|
DaggerAnimas
"KMAN" wrote in message .. . "Michael Daly" wrote in message ... How would this self-taught paddler know what path to follow? How do you know they won't just plunge into class 4 WW - after all, that's what they see on TV. If your point is that some people are stupid, point taken. As I've said, I can point you to countless third-party verifiable tales of professionally trained people who perish doing stupid things. It's possible there are people who buy a WW kayak and go directly into class 4 and die. Can you point me to some verifiable stories where this has happened? Is this common? Or are you just making the point that someone who has done no learning and goes into a set of class IV rapids would be in a lot of danger? If so, may I say, once again, you need only ask me: "Do you think it's a good idea for a new kayaker to plunge into class 4 WW?" because, yet again, I would have replied in the affirmative. LOL. I mean: "Don't you think it's a bad idea for a new kayaker to plunge into class 4 WW?" because, yet again, I would have replied in the affirmative. |
DaggerAnimas
On 13-Oct-2005, "KMAN" wrote: It's about learning - you seem to think people can only learn with professional instruction. Please quote a single message from me where I have said anything of the sort. I can't imagine how boring and even frightening life must be if there is nothing you think possible without an "expert" to guide you. Nothing boring or frightening about my life. I don't need an expert for everything, but know the value of an expert when I need it. I know when it's a waste of time to reinvent the wheel. I have never learned anything in a vacuum and am honest enough to admit it. I learn from others - just as you do but can't seem to admit. All I have said is that it is entirely possible to learn to kayak well and safely without a professional instructor. Do you disagree? Possible - yes. It is entirely possible to learn the same from a non- professional instructor. I have never said otherwise. I have said that is is unlikely that someone can learn without _any_ instruction in a reasonable period of time. Most will never learn kayaking - especially whitewater - to a reasonable skill level without any instruction. If you refuse to answer yet again, I think it would be fair to assume that you don't have the evidence. Again - please post a quote from me where I have made any such claim that you ask me to prove. You are asking me to prove your statements, not mine. You are the one that is making the claims that aren't supportable. You insist on relying on anecdote without specifying the source. You make blowhard claims about beating the experts without training. Mike |
DaggerAnimas
On 13-Oct-2005, KMAN wrote: That's all I have been saying. Bull****. You are constantly berating instruction. That's how this whole discussion got started. Mike |
DaggerAnimas
"Michael Daly" wrote in message ... On 13-Oct-2005, KMAN wrote: That's all I have been saying. Bull****. You are constantly berating instruction. As usual, you are making a claim without foundation. If I am always saying it, it is easy enough for you to quote me. That's how this whole discussion got started. Mike My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. That is not true. I have not "berated instruction" that is pure and rather typical Michael Daly fantastical thinking. |
DaggerAnimosity
"KMAN" wrote in message .. . My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. As the guy who started the whole thing by asking why the subject boat was hard for a "beginner" to control, I must express my sincerest apologies for ever having posted. The group seems to be wound fairly tightly, with a few pretty helpful people and a bunch of people with a lot of free-floating hostility. Most of the "paddling" that goes on here is on one another's butts. Anyone on here have a canoe? |
DaggerAnimosity
"Roger Houston" wrote in message ... "KMAN" wrote in message .. . My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. As the guy who started the whole thing by asking why the subject boat was hard for a "beginner" to control, I must express my sincerest apologies for ever having posted. Don't be silly now... The group seems to be wound fairly tightly That's the outcome of the professionalization of recreation. with a few pretty helpful people and a bunch of people with a lot of free-floating hostility. Often they are the same people. Most of the "paddling" that goes on here is on one another's butts. Sometimes, yes. Anyone on here have a canoe? Yeah, me :-) I learned to paddle it myself. Haven't died yet. Its'a 17" wenonah royalex. My wife and I use it as a tripping canoe for routes where a kayak is less than handy (i.e. lots of portaging). When I was younger I did a lot of whitewater canoeing with my father in a Scott kevlar. Didn't die then either. We had a great time all across Northern Ontario while visiting my grandparents (deceased, but for the record, neither of them died due to lack of professional instruction). |
DaggerAnimosity
"KMAN" wrote
