Deaf Awareness

Just sayin' 30-40 in 350mil is not 100mil. its round 10mil, and about 4 times more likely than winning the SuperLotto in California.

Not to say, according to census.gov theres 308.7mil people.

:aw:

Close enough for me. And I never claimed to be perfect -- Which, according to a friend of mine I cannot be because I am not deaf.

Other than that I think I am Okay.
 
The book was published in 1980-Sociology a Canadian perspective.

What was the event that suggests there is something called "deaf culture" NOW that DID'NT EXIST PRIOR? Something to do with Cochlear Implants?--Coincidental?

Implanted A B Harmony activated Aug/07

Lets try this.

First:

At the start of the 1700 century one in four children in Martha's Vineyard were born deaf. The residents developed their own sign language, MVSL. That comes up as pretty much a Deaf community with a separate culture.

In the mid 1700's in France De l'Epee stumbled upon two deaf girls who communicated using sign language and uncovered a hither to unknown community of Deaf people. He felt they had the right to be preached too, receive sacraments and thereby go to heaven. To this end he founded the first known school for the Deaf. I would say that counts. I fail to be able to conceive of a hither to unknown Deaf community that would not have its own cultural norms.

Gallaudet was founded in the mid 1800's. The signed languages of Martha's Vineyard and French sign language merged.

The first bicycle with two equally sized wheels was invented in the late 1800's. By the turn of the century it was the rage. One of the largest and wealthiest bicycle clubs was composed of Deaf riders. They bought buildings, had their own country club, did all kinds of things.

In the mid 1950's Stokoe demonstrated ASL was a true language.

I believe the first documentary about Deaf culture was "In the Land of the Deaf" in the 1990's.

My vote is that it is hard to deny Deaf Culture based on these events alone.
 
Don't forget that in the heyday of the Deaf clubs, there were oral deaf clubs also where no signing was allowed. Deaf culture did not only encompass ASL users.

So drphil would have been happy and fit in there.
 
there were oral deaf clubs also where no signing was allowed. Deaf culture did not only encompass ASL users.

So drphil would have been happy and fit in there.

i thought ag bell and other oral orgs rans them still
 
I "understand oral deaf according to "cultural deaf" apparently aren't "real" due the lack of ASL usage. Hope the Zombies welcome them.
Michael Chorost in his book Rebuilt,2005 does discuss the decline of members in"deaf culture". Seems to be tied into the explosion of Cochlear Implant users. Surprised?

Implanted A B Harmony activated Aug/07
 
I "understand oral deaf according to "cultural deaf" apparently aren't "real" due the lack of ASL usage. Hope the Zombies welcome them.
Michael Chorost in his book Rebuilt,2005 does discuss the decline of members in"deaf culture". Seems to be tied into the explosion of Cochlear Implant users. Surprised?

Implanted A B Harmony activated Aug/07

drphil, you are very real. The divide between oral and ASL users is there, but you are still deaf.

And your brothers too, even they don't seem interested in finding us.

You have a genetic component there in your family. I wonder if you are your brothers are a spontaneous mutation or if you can trace it back further in your genetic line.
 
I "understand oral deaf according to "cultural deaf" apparently aren't "real" due the lack of ASL usage. Hope the Zombies welcome them.
Michael Chorost in his book Rebuilt,2005 does discuss the decline of members in"deaf culture". Seems to be tied into the explosion of Cochlear Implant users. Surprised?

Implanted A B Harmony activated Aug/07

Michael Chorost is only attempting to justify himself. Totally oral CI users are still, and always will be, a small minority of the deaf.
 
Jumping in here.

First StSapphire, I believe you are sincere.

I am. And before responding further - I wasn't attempting to defend "all textbooks" or even say that "textbooks are the best way to learn anything new", I just thought the conversation was starting to head towards a "textbooks and book-learnings suck and are worthless" direction.

As to textbooks. They are excellent as starting points especially when nothing more concrete is available in any subject. But when you start reading a text book there are certain things you should be aware of.

1. Textbooks are formal.

For instance the textbook way of writing the last sentence is "There are three things of which you should be aware."

But very few people talk like that or think like that. Most people can't tell the difference between the two sentences and those who do see a difference will notice the formal version is "stuck up."

In other words textbooks are formal guides "about" reality, they are not, in any way, to be construed AS reality.

