperienced and often alone in dealing with such challenges.
Can Personal Development principles conveyed through stories help kids in dealing with this challenges?
I ask because I appreciate The opinion from people who have interests in education and possibly interact daily with kids.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 5, 2012 2:46:38 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 5, 2012 2:50:39 PM PST
Bruce Bain says:
"Can Personal Development principles conveyed through stories help kids in dealing with this challenges?"

Your post doesn't indicate what Personal Development "principles" you are referring to.

You inquiry is framed as a "Sweeping Generalization".

Only a general answer can be offered without specifics, and generalizations just aren't worth very much.

.

But even at that, I would offer you this response. I think it depends as much upon the "environment" and the context as it does "principles".

In other words, what is your status?
Are the children yours? What are the ages of the children? What Principles?

My educated guess is this. Children will be "way ahead" in their development, in regards to anything that you can teach them.
What Principles?

Open ended inquiries such as you are conducting, don't usually produce subsantive responses, for the very reason that they are so broadly worded.

.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 5, 2012 2:58:03 PM PST
Lisareads says:
"Open ended inquiries such as you are conducting, don't usually produce substantive responses, for the very reason that they are so broadly worded."
==================
The world is not that simple as everything effects everything else. You focused approach has missed the reality of human life.

Your computer left out the "t".

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 5, 2012 4:30:31 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 5, 2012 4:31:53 PM PST
Mr. Brain, this was meant to start a discussion. Of course I cannot just assume that everybody understands the same under Personal Development principles. Those not familiar with books from Authors like Dale Carnegie, John Maxwell and others have possibly never heard of Personal development principles like "Importance of Enthusiasm in life", "Positive Thinking", "Goal Setting", "Help others to success to be successful yourself", just to name a few in my own words. I just assumed that participants in a Education forum have heard and are familiar with Personal development. A discussion is certainly needed if a broad start to the topic is being seen as sweeping generalization. Targeting only one aspect will leave out many others and does not offer the opportunity for other participants to add the area they are focused in.
Your last sentence seems to be true in that my inquiry did not produce a substantive response from you, but it is a start and we all start from somewhere and focus down to areas of interest. Thanks Lisareads.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 6, 2012 12:27:06 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 6, 2012 12:30:51 AM PST
Bruce Bain says:
Oh I see. You only wanted to "start a discussion" for which you presume to already have all the answers.

That figures.

Well if you are already familiar with the book, ""Help others to success to be successful yourself", then you are already familiar with answers to your own questions, unless you are putting on an act as to being an uninformed questioner.


.
It doesn't take a Doctoral Degree in Rocket Surgery to see you have some kind of a game going on.

.

.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 6, 2012 1:05:50 AM PST
Why are you treating a person you do not know like this? There is no game intended. I asked a question. Besides it is not one book alone that talks about such topic and the phrase you misunderstand as a book is one of the principles. I guess all that is left is to hope you will find one day the book " Attitude is everything" from Jeff Kellar.
I did not think I would find such way of talking in an Education forum.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 6, 2012 1:52:31 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 6, 2012 2:07:05 AM PST
Bruce Bain says:
ISSUE THE FIRST

===============================================

"Why are you treating a person you do not know like this?"----------sentence 1 of paragraph 1, from the comment of Achim Mohssen-Beyk on Feb 6, 2012 1:05:50 AM PST regarding the discussion topic, "Personal Development" for Kids" on Amazon.com

================================================

.

.

(1) First of all, the fact of the issue is that your 'person' has not been treated at all, because your 'person' is not within my reach.

(2) Secondly, your person is not being 'treated' because it is your ideas that have been published in the public media that are being 'treated'.

.

.

ISSUE THE SECOND
======================================================

"Besides it is not one book alone that talks about such topic and the phrase you misunderstand as a book is one of the principles."-----sentence 4 of paragraph 1 from the comment of Achim Mohssen-Beyk on Feb 6, 2012 1:05:50 AM PST regarding the discussion topic, "Personal Development" for Kids" on Amazon.com

============================================================

.

.

(1) That is exactly the point. You are knowledgeable as to many titles on the subject, rather than uninformed on your subject.

You are marketing your ideas in the public media, without making it entirely clear what your status is.

.

.
(2) When you refer to KIDS, you have very coyly avoided indicating:

(A) Whose KIDS you refer to.

(B) The Ages of the KIDS you refer to.

(C) Where the KIDS are to be taught "Personal Development" and by whom.

.

.

(3) You have very cunningly avoided identification of your specific interest in KIDS.

(4) Moreover, since you are using a computer, it doesn't require a degree in Rocket Surgery to conduct an Internet Search into the Curriculums of Schools and discover if "Personal Development" concepts are included in Curriculums, so in that regard, your inquiry is entirely disingenuous.