My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. Who ever said such a thing? Could you please quote that post? Mike has been pretty clear that instruction is a good thing, and you have been pretty clear on the opposite sentiment, that it's better to figure out things on your own. In another thread you said "The common assumption is often that learning is something to rush through in order to arrive at enjoyment. Well, if you like sex that last about 30 seconds, then I guess that's the right philosophy! Personally I find the journey is just as important as the destination, and that goes for paddling too :-) " and "Learning is exciting. The problem is some people think it is something to avoid or get past as quickly as possible. " That's rather far from my ideas. I'll suggest a couple a things that I believe, that you apparently don't. 1. Knowledge and skill are beter than ignorance. We begin every new activity in a state of ignorance. Most people do in fact choose to get past that state fairly rapidly, because... 2. Activities pursued skillfully are more fun than those pursued clumsily. This is certainly true for boating. Being able to place the boat where you want it, to play, to surf: that's great fun. More fun than just floating down the river because you don't know how to paddle skillfully. "Learning is exciting," you say, which is certainly true, but then you say "some people think it is something to avoid or get past as quickly as possible." You NEVER get past learning. All the same, I can't imagine anyone saying, as you seem to, "I'm in no hurry to get skillful; I'd like to remain ignorant and clumsy as long as possible." I'm not criticizing you for that belief, just pointing out that I think you're in a distinct minority. Certainly the people who come to me don't think so. In fact, many have said things like "I had been paddling on my own for along time and didn't seem to be making much progress, but this class showed me how to improve." 3. Activities pursued skillfully are safer than those pursued clumsily. You are clearly concerned with safety, so this should be persuasive even if the earlier comments weren't. The more challenging the water, the more important this point is. If you're content with a protracted, casual learning progress, you limit the number of places you can go safely. Of course, if you don't want to do challenging water, that's fine, but don't denigrate people who do want to develop skills to get on something like the Chatooga. As someone said earlier "There are lots of rivers out there and not much time to enjoy them." BTW, earlier you called me "a professional who isn't an asshole" (which may be one of the sweeter things ever said to me on Usenet), but I'm not really a professional, even though I do receive money for classes sometimes. I'm not really a super expert paddler, either. Mainly what I am is an inveterate, incorrigible instructor. People who paddle with me get instruction even if they aren't paying for it. I just can't help myself. You probably don't want to paddle with me. -- Steve Cramer Athens, GA |
DaggerAnimosity
"Steve Cramer" wrote in message ... "KMAN" wrote My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. Who ever said such a thing? Could you please quote that post? Mike has been pretty clear that instruction is a good thing, and you have been pretty clear on the opposite sentiment, that it's better to figure out things on your own. In another thread you said "The common assumption is often that learning is something to rush through in order to arrive at enjoyment. Well, if you like sex that last about 30 seconds, then I guess that's the right philosophy! Personally I find the journey is just as important as the destination, and that goes for paddling too :-) " and "Learning is exciting. The problem is some people think it is something to avoid or get past as quickly as possible. " That's rather far from my ideas. I'll suggest a couple a things that I believe, that you apparently don't. 1. Knowledge and skill are beter than ignorance. We begin every new activity in a state of ignorance. Most people do in fact choose to get past that state fairly rapidly, because... 2. Activities pursued skillfully are more fun than those pursued clumsily. This is certainly true for boating. Being able to place the boat where you want it, to play, to surf: that's great fun. More fun than just floating down the river because you don't know how to paddle skillfully. You are falling into the same trap of assuming that learners who do not hire professionals to teach them are incapable of advancing beyond floating down the river. Thus my participation in this thread, as this is wholly untrue. "Learning is exciting," you say, which is certainly true, but then you say "some people think it is something to avoid or get past as quickly as possible." You NEVER get past learning. All the same, I can't imagine anyone saying, as you seem to, "I'm in no hurry to get skillful; I'd like to remain ignorant and clumsy as long as possible." I've said no such thing. I've been trying to explain that people can and to become skillful without professional instructino. I think I've been pretty clear about that. Maybe take a read through again. I'm not criticizing you for that belief, just pointing out that I think you're in a distinct minority. Certainly the people who come to me don't think so. In fact, many have said things like "I had been paddling on my own for along time and didn't seem to be making much progress, but this class showed me how to improve." I can believe that. Because, sadly, our society has become rather dependent on structured learning and many people have lost the ability to learn on their own. 3. Activities pursued skillfully are safer than those pursued clumsily. Agreed. You are clearly concerned with safety, so this should be persuasive even if the earlier comments weren't. The more challenging the water, the more important this point is. If you're content with a protracted, casual learning progress, you limit the number of places you can go safely. Of course, if you don't want to do challenging water, that's fine, but don't denigrate people who do want to develop skills to get on something like the Chatooga. As someone said earlier "There are lots of rivers out there and not much time to enjoy them." You are missing the point again. All I am saying is it is possible to become skillful without professional instruction. BTW, earlier you called me "a professional who isn't an asshole" (which may be one of the sweeter things ever said to me on Usenet), but I'm not really a professional, even though I do receive money for classes sometimes. I'm not really a super expert paddler, either. Mainly what I am is an inveterate, incorrigible instructor. People who paddle with me get instruction even if they aren't paying for it. I just can't help myself. You probably don't want to paddle with me. Not if you give me instruction when I haven't asked for it. Otherwise, no problem. And I still don't think you are an asshole, but you have done a terrible job of interpreting my position, and unfortunately, you may also be a victim of our over-structured culture where you sincerely believe that people cannot be proficient learners without a professional to teach them. |