I's at least somewhat agree, though I wouldn't claim that formalism negates the message. If I'm learning how to do arithmetic, you could try to come up with your own system from scratch, but I guarantee that it'll probably suck compared to whatever you could come up with on your own. It might not be completely wrong, but I'd bet money on it being more likely to be wrong at least in some points than a math textbook would be.

Side note: Don't tell Richard Feynman I said that. I read his autobiography recently, and he had a section on textbooks in that. All of my defenses are of textbooks that don't suck, which apparently is becoming a shrinking minority.

2. The only things included in these formal guides are:

A. Those things so generally recognized as being true it is believed by the authors there is no need to cite a source -- Unfortunately, as Buddha said, "Just because a thing is generally believed to be true does not mean it is true. Therefore do not accept if for that reason alone." (paraphrased.)

B. Those things established through research, polls and statistics.

Research is often over turned when some new factor is discovered that influences it, sometimes research supports more than one point of view, sometimes research is faulty, and sometimes, as in the cigarette debate, outright purchased. Therefore while research is indicative it should never be accepted without reservations.

Polls are unreliable unless you know the questions that were asked. For instance I can prove fully 80% of the hearing people in my town hate Deaf people by asking them "How many Deaf people do you know you like?" Since at least 80% of the hearing people in town have never knowingly interacted with a Deaf person they will answer "none." But if I ask those same people "Do you dislike Deaf people," those same people will answer "No." Proving my town to be one of the most Deaf friendly in the nation.

And you have to love statistics! How a statistic is presented almost guarantees the reaction you will receive.

One of my granddaughters came up to me scared out of her wits after listening to some news person say "How dangerous the world is today." She quoted "And Boompa there are 30 to 40 serial killers loose in the U.S. at any given time. It could be your neighbor."

True, it could be, but -- There are 350,000,000 people in the U.S.A. which means one in every 100,000,000 people is a serial killer. The percentage may have never changed throughout history.

Which means you are 3 times more likely to win the California lottery than you are to meet a serial killer.

C. Those things that are backed by authority. Unfortunately if you know how to do research you can find some authority somewhere to back up almost any opinion you want to present -- And if you want to sell your textbook you will find the authorities who will back up the opinion the purchasers of your textbook will want to read. So in this case you are learning the opinions approved of by those who buy the textbooks for the school system that uses them.

D. By and large textbooks are designed to teach you things to be memorized during class and recalled during test taking. Thus a minimum of complexity or controversy is included. Textbooks are not set up to have your knowledge tested through essay questions, which is the best way to test your comprehension of a subject, but by multiple choice testing, which is the most convenient way to test your comprehension of a subject.

Thus textbooks are more akin to indoctrination tools than comprehension tools.

E. Textbooks tend to obfuscate rather than clarify. Often things are approached in the hardest possible way to learn -- And time is spent learning jargon so you can discuss relatively simple subjects with a vocabulary that makes it sound exceedingly important.

Thus you read: "The inherent diversification among the various Deaf communities indigenous to the United States is greater than previously estimated." instead of reading, "Every Deaf club has its own personality."

I could go on but 5 points should be enough to satisfy Eris.

So let us say you have no access to D/deaf people so you can expand your experience -- What do you do?

AllDeaf is a good choice. Harris Communications -> Harris Communications - products for deaf, hard of hearing, hearing impaired, hearing loss, and sign language. Harris Communications - Vibrating Alarm Clocks, Loud Telephones and Signalers is excellent -- Look for the label "Deaf Author" when choosing a book. Another wonderful place is OIC Movies - American Sign Language (ASL) Deaf Videos. If you are not good at ASL pay your $59 yearly subscription fee and it will be subtitled for the signing impaired. Fantastic deal.

Another thing to do, on ANY subject, when using a textbook, is to use the textbook as a starting point – Not a final word as at least one person does on this forum. You do this by checking every statement on the internet. Try rephrasing the text book in simple, or simply different language. Look for differing opinions, see which ones tend to fit your world view and which ones don't. After a while you will get a feel for the subject you cannot get any other way.

Just remember, when it comes test time, give the teachers the answers they want – Unless you want to be like I was in school, give the kids around you the “right” answers so they could pass while I wrote down the “true” answers and proudly walked away with my straight “F” average.

I'd say there's a very simple solution for everything in this section, to weed out the shitty textbooks from the good textbooks. (Shitty: Contains all the negative aspects above, designed to sell, rather than to teach, more concerned with ideology than with truth; Good: The opposite of shitty, as defined above.)

