I do realize my my first post was hard to read but my son was hitting the buttons on the keyboard and i figured even with the mistakes the message would get across and it did. Even with out perfect punctuation spelling and grammar. I don't hold the written word to be sacred and personally don't really care it was a bit of a mess.
Donna Sorry you find my comment tasteless about listening better. I was not implying blind are better.(yes that was snark because your comments to me were assuming I am a very uneducated person). Simply that if you were paying attention to the language you would have heard those words and recognized they were separate. Like when kids in kindergarten think "LMNOP" is all one letter.
Technology is always improving and because of that getting cheaper. I have never said lets just get rid of braille now and go on a book burning party. I think in the future a way of communication that is used by few and in many ways inconvenient will eventually phase itself out because it will be no longer relevant to our technology focused society.
I don't think the written word is for the sighted only but it works better for them.
One thing the article and Donna touched on was the literacy and employment rate. I think those are related. When one thinks of a blind persons abilities braille does come to mind. Does that percentage include blind people that have/had birth defects or other problems that would keep them out of the workforce? Don't shoot me for saying it because the article mentioned more preemie babies surviving and having blindness being on a list of problems that could make them potentially illegitimate anyway.
Next. That is a shame they withheld education for you when you wanted to learn braille that is not right.
You can pause a book on tape to ponder the words so it will stop and start when you hit the button.
Teachers being expensive would be one more reason not to have braille.
I also don't suppose there are no blind writers. (man you have had a lot of judgment on you and are putting it on me) You don't have to have someone translate your words there are already computer programs for that and they are not over the top expensive.
There are cameras that will read text for the blind like a menu. When was the last time you went to a restaurant that had a braille menu anyway? No not everything comes in an audio form but there are tools to translate print into words. I understand that technology is not available to everyone everywhere but things like that will be one day. So until then braille has it usefulness but I don't think it is something that is necessary or useful in the next 100 years.
I understand that making people who function differently conform into a sighted society will only go so far. It makes more sense to focus on their strengths in oral communication.
What is with the assumption I did not "actually" read the article?
I don't think the issue is that complicated. I think there is a lot of discussing "what if's" to try and make it more complicated.
I figured that brain function in visual areas would be different for people who can't see. Why try and make them function more like sighted people. I think working on their strengths in oral communication is a better way to go. I can see why braille developed being in a time without the voice technology we have today but seeing as we have it now braille is like the morse code. Why bother when you can say it or hear the words.
I still don't see why it is relevant today to teach them a written style of language (unless of course they want to learn) when oral works just as well.
I am thinking "so what?" If they done use paragraphs what is the big deal in them not learning about them, Same with how to spell. Writing is clearly not a good medium for the blind. Why not be an oral society. What next are we going to teach them about art so they can uselessly know about colour and composition and primary and secondary colours? In the scheme of knowledge a person should acquire the useful things should come first and clearly learning our sighted version language is not one of them.
But the person who did not know happily ever after is not one word was clearly not listening well since they are spoken with separate meaning often.
Am I the only one that hates the anniversary look? I wanted to get one for my son but I am hating on the face so bad I think I will find another car or head to a yard sale.
Hey hugh lets write a thought provoking best selling novel. No wait. I've got an even better idea, lets post stupid stuff in the comments on a website! LOL
Then keep your penis out of your ex! So old. I think it is a good idea in some countries where rape is common it would make they guy think twice but in gang rape i can see the woman getting killed and raped while the other guy is doubled over in pain. Also years ago when this was in the news there were some problems with the barbs tearing through the ...i am gonna assume latex and the women had to go to the hospital.
One more thing... BMI should not be used to determine a healthy weight where they has a whole big thing in the news about only hiring models with a healthy BMI. There are many types of normal. Some "overweight" people are healthy and some "underweight" people are to.
Donna
Sorry you find my comment tasteless about listening better. I was not implying blind are better.(yes that was snark because your comments to me were assuming I am a very uneducated person). Simply that if you were paying attention to the language you would have heard those words and recognized they were separate. Like when kids in kindergarten think "LMNOP" is all one letter.
Technology is always improving and because of that getting cheaper. I have never said lets just get rid of braille now and go on a book burning party. I think in the future a way of communication that is used by few and in many ways inconvenient will eventually phase itself out because it will be no longer relevant to our technology focused society.
I don't think the written word is for the sighted only but it works better for them.
One thing the article and Donna touched on was the literacy and employment rate. I think those are related. When one thinks of a blind persons abilities braille does come to mind. Does that percentage include blind people that have/had birth defects or other problems that would keep them out of the workforce? Don't shoot me for saying it because the article mentioned more preemie babies surviving and having blindness being on a list of problems that could make them potentially illegitimate anyway.
Next. That is a shame they withheld education for you when you wanted to learn braille that is not right.
You can pause a book on tape to ponder the words so it will stop and start when you hit the button.
Teachers being expensive would be one more reason not to have braille.
I also don't suppose there are no blind writers. (man you have had a lot of judgment on you and are putting it on me) You don't have to have someone translate your words there are already computer programs for that and they are not over the top expensive.
Peace out i am done!
There are cameras that will read text for the blind like a menu. When was the last time you went to a restaurant that had a braille menu anyway? No not everything comes in an audio form but there are tools to translate print into words. I understand that technology is not available to everyone everywhere but things like that will be one day. So until then braille has it usefulness but I don't think it is something that is necessary or useful in the next 100 years.
I understand that making people who function differently conform into a sighted society will only go so far. It makes more sense to focus on their strengths in oral communication.
I don't think the issue is that complicated. I think there is a lot of discussing "what if's" to try and make it more complicated.
I figured that brain function in visual areas would be different for people who can't see. Why try and make them function more like sighted people. I think working on their strengths in oral communication is a better way to go. I can see why braille developed being in a time without the voice technology we have today but seeing as we have it now braille is like the morse code. Why bother when you can say it or hear the words.
I still don't see why it is relevant today to teach them a written style of language (unless of course they want to learn) when oral works just as well.
If they done use paragraphs what is the big deal in them not learning about them, Same with how to spell. Writing is clearly not a good medium for the blind. Why not be an oral society. What next are we going to teach them about art so they can uselessly know about colour and composition and primary and secondary colours? In the scheme of knowledge a person should acquire the useful things should come first and clearly learning our sighted version language is not one of them.
But the person who did not know happily ever after is not one word was clearly not listening well since they are spoken with separate meaning often.
I've got an even better idea, lets post stupid stuff in the comments on a website!
LOL