DaggerAnimosity
I have a whitewater canoe and a flat water canoe and even have a sea kayak
as well as my whitewater kayaks. What can I say, I just love paddling all types of water. Are you thinking of going with a canoe instead? Courtney "Roger Houston" wrote in message ... Anyone on here have a canoe? |
DaggerAnimosity
"Courtney" wrote in message ink.net... I have a whitewater canoe and a flat water canoe and even have a sea kayak as well as my whitewater kayaks. What can I say, I just love paddling all types of water. Are you thinking of going with a canoe instead? Courtney A boat that could morph from canoe to kayak on demand would be awesome :-D "Roger Houston" wrote in message ... Anyone on here have a canoe? |
DaggerAnimosity
I dunno.....I've quite enjoyed it
"Roger Houston" wrote in message ... "KMAN" wrote in message .. . My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. As the guy who started the whole thing by asking why the subject boat was hard for a "beginner" to control, I must express my sincerest apologies for ever having posted. The group seems to be wound fairly tightly, with a few pretty helpful people and a bunch of people with a lot of free-floating hostility. Most of the "paddling" that goes on here is on one another's butts. Anyone on here have a canoe? |
DaggerAnimosity
"Roger Houston" wrote in
: "KMAN" wrote in message .. . My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. As the guy who started the whole thing by asking why the subject boat was hard for a "beginner" to control, I must express my sincerest apologies for ever having posted. Despite the fact that the posting generated a lot of heated debate it also hopefully produced some useful information. The group seems to be wound fairly tightly, with a few pretty helpful people and a bunch of people with a lot of free-floating hostility. That's not really any different from pretty much every other online forum I've been involved in. Some people clearly just likely to argue/debate are seem to be more concerned about being right and "winning" an argument than spreading useful information. It's pretty easy to determine who those people are just be looking over the archives and seeing who is involved in long debates. Most of the "paddling" that goes on here is on one another's butts. Anyone on here have a canoe? I do, along with three touring kayaks (actually, one of them I'm rebuilding due to it's nearly fatal encounter with a fallen tree branch that was 15" in diameter and 30' long) and a whitewater kayak (that I mostly use in the winter for rolling practice at pool sessions). |
DaggerAnimosity
KMAN:
I was wondering why I couldn't find your original posts on my newsreader yesterday, and I have realized that it was because I plonked you in my bitbucket a long time ago preceisely because of your willful insistence on misrepresenting what other people say. As I pointed out below, NO ONE has said that you need professional instruction. In fact, I wasn't even talking about instruction as much as your apparent desire to progress in learning as slowly as possible. You won't address what I said at all, and unlike Mike, I don't really get any thrills out of fencing with you, so PLONK. Steve KMAN wrote: "Steve Cramer" wrote in message ... "KMAN" wrote My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. Who ever said such a thing? Could you please quote that post? Mike has been pretty clear that instruction is a good thing, and you have been pretty clear on the opposite sentiment, that it's better to figure out things on your own. In another thread you said "The common assumption is often that learning is something to rush through in order to arrive at enjoyment. Well, if you like sex that last about 30 seconds, then I guess that's the right philosophy! Personally I find the journey is just as important as the destination, and that goes for paddling too :-) " and "Learning is exciting. The problem is some people think it is something to avoid or get past as quickly as possible. " That's rather far from my ideas. I'll suggest a couple a things that I believe, that you apparently don't. 1. Knowledge and skill are beter than ignorance. We begin every new activity in a state of ignorance. Most people do in fact choose to get past that state fairly rapidly, because... 2. Activities pursued skillfully are more fun than those pursued clumsily. This is certainly true for boating. Being able to place the boat where you want it, to play, to surf: that's great fun. More fun than just floating down the river because you don't know how to paddle skillfully. You are falling into the same trap of assuming that learners who do not hire professionals to teach them are incapable of advancing beyond floating down the river. Thus my participation in this thread, as this is wholly untrue. "Learning is exciting," you say, which is certainly true, but then you say "some people think it is something to avoid or get past as quickly as possible." You NEVER get past learning. All the same, I can't imagine anyone saying, as you seem to, "I'm in no hurry to get skillful; I'd like to remain ignorant and clumsy as long as possible." I've said no such thing. I've been trying to explain that people can and to become skillful without