(5) In point of fact, "Personal Development" pertains to metaphysical conceptions, such that the teaching of it constitutes teaching "religion".

(6) You are a naive person indeed, to suppose that you can engage in the public advocacy of any idea, without having your ideas subjected to objective scrutiny. If you are so sensitive to the public examination of your ideas, intentions, and status, perhaps you should avoid further public efforts to
engage in an advocacy for "Personal Development"; because you are not prepared to demonstrate that your ideas have practical value.

.
(7) What you are looking for are persons susceptible to your marketing of these ideas, and to have your ideas regarded as credible educational curricula.

.
By the way, the "Pollyanna" act doesn't work for you, because it isn't much of a testimony as to the validity of "Personal Development".

.

.
.

.

Posted on Feb 6, 2012 6:32:12 AM PST
Lisareads says:
Bruce is an self educated machine. He has very little experience with real humanity. If there was ever a challenging case to humanize he is it. I suspect a lonely computer programmer who holds on to religion except when it comes to logically not having the evidence.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 6, 2012 5:01:27 PM PST
Bruce Bain says:
.

=================================================

"I suspect a lonely computer programmer who holds on to religion except when it comes to logically not having the evidence."---------sentence 4 of paragraph 1, from the comment of "Lisareads"
on Feb 6, 2012 6:32:12 AM PST regarding the discussion topic "Personal Development for Kids" on Amazon.com

===============================================
.

.

(1) Oh really? Because what is known of you "Lisareads" is that whatever becomes a suspicion in your mind, passes for fact, shortly thereafter, by some construance, that looks similar to what is designated "Magical Thinking".

.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 6, 2012 5:12:05 PM PST
Lisareads says:
"Magical Thinking"
===============
No, I do not believe in God.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2012 5:49:55 AM PST
Bruce Bain says:
Hey there "Lisareads". How are you?

.

.

====================================================

"No, I do not believe in God."---------------sentence 1 of paragraph 1, from the comment of "Lisareads"
on Feb 6, 2012 5:12:05 PM PST
regarding the discussion topic "Personal Development for Kids" on http://Amazon.com

"I do not follow human made rules.
They lead you to false assumptions."--------------sentences 1 & 2 of paragraph 7,
from the comment of Lisareads on Jan 18, 2012 6:53:29 AM PST regarding the discussion topic,
"Copying and Respect" on http://Amazon.com

"I am not Spock."---sentence 1 of paragraph 9, from the from the comment of Lisareads on Jan 18, 2012 6:53:29 AM PST regarding the discussion topic,
"Copying and Respect" on http://Amazon.com

=========================================

.

.

Which is why my friend, no credence need be ceded to your public communications, whatsoever.
.

.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2012 7:32:13 AM PST
Lisareads says:
"Which is why my friend, no credence need be ceded to your public communications, whatsoever"
=======================
I am not your friend nor do I care about your judgement of credence. This is computer communication not public communication.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2012 9:27:58 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 7, 2012 9:41:46 AM PST
Bruce Bain says:
=============================================

"This is computer communication not public communication."-------sentence 2 of paragraph 2,
from the comment of "Lisareads"
on Feb 7, 2012 7:32:13 AM PST
regarding the discussion topic "Personal Development for Kids" on http://Amazon.com

=====================================================

.

.

(1) Is that really what you think? You think that the Internet, or what you refer to so vaguely as
COMPUTER COMMUNICATION is not public media?

Read this my friend.

#########################################################

"Federal Communications Commission (FCC), independent executive agency of the U.S. government established in 1934 to regulate interstate and foreign communications in the public interest.
The FCC is composed of five members, not more than four of whom may be members of the same political party, appointed by the president with the consent of the U.S. Senate.
The commissioners are authorized to classify television and radio stations, to assign broadcasting frequencies, and to prescribe the nature of their service.
The FCC HAS JURISDICTION OVER standard, high-frequency, relay, international, television, and facsimile broadcasting stations and also has authority over experimental, amateur, coastal, aviation, strip, and emergency radio services; telegraph and interstate telephone companies; cellular telephone and paging systems; satellite facilities; and cable companies AND INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS."---- from The Columbia Encyclopedia [caps mine, for emphasis--BB]

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/federal-communications-commission#ixzz1liVObiws

###########################################################

.

.

(2) Under the law, threats are not protected under the First Amendment, even if the threats
do indeed, involve racial epithets or those motivated by "racial animosity".
A threatening private message sent over the Internet to a victim, however, or even a PUBLIC
MESSAGE DISPLAYED ON A WEB SITE which describes an intention
"to commit acts of racially motivated violence," can be prosecuted under the law.