1) Have several people who are recognized as competent in the field the textbook is attempting to teach, ideally who do not all share the same ideological leanings, read at least 3 or more different textbooks on the subject. If any one is panned by more than 75% of the "experts", throw it out immediately. If any one is selected as good by more than 75% of the "experts", read it and be happy that someone wrote an actually good textbook.

2) If they couldn't agree, find out if that's because of ideological differences, then find the leading two textbooks from each camp, and read both, to gain differing perspectives.

3) If there are no leading candidates, throw away all of the textbooks and get the authors to try again. Tell them not to suck so much this time.

=====

Anyhow, didn't want to derail the conversation much more, but thought I'd clarify my position there. And I agree that there may very well be some subjects which are learned in much better ways than reading about them in a textbook. Still, assuming you can find a good textbook on the subject, I don't think it ever hurts to start your journey in learning about it there, so long as, as mentioned above, you realize that it is a start, rather than the end-all be-all for knowledge on the subject.
 
When someone ONLY uses a textbook to "understand" deaf culture and doesn't bother to interact, we tell them TO INTERACT. Simple as that. We're basing our statements off poster(s) who won't have anything to do with the deaf community. If you'd been here longer and seen the posts we're referencing to, you would have understood that. :)
 
Dude, some of us aren't even candidates for CI. :roll:
 
Yes, Bott. Sorry that I didn't make that clear. *waves*
 
I have never said that I "studied deaf culture" from a textbook-Sociology-Canadian perspective. Did anyone notice how hard it is to study anything that ISN'T DISCUSSED?

MY understanding re "deaf culture" came from various articles in VIBES-Canadian Hearing Society magazines over the last 20 years. Discussed in many Hearing Help classes as well.

I have acknowledged that I became Bilaterally deaf-December 20, 2006 That fact will remain for the rest of my life. I have NEVER denied this. My 2 younger brothers are in similar situation. Two of us Cochlear Implants with my youngest brother is at Profound loss level considers his Hearing aid is suitable.

I am well aware that not everyone is a suitable candidate for a Cochlear Implant. I have mentioned before Sunnybrook/Toronto 19 year experience -60% of all person referred were "rejected" for one reason or other. 850 persons were implanted in that timeframe of which I was one.

Implanted Sunnybrook Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07
 
I have never said that I "studied deaf culture" from a textbook-Sociology-Canadian perspective. Did anyone notice how hard it is to study anything that ISN'T DISCUSSED?

MY understanding re "deaf culture" came from various articles in VIBES-Canadian Hearing Society magazines over the last 20 years. Discussed in many Hearing Help classes as well.

I have acknowledged that I became Bilaterally deaf-December 20, 2006 That fact will remain for the rest of my life. I have NEVER denied this. My 2 younger brothers are in similar situation. Two of us Cochlear Implants with my youngest brother is at Profound loss level considers his Hearing aid is suitable.

I am well aware that not everyone is a suitable candidate for a Cochlear Implant. I have mentioned before Sunnybrook/Toronto 19 year experience -60% of all person referred were "rejected" for one reason or other. 850 persons were implanted in that timeframe of which I was one.

Implanted Sunnybrook Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07

We know you haven't studied Deaf Culture. That is why it is completely innappropriate for you to even attempt to discuss the topics related to Deaf Culture.

We also have the date of your deafness memorized simply because we have seen it over and over and over....
 
We know you haven't studied Deaf Culture. That is why it is completely innappropriate for you to even attempt to discuss the topics related to Deaf Culture.

We also have the date of your deafness memorized simply because we have seen it over and over and over....
No, that's just the date when he first experienced SILENCE. He became deaf years before that when he began wearing HAs or more likely even years before that.
 
We know you haven't studied Deaf Culture. That is why it is completely innappropriate for you to even attempt to discuss the topics related to Deaf Culture.

There will be some very sparse discussions if you begin limiting participation to those who actually know what they are talking about, and far fewer if your prerequisite for conversation involves "studying" the topic. :)

I've seen people who haven't studied relationships and really don't understand their own discuss such things in the Relationships threads. I've seen people who are not parents -- or who have not been well-parented -- participate in discussions in the Parenting threads. Politics? Is everyone involved in those threads a student - formal or otherwise -- of economics, foreign policy, public policy, health care management, etc.? I've also seen people who did not study education, and who do not feel they received a great education provide input in the Deaf education threads. Not least, there are even people who haven't studied cochlear implants who attempt to discuss topics related to CIs, from evaluation to surgery to outcomes.