professional instructino. I think I've been pretty clear about that. Maybe take a read through again. I'm not criticizing you for that belief, just pointing out that I think you're in a distinct minority. Certainly the people who come to me don't think so. In fact, many have said things like "I had been paddling on my own for along time and didn't seem to be making much progress, but this class showed me how to improve." I can believe that. Because, sadly, our society has become rather dependent on structured learning and many people have lost the ability to learn on their own. 3. Activities pursued skillfully are safer than those pursued clumsily. Agreed. You are clearly concerned with safety, so this should be persuasive even if the earlier comments weren't. The more challenging the water, the more important this point is. If you're content with a protracted, casual learning progress, you limit the number of places you can go safely. Of course, if you don't want to do challenging water, that's fine, but don't denigrate people who do want to develop skills to get on something like the Chatooga. As someone said earlier "There are lots of rivers out there and not much time to enjoy them." You are missing the point again. All I am saying is it is possible to become skillful without professional instruction. BTW, earlier you called me "a professional who isn't an asshole" (which may be one of the sweeter things ever said to me on Usenet), but I'm not really a professional, even though I do receive money for classes sometimes. I'm not really a super expert paddler, either. Mainly what I am is an inveterate, incorrigible instructor. People who paddle with me get instruction even if they aren't paying for it. I just can't help myself. You probably don't want to paddle with me. Not if you give me instruction when I haven't asked for it. Otherwise, no problem. And I still don't think you are an asshole, but you have done a terrible job of interpreting my position, and unfortunately, you may also be a victim of our over-structured culture where you sincerely believe that people cannot be proficient learners without a professional to teach them. -- Steve Cramer Athens, GA |
DaggerAnimosity
And BTW, although a white water guy through and through, I also own 2 Mohawk
XL-13's ok so they are WW canoes but....I still have a Prijopn Yukon Expedition from my touring days which I will still take out twice a year or so and support the flat water side of my club. And YES, it has a rudder, but I NEVER EVER use it, I swear!!! "Grip" wrote in message ... I dunno.....I've quite enjoyed it "Roger Houston" wrote in message ... "KMAN" wrote in message .. . My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. As the guy who started the whole thing by asking why the subject boat was hard for a "beginner" to control, I must express my sincerest apologies for ever having posted. The group seems to be wound fairly tightly, with a few pretty helpful people and a bunch of people with a lot of free-floating hostility. Most of the "paddling" that goes on here is on one another's butts. Anyone on here have a canoe? |
DaggerAnimosity
I find myself torn between Mike's approaches to many topics and those
of KMAN. Mike speaks to the geeky nerd in me while KMAN addresses my tendencies to anarchy and resistance to all things organized. While they do tend to go on and on, I find a little something of value on both their contributions. My rational side agrees with Mike on this issue. However, hell will be frozen over before I'll ever find myself enrolled in a kayaking course (you will, however, see me lurking on the fringes of such classes picking up whatever bons mots I can); could be that I'm just plain cheap. So, as far as I'm concerned, Mike and KMAN; carry on but perhaps figure out when you're starting to flog dead horses GRIN... and I will continue to enjoy my rudder even though I could paddle straight if I wanted to. Really! I could! And without lessons! Cheers |
DaggerAnimosity
On 14-Oct-2005, "KMAN" wrote: That's the outcome of the professionalization of recreation. And you claim that you don't denigrate professionals. You're so full of ****, Keenan. Mike |
DaggerAnimosity
On 14-Oct-2005, "KMAN" wrote: I've been trying to explain that people can and to become skillful without professional instructino. "Can" isn't the same thing as "will". That's the part you refuse to accept and what Steve is trying to explain. As I have said repeatedly - _some_ people can learn without instruction; _most_ people cannot. Mike |
DaggerAnimosity
Michael:
============== That's the outcome of the professionalization of recreation. And you claim that you don't denigrate professionals. You're so full of ****, Keenan. =============== I don't denigrate professionals, but, I too, wonder at the "professionalization of recreation". Why can't kids play soccer (hockey, basketball, etc) anymore, without going to camps lead by ex-pro athletes? Apparently the lowly parent subbing players as required in games isn't good enough for some. Why must people assume they have to take lessons to ski? I skiied for several years, having a great deal of fun, putting the weight on the wrong foot when turning (I assumed it was like skating); lessons would have sped up the learning of that fact, but I'm not sure I would have had more fun. Michael, I'm not opposed to lessons, but I think our society occasionally gets carried away with the formalization of recreation (just look at all the people signing up for cooking lessons; fer crissakes, it's not rocket science!!!! -- read a friggin' cookbook!!!). My $0.02 -- and no denigration of professionals |
DaggerAnimosity