To wit, since Telecommunications Act of 1996, the INTERNET is PUBLIC, rather than PRIVATE communication. The words, COMPUTER COMMUNICATION do not really mean anything at all as to any issue of fact.

.
You are either senting an e-mail, which is PRIVATE communication, or you are engaged in the
PUBLIC MEDIA, at the same level as TV, Newspaper, and Radio, etc.
That is precisely why the
Federal Communications Commission has jusrisdiction over the Internet.

.

.

.

.

.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2012 11:44:44 AM PST
Lisareads says:
"Federal Communications Commission has jusrisdiction (jurisdiction)over the Internet."
==================================

Hackers listen as FBI talks to Scotland Yard ... Scotland Yard's central e-crime unit telling the FBI that British police had identified a 15-year-old ...

LOL The Government does not enforce the laws they use them for select punishment against those that disagree with their goals.

I have poor grammar and very poor spelling. I went to public school. Yet I can see through false beliefs.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 8, 2012 4:07:30 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 8, 2012 4:42:42 AM PST
Bruce Bain says:
What you publish here concerning the FBI, etcetera, is demonstrative of the common logical error designated the Fallacy of Ignoratio Elenchi. This is the fallacy involving an irrelevant conclusion.

Were your conclusion relevent to the subject, you might obtain some semblance of credibility, but as your conclusion is a complet shift in topic, you don't obtain credibility.

.

Which serves to show "Lisareads" that you have published misinformation in the PUBLIC media.

You wrote:

=============================================

"This is computer communication not public communication."-------sentence 2 of paragraph 2,
from the comment of "Lisareads"
on Feb 7, 2012 7:32:13 AM PST
regarding the discussion topic "Personal Development for Kids" on http://Amazon.com

=====================================================

.

.

That is an evident error. The Internet is PUBLIC media, at the same level of Newpapers, Radio, and Television.

.
Your confusion of PUBLIC with PRIVATE media, is perhaps why you are unable to censor yourself so as to engage in objective communication, because much of what you publish in these forums,
is (for lack of a better term) scatterbrained, as best, as is evidenced by your latest post, which does not bear upon this discussion.

.
Your attempts at being "coy" are not working for you, which seems to be evident to all persons except yourself.

.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 8, 2012 6:39:02 AM PST
Lisareads says:
When all else fails use name calling? A subject attempt to win a debate, you should be a politician.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 9, 2012 3:15:35 AM PST
Bruce Bain says:
ISSUE THE FIRST

===================================================

"When all else fails use name calling?"----sentence 1 of paragraph 1, from the comment of "Lisareads"
on Feb 8, 2012 6:39:02 AM PST
regarding the discussion topic "Personal Development for Kids" on http://Amazon.com

=====================================================

.

.

(1) Are you citing an Ethical Objection my friend? Which one is that?

.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 10, 2012 6:38:22 PM PST
Lisareads says:
""Federal Communications Commission (FCC), independent executive agency of the U.S. government established in 1934 to regulate interstate and foreign communications in the public interest."
===============================


Hackers have claimed responsibility for making the CIA website inaccessible on Friday - the latest attack on a US federal agency.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 11, 2012 3:07:01 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 11, 2012 3:09:16 AM PST
Bruce Bain says:
Thanks for the comment "Lisareads". How are you?

.

.

======================================

"Hackers have claimed responsibility for making the CIA website inaccessible on Friday - the latest attack on a US federal agency."---sentence 1 of paragraph 2, from the comment of "Lisareads"
on Feb 10, 2012 6:38:22 PM PST regarding
the discussion topic "Personal Development for Kids" on http://Amazon.com

=====================================================

.

.

(1) This statemtent from you, is demonstrative of the common logical error
designated the Falllacy of Ignoratio Elenchi ("Irrelvant Conclusion").

The irrelevency occurs because the subject is Personal Development, which has no bearing on HACKERS. The alternate subject is The FCC jurisdiction over the Internet's PUBLIC communications.

HACKERS as a subject, bears no relevence to the discussion.

.

.

You can presume in an errant logic, that the subject of HACKERS is relevent to the public discourse, but it remains to be seen whether or not you can show that your contribution is a relevency.

.

.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 23, 2012 2:33:04 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Dec 23, 2012 2:37:41 PM PST]

Posted on Jan 19, 2013 12:02:10 PM PST
DRM says:
Human development is a very worthy goal. Allowing Children the freedom to develop and create is vital.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Education forum
Participants:  5
Total posts:  21
Initial post:  Feb 4, 2012
Latest post:  Jan 19, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions