Jump to content


Pedants' Paradise

  • Please log in to reply
3797 replies to this topic

#3796 Aquarelle



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8905 posts
  • Member: 10531
    Joined: 05-April 07

Posted 24 November 2022 - 12:16

I agree with  zwhe.  You have to adapt  the explanation of the concept you are teaching to the intellectual capacity of the child. Sometimes this means telling them something that is approximate rather than exact. and often incomplete. When I do that I usually thell them that they will learn more about it later. You have to move their minds in the right dirrection but always keep in mind their mental immaturity - which is not the same as their intellectual capacity. I never teach young children that 6/8 is compound duple with two dotted crotchet beats in a bar. We start of by counting 6 quavers. The rest can come later. I never explain the lower figure of the time signature until I am sure they have enough mathematical understanding to get it. I just tell them to ignore the lower figure and we will tackle that later. I don't give the same definition of a symphony or a concerto or an opera to a seven year old as I do to a twelve year old - and later still to a 16 year old etc. You don't necessarily  digest a whole concept in one gulp. You don't feed a baby on  hot spicy  curry. It's all a question of development.

  • 0

#3797 Gordon Shumway

Gordon Shumway


  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1208 posts
  • Member: 899488
    Joined: 11-February 19
  • London SE5

Posted 24 November 2022 - 13:53

It's a universal problem. On so many music forums absolute beginner violinists ask a question about basic technique and are given answers that are only of use to someone at a conservatoire. Partly it's because on forums one takes the temperature and then talks a big game trying to blend in (with perhaps other blusterers), and people can't read between the lines. But look at people's Youtube channels and the truth comes out.

  • 0

#3798 Tenor Viol

Tenor Viol


  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7621 posts
  • Member: 343214
    Joined: 25-October 11
  • North Shropshire

Posted 24 November 2022 - 18:07

I find it frustrating that there is a fashion amongst conspiracy theory nutjobs to claim that science is 'lying' to them because explanations change either over time or depending on whom the target audience is.

They fail to understand that science evolves. Newton's explanation of gravity was the best available at the time, it fitted with observations and measurements. When technology improved, measurements showed up some discrepancies in some cases, e.g. the position of Mercury in the sky. Einstein comes along and provides a model which resolves those issues, and measurements confirm the theory.

Is Newton 'wrong'? No, for the vast majority of real world uses, like navigating a ship or an aeroplane, it's fine. Start working with things at significant luminal velocities, or intense gravitational fields, and you need Einstein. 

  • 3