On 15-Oct-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote: Why can't kids play soccer (hockey, basketball, etc) anymore, without going to camps lead by ex-pro athletes? Apparently the lowly parent subbing players as required in games isn't good enough for some. There is a problem with organized sports and that problem is parents. They want to live the successful athlete's life vicariously through their kids. However, most organized sports consists of well-meaning dads and moms helping their kids play for fun. Those moms and dads may not be as obvious as the loud-mouthed nutcase parents, but they are by far in the majority. Friends and relatives of mine are in that category. My brother-in-law has done a lot of good with kids in curling. If it isn't fun, he makes sure the kids make the right decision about whether to continue. Michael, I'm not opposed to lessons, but I think our society occasionally gets carried away with the formalization of recreation (just look at all the people signing up for cooking lessons; fer crissakes, it's not rocket science!!!! -- read a friggin' cookbook!!!). That's fine - you can take lessons if you want. Otherwise you can learn on your own. But that's not the same thing as saying that professional instructors are somehow bad. And cooking isn't rocket science - it's chemistry :-) In defense of cooking instruction - there are a lot of things that just can't be explained well in a cookbook - folding for example - 30 seconds of demonstration is better than hours of reading. I learned to cook from watching my mom and cooking shows as a kid - the former for the basics and the latter for the fancy stuff. I've learned a lot over the years from lots of people. I'm not going to pretend that I don't owe them a great deal. That doesn't mean that I desperately need a professional instructor - even a single word from an experienced person can turn on a light. Mike |
DaggerAnimosity
Michael says:
============= I've learned a lot over the years from lots of people. I'm not going to pretend that I don't owe them a great deal. That doesn't mean that I desperately need a professional instructor - even a single word from an experienced person can turn on a light. ============= I concur 100%. Why do I have this funny feeling (trying not to speak for KMAN here) KMAN wouldn't disagree either. |
DaggerAnimosity
On 15-Oct-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote: Why do I have this funny feeling (trying not to speak for KMAN here) KMAN wouldn't disagree either. If he did, he'd find a way to insult me in the process. He's been doing that in all the years since we first crossed paths on Usenet. Mike |
DaggerAnimosity
|
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Grip at
wrote on 10/15/05 2:03 PM: And BTW, although a white water guy through and through, I also own 2 Mohawk XL-13's ok so they are WW canoes but....I still have a Prijopn Yukon Expedition from my touring days which I will still take out twice a year or so and support the flat water side of my club. And YES, it has a rudder, but I NEVER EVER use it, I swear!!! LOL. Good for you. One of the first kayaks I ever paddled was a Prijon. "Grip" wrote in message ... I dunno.....I've quite enjoyed it "Roger Houston" wrote in message ... "KMAN" wrote in message .. . My part in the discussion came about because I felt that opinions were being expressed to suggest that one cannot learn to kayak without professional instruction. As the guy who started the whole thing by asking why the subject boat was hard for a "beginner" to control, I must express my sincerest apologies for ever having posted. The group seems to be wound fairly tightly, with a few pretty helpful people and a bunch of people with a lot of free-floating hostility. Most of the "paddling" that goes on here is on one another's butts. Anyone on here have a canoe? |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 10/15/05 2:59 PM: I find myself torn between Mike's approaches to many topics and those of KMAN. Mike speaks to the geeky nerd in me while KMAN addresses my tendencies to anarchy and resistance to all things organized. While they do tend to go on and on, I find a little something of value on both their contributions. My rational side agrees with Mike on this issue. However, hell will be frozen over before I'll ever find myself enrolled in a kayaking course (you will, however, see me lurking on the fringes of such classes picking up whatever bons mots I can); could be that I'm just plain cheap. So, as far as I'm concerned, Mike and KMAN; carry on but perhaps figure out when you're starting to flog dead horses GRIN... and I will continue to enjoy my rudder even though I could paddle straight if I wanted to. Really! I could! And without lessons! Cheers Cheers. I think. |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Michael Daly at
wrote on 10/15/05 3:01 PM: On 14-Oct-2005, "KMAN" wrote: That's the outcome of the professionalization of recreation. And you claim that you don't denigrate professionals. You're so full of ****, Keenan. Mike That's KMAN. And you are full of rage, it seems. Or certainly the inability to have a discussion without resorting to personal attacks. How am I denigrating professionals? I'm a professional myself. Although I am pretty good at auto mechanics, I take my car to a professional. And I speak highly of their work. I have a lawyer and an accountant. I speak highly of them and their work too. But I don't think the professionalization of recreation is a good thing. It's supposed to be recreation, not work that happens outside! I feel sorry for many children today who find themselves professionally scheduled for every waking hour. They are in leagues and lessons, rushed from one to the other, and nobody ever just goes out and plays anymore. It's not healthy. And some of the attitudes express here are consistent with that same problem - the thinking that learning without a professional instructor is somehow inferior. I find it sad. |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Michael Daly at
