1) Of what value are emotions in the learning process?
Keep your head
Within the article "Keep your head" I found the idea that once an individual goes into panic mode they could potentially exacerbate the original problem pretty interesting. By going into the panic mode a person would or could potentially make a bad decision. Bond uses the example of 9/11. This event changed not only New York but also the mentality of individuals. As a result of this crisis people started to avoid traveling by air and replaced it by car. An individual that did so actually increased their likelihood to die and this can be proven by the increase in deaths by car accidents after 9/11. I don't think an individual can be blamed for making a decision like this. They found a way to eliminate a possibility that they deemed as dangerous. In their terms they were actually successful. Whether they know the statics of deaths per method of travel or not they made a decision. Towards the end Bond extends the idea that when you come to a risk you should "feel the numbers". But smokers know its dangerous to continue their bad habit, some of them even know the exact numbers of deaths per year of smoking and yet still continue smoking. I believe a person should be allowed to make a decision based on their emotion because they would only choose a decision that satisfies them selves. A person would not swap their short plane ride for a tedious long car ride un-less they felt like doing so. In the end of the day it's their choice and they have made it.
How does language shape the way we think?
2) 'If you speak multiple languages-you are a polyglot, if you do-do you think differently in one language than you do in the other?'
I learnt Norwegian and English both from day one, side by side. However due to my lack of involvement within Norwegian compared to the amount of English I have been exposed to, I can safely title English as my prime language. This article has brought completely revolutionary thoughts to me. I have always thought about how different languages have different vocabularies and grammar styles but never ever thought it could change the way we think. From this it self I wonder if their any languages that we could call superior or even has the way humans developed to communicate limit the way we think? I'm not exactly able to distinguish the possible differences or even barriers that Norwegian and English could carry but I think my limit to usage of Norwegian defiantly affects me. When I think of objects in English I am able to create multiple images of it and ties to other areas, however in Norwegian the object is just an object. Yet again this could just be the possibility of the lack of involvement I have with Norwegian. The more I practice it the deeper it may become. Another area that Lera Boroditsky made an impact for me is how many of my friends could possibly be thinking in different terms constantly. For example Norwegian and English do not have any prime distinguishments between sex's. While in Arabic the actual word and grammar structure changes on who you speak with. Different groups of people around the world are not only are different by their physical features but also their cultural backgrounds. Can cultures or mass ideological ideas drive a certain language to explore different area's of a language? Another question that arises, can the more languages you speak make you more knowledgeable or even make you better at expressing yourself? Who knows…
1) Of what value are emotions in the learning process?
Keep your head
Within the article "Keep your head" I found the idea that once an individual goes into panic mode they could potentially exacerbate the original problem pretty interesting. By going into the panic mode a person would or could potentially make a bad decision. Bond uses the example of 9/11. This event changed not only New York but also the mentality of individuals. As a result of this crisis people started to avoid traveling by air and replaced it by car. An individual that did so actually increased their likelihood to die and this can be proven by the increase in deaths by car accidents after 9/11. I don't think an individual can be blamed for making a decision like this. They found a way to eliminate a possibility that they deemed as dangerous. In their terms they were actually successful. Whether they know the statics of deaths per method of travel or not they made a decision. Towards the end Bond extends the idea that when you come to a risk you should "feel the numbers". But smokers know its dangerous to continue their bad habit, some of them even know the exact numbers of deaths per year of smoking and yet still continue smoking. I believe a person should be allowed to make a decision based on their emotion because they would only choose a decision that satisfies them selves. A person would not swap their short plane ride for a tedious long car ride un-less they felt like doing so. In the end of the day it's their choice and they have made it.
How does language shape the way we think?
2) 'If you speak multiple languages-you are a polyglot, if you do-do you think differently in one language than you do in the other?'
I learnt Norwegian and English both from day one, side by side. However due to my lack of involvement within Norwegian compared to the amount of English I have been exposed to, I can safely title English as my prime language. This article has brought completely revolutionary thoughts to me. I have always thought about how different languages have different vocabularies and grammar styles but never ever thought it could change the way we think. From this it self I wonder if their any languages that we could call superior or even has the way humans developed to communicate limit the way we think?
I'm not exactly able to distinguish the possible differences or even barriers that Norwegian and English could carry but I think my limit to usage of Norwegian defiantly affects me. When I think of objects in English I am able to create multiple images of it and ties to other areas, however in Norwegian the object is just an object. Yet again this could just be the possibility of the lack of involvement I have with Norwegian. The more I practice it the deeper it may become.
Another area that Lera Boroditsky made an impact for me is how many of my friends could possibly be thinking in different terms constantly. For example Norwegian and English do not have any prime distinguishments between sex's. While in Arabic the actual word and grammar structure changes on who you speak with.
Different groups of people around the world are not only are different by their physical features but also their cultural backgrounds. Can cultures or mass ideological ideas drive a certain language to explore different area's of a language?
Another question that arises, can the more languages you speak make you more knowledgeable or even make you better at expressing yourself? Who knows…