wrote on 10/15/05 3:04 PM: On 14-Oct-2005, "KMAN" wrote: I've been trying to explain that people can and do become skillful without professional instruction. "Can" isn't the same thing as "will". I know. I didn't say all people. I can formally amend the above to say "I've been trying to explain that some people can and do become skillful without professional instruction" if that will help you. That's the part you refuse to accept and what Steve is trying to explain. I agreed with that a long time ago, you just don't listen. As I have said repeatedly - _some_ people can learn without instruction; _most_ people cannot. Mike That sounds exactly like the statement I agreed to some time ago. I would consider people incapable of learning without professional instruction to be victims. It's a basic instinct for human beings to learn through experience and observation. It's evidence that the culture of professinalization has gone to far when we can now produce human beings incapable of learning without professional instruction. |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 10/15/05 4:49 PM: Michael: ============== That's the outcome of the professionalization of recreation. And you claim that you don't denigrate professionals. You're so full of ****, Keenan. =============== I don't denigrate professionals, but, I too, wonder at the "professionalization of recreation". Why can't kids play soccer (hockey, basketball, etc) anymore, without going to camps lead by ex-pro athletes? LOL. I just wrote something similar. Apparently the lowly parent subbing players as required in games isn't good enough for some. I coach and have coached a number of children in sports. It has come to the point where I have to have a meeting with all the parents and explain to them that all the children are going to get equal playing time, and that if this is a problem for any parent, they should move their child to another team now, rather than put them in the middle of a situation where coach and parent cannot agree. And, believe it or not, about 10% of parents actually pull their kids of the team. Why must people assume they have to take lessons to ski? I skiied for several years, having a great deal of fun, putting the weight on the wrong foot when turning (I assumed it was like skating); lessons would have sped up the learning of that fact, but I'm not sure I would have had more fun. I learned how to downhill ski when my buddies took me up to the top of the hill and pushed me. I was a little upset at the time, but I always had a blast, right from that first moment. In some sports (like tennis) I decided I really wanted to become technically proficient, so I worked at my game. But in skiing, I stuck with my original technique. Good times. Michael, I'm not opposed to lessons, but I think our society occasionally gets carried away with the formalization of recreation (just look at all the people signing up for cooking lessons; fer crissakes, it's not rocket science!!!! -- read a friggin' cookbook!!!). My $0.02 -- and no denigration of professionals Agree, agree. I am ashamed to say I now have several acquaintances who feel they need "personal trainers" because they can't stop eating like pigs or get off their asses to go for walk. They honestly believe it is not possible for them to lose weight without a professional to help them. The professionals who do this work are not to blame. It's the culture that has produced such a belief that is to blame. |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Michael Daly at
wrote on 10/15/05 6:22 PM: On 15-Oct-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote: Why can't kids play soccer (hockey, basketball, etc) anymore, without going to camps lead by ex-pro athletes? Apparently the lowly parent subbing players as required in games isn't good enough for some. There is a problem with organized sports and that problem is parents. They want to live the successful athlete's life vicariously through their kids. However, most organized sports consists of well-meaning dads and moms helping their kids play for fun. Do you go and watch kids in organized sports? Those well-meaning moms and dads - a lot of them - are screaming for their kid to do things that aren't very nice. Those moms and dads may not be as obvious as the loud-mouthed nutcase parents, but they are by far in the majority. Friends and relatives of mine are in that category. My brother-in-law has done a lot of good with kids in curling. If it isn't fun, he makes sure the kids make the right decision about whether to continue. See my other post about coaching. Although only 10% of the parents actually walk out, I've learned about 50% of those who remain ain't happy. Michael, I'm not opposed to lessons, but I think our society occasionally gets carried away with the formalization of recreation (just look at all the people signing up for cooking lessons; fer crissakes, it's not rocket science!!!! -- read a friggin' cookbook!!!). That's fine - you can take lessons if you want. Otherwise you can learn on your own. But that's not the same thing as saying that professional instructors are somehow bad. Who has said this? |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 10/15/05 8:27 PM: Michael says: ============= I've learned a lot over the years from lots of people. I'm not going to pretend that I don't owe them a great deal. That doesn't mean that I desperately need a professional instructor - even a single word from an experienced person can turn on a light. ============= I concur 100%. Why do I have this funny feeling (trying not to speak for KMAN here) KMAN wouldn't disagree either. I wouldn't :-) I've been trying to make the simple point that SOME people are capable of learning on their own. I further understand and agree that with some people and/or with certain skills being self-taught could mean a longer learning curve than would be epxerienced with professional instruction. But I firmly believe ALL people SHOULD be capable of learning without professional instruction. The fact that some are not (or think they are not) is evidence for me of a problem in our culture - that the learning instinct has been beaten out of some of the human beings in our society. My own approach to supporting the learning of others is to view my role as a facilitator. I am not "teaching" them. Teaching from that perspective is something you "do to" someone. I prefer to understand it is a process we are sharing together. I am going to learn things from them as well (and that's for me the most rewarding thing about supporting people to learn). I facilitate their learning - making sure they are in charge, rather than adopting a superior instructor vs inferior learner approach. Professional or otherwise, that's the perspective I look for in choosing professionals that help me in my own life. |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Michael Daly at
wrote on 10/15/05 9:45 PM: On 15-Oct-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote: Why do I have this funny feeling (trying not to speak for KMAN here) KMAN wouldn't disagree either. If he did, he'd find a way to insult me in the process. He's been doing that in all the years since we first crossed paths on Usenet. Mike Example? I think you are a bit paranoid, and I am starting to understand why you keep failing to appreciate my actual position on this issue. You feel personally challenged in some way. Relax. I'm not out to damage whatever reputation you think it is you have. I don't know you, and that's not my purpose in debating this issue. I have a genuine concern that our society is producing citizens incapable of learning, and it seems to me that some ideas are floated here (no pun intended) from time to time that seem to suggest professional instruction is a MUST for anyone interested in developing their kayaking skills. It just isn't so. And if that's not what is being said, hey, no problem, it's still a good discussion to have. |
DaggerAnimosity
"KMAN" wrote in message ... But I don't think the professionalization of recreation is a good thing. It's supposed to be recreation, not work that happens outside! I suppose, though, all things considered, we could all agree that it is better to contemplate the professionalization of recreation than that of procreation. |
DaggerAnimosity
"KMAN" wrote in message ... I am ashamed to say I now have several acquaintances who feel they need "personal trainers" because they can't stop eating like pigs or get off their asses to go for walk. They honestly believe it is not possible for them to lose weight without a professional to help them. That particular issue may be more an issue of "locus of control". Some are self-motivated, and these folks are spoken of as having an "internal" locus of control. Others have an external locus, and still others what is called a "powerful other" locus. There are little quizzes you can take that scores you on all three dimensions. The people who employ a personal trainer probably have a combination where the internal is the weakest of the domains. The people whose doctors have to tell them they're fat and out of shape and then join Weight-watchers probably have high external, higher "powerful other" and very low internal loci. And so forth. This may relate somehow to the current pie-fight on the topic of teaching yourself vs. going to classes to learn how to have fun in a paddlecraft. Or not. (Become inner-directed, and be the envy of all your friends.) |
DaggerAnimosity
On 16-Oct-2005, KMAN wrote: Example? Think twice before you challenge to prove you are a liar. Mike |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Roger Houston at
wrote on 10/16/05 1:53 AM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... But I don't think the professionalization of recreation is a good thing. It's supposed to be recreation, not work that happens outside! I suppose, though, all things considered, we could all agree that it is better to contemplate the professionalization of recreation than that of procreation. LOL. Well, I once had a column published in a major newspaper about the "professinalization of procreation." True! |
DaggerAnimosity
On 16-Oct-2005, KMAN wrote: Or certainly the inability to have a discussion without resorting to personal attacks. You mean like the personal attacks on me that you constantly post? Mike |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Roger Houston at
wrote on 10/16/05 2:01 AM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... I am ashamed to say I now have several acquaintances who feel they need "personal trainers" because they can't stop eating like pigs or get off their asses to go for walk. They honestly believe it is not possible for them to lose weight without a professional to help them. That particular issue may be more an issue of "locus of control". Some are self-motivated, and these folks are spoken of as having an "internal" locus of control. Others have an external locus, and still others what is called a "powerful other" locus. There are little quizzes you can take that scores you on all three dimensions. The people who employ a personal trainer probably have a combination where the internal is the weakest of the domains. The people whose doctors have to tell them they're fat and out of shape and then join Weight-watchers probably have high external, higher "powerful other" and very low internal loci. And so forth. This may relate somehow to the current pie-fight on the topic of teaching yourself vs. going to classes to learn how to have fun in a paddlecraft. Or not. (Become inner-directed, and be the envy of all your friends.) Heh. I don't buy into the the locus pocus myself. They know they are overweight. They know they need to eat better. They know they need to exercise more. But they've bought in (and it's easy to buy in, since all that is required is laziness) to the culture of professionalization, which states that no matter what it is you are too lazy to do, it's not your fault, the problem is you haven't yet hired a professional. Now I don't mess around with people in my personal life when it comes to this sort of stuff, because I'm just happy that they are doing SOMETHING to have a healthier lifestyle, and I don't care if they hire a professional trainer or worship the stars, as long as it means they will be on the planet longer and enjoying a better quality of life. But with one friend in particular, I carefully broached the subject - if (as she was saying) you could not have done it without the trainer, then what will happen when you no longer have the trainer? Or has the trainer been supporting you to succeed on your own? Answer: Oh, no. I'm planning to see the trainer for the rest of my life. I could never do this on my own. What can you say? I just put on my best fake smile, said "that's great" and started talking about the weather. And then, much worse I think, are my friends and acquaintances who go on this Dr Bernstein (sp?) diet, where they give you vitamin injections and basically starve you (so it seems) to produce rapid weight loss. Man o man, this is some scary stuff. Sure enough they lose that weight, but how the heck is anyone supposed to keep the weight off, when all you've done is a totally unnatural and unsustainable method to get it off to begin with? |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Michael Daly at
wrote on 10/16/05 2:15 AM: On 16-Oct-2005, KMAN wrote: Example? Think twice before you challenge to prove you are a liar. Mike Eh? Here's the whole context: === in article , Michael Daly at wrote on 10/15/05 9:45 PM: On 15-Oct-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote: Why do I have this funny feeling (trying not to speak for KMAN here) KMAN wouldn't disagree either. If he did, he'd find a way to insult me in the process. He's been doing that in all the years since we first crossed paths on Usenet. Mike Example? === This means I am asking for an example of how I've been insulting you. I'm not saying it never happened, but looking through the various posts here, I don't see a pattern of that happening. I do see you be rather rude with me on numerous occasions, however, and certainly engaging in personal attack rather than addressing the actual points I am making. |
DaggerAnimosity
in article , Michael Daly at
wrote on 10/16/05 2:17 AM: On 16-Oct-2005, KMAN wrote: Or certainly the inability to have a discussion without resorting to personal attacks. You mean like the personal attacks on me that you constantly post? Mike Can you please provide, say, three examples? Just to establish a foundation for your comment. Thanks! And may I futher inquire... Are you suggesting that your need to attack me on a personal basis rather than addressing the points I am making is justified because you feel that you have suffered attacks from me? Not very mature, if that's your justification for your own behaviour. |
DaggerAnimosity
"KMAN" wrote in message ... Heh. I don't buy into the the locus pocus myself. Well, you really don't have to buy into anything. The "locus pocus" is a theory that "professionals" in behavioral science have used to help to explain something they've observed. They know they are overweight. They know they need to eat better. They know they need to exercise more. But they've bought in (and it's easy to buy in, since all that is required is laziness) to the culture of professionalization, which states that no matter what it is you are too lazy to do, it's not your fault, the problem is you haven't yet hired a professional. In a sense, the theory of locus of control would reinforce what you said here. In fact, if you fully explained your theories of the professionalisation of everything, you'd provide an operational definition of the theory. If you talked long enough, you'd reveal that your theoretical framework is parallel to that of the professionals who observed behavior and postulated the theory of locus of control. Don't believe it? Internal: Some folks learn just fine on their own, others don't. External: Some folks learn by observing others, choosing the things they saw others do that worked and adopting them to their own performance, and discarding, or not attempting in the first place, the things they've seen others do that didn't work. Powerful other: Some people figure they can never do it on their own and seek professional instruction, often assigning guru-like attributes to the instructor. (Not deterred by many instructors who assign guru-like attributes to themselves). So, in a sense, you have provided a reinforcement of this theory by 'publishing' your observations in this forum and defending your thesis against the "other side" (using your dichotomy), and bolstering the observations and theory of "professionals". You don't buy into the "locus hocus pocus" yet you've arrived at similar conclusions on your own but have chosen to call the described domains by other names. Put another way, you've "discovered" something for yourself that "professionals" have written about for others to learn without doing the experiments you've done. Other theoretical work to which your philosophy alludes (and which you could look up) would be found using the phrase "learning style". The dead horse in this particular line of discussion is that the theories aren't laws, exceptions can be found for each, and you'll continue to point out the exceptions -- often using yourself as an example. No generalization is worth a damn -- including this one. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:02 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com