Besides, DrPhil interacts with other deaf in organized activities, shares with them distinctive experiences, some common values, interacts on this forum (and likely others) etc. -- who is to say that what he has been living every day isn't how Deaf Culture can manifest in some environments and for some people.
 
I am. And before responding further - I wasn't attempting to defend "all textbooks" or even say that "textbooks are the best way to learn anything new", I just thought the conversation was starting to head towards a "textbooks and book-learnings suck and are worthless" direction.


I don't think anyone thinks textbooks are worthless -- But by the time you are 40 you develop a very low tolerance of the next 20 year old who tells you, "You don't know what you are talking about. I just read the latest textbooks in college and they say..."



I's at least somewhat agree, though I wouldn't claim that formalism negates the message. If I'm learning how to do arithmetic, you could try to come up with your own system from scratch, but I guarantee that it'll probably suck compared to whatever you could come up with on your own. It might not be completely wrong, but I'd bet money on it being more likely to be wrong at least in some points than a math textbook would be.

Tractenberg system of speed mathematics. Chi San Bop. Khan Academy The list is longer but my memory fails me.

When I was a kid in school I could not comprehend standard fractions let alone manipulate them. So I found a simple solution. I converted all the standard fractions to decimal fractions worked the equations in a simple to understand manner, then converted them back to get the answer.

The school punished me because I "refused to conform" my mother argued that I should be pushed ahead to a more advanced class.


Side note: Don't tell Richard Feynman I said that. I read his autobiography recently, and he had a section on textbooks in that. All of my defenses are of textbooks that don't suck, which apparently is becoming a shrinking minority.

Assuming you can tell the difference.


My name was once Nomad. As I bounced around from place to place I noticed textbooks that discussed the Civil War. The ones from Main, the ones from Georgia, and the ones from California -- They could have been three different countries writing about three different wars.





I'd say there's a very simple solution for everything in this section, to weed out the shitty textbooks from the good textbooks. (Shitty: Contains all the negative aspects above, designed to sell, rather than to teach, more concerned with ideology than with truth; Good: The opposite of shitty, as defined above.)

1) Have several people who are recognized as competent in the field the textbook is attempting to teach, ideally who do not all share the same ideological leanings, read at least 3 or more different textbooks on the subject. If any one is panned by more than 75% of the "experts", throw it out immediately. If any one is selected as good by more than 75% of the "experts", read it and be happy that someone wrote an actually good textbook.

2) If they couldn't agree, find out if that's because of ideological differences, then find the leading two textbooks from each camp, and read both, to gain differing perspectives.

3) If there are no leading candidates, throw away all of the textbooks and get the authors to try again. Tell them not to suck so much this time.

=====

There is no way to get rid of bias due to politics, time, and place. The only thing you can do is recognize it and compensate for it.



Anyhow, didn't want to derail the conversation much more, but thought I'd clarify my position there. And I agree that there may very well be some subjects which are learned in much better ways than reading about them in a textbook. Still, assuming you can find a good textbook on the subject, I don't think it ever hurts to start your journey in learning about it there, so long as, as mentioned above, you realize that it is a start, rather than the end-all be-all for knowledge on the subject.

It is unimportant where you start. What is important is the questions you ask and where they lead you. Don't just ask individual questions, ask them in sets.

Who agrees with an idea. Why do they agree. How did they come by this knowledge and/or belief.

Who disagrees with an idea. Why do they disagree. How did they come by this knowledge and/or belief.

Who and/or what benefits? Someone and/or something (such as a government or a culture) always does.

Who and/or what suffers? Same.
 
No, that's just the date when he first experienced SILENCE. He became deaf years before that when he began wearing HAs or more likely even years before that.

Oh, I agree with you. And so does every other thinking person. But since he classifies "deaf" as "silence" it appears that the date for both is one and the same.:giggle:

Which would also provoke the question: exactly how many years has there been a real life opportunity to learn about Deaf Culture?
 
There will be some very sparse discussions if you begin limiting participation to those who actually know what they are talking about, and far fewer if your prerequisite for conversation involves "studying" the topic. :)

I've seen people who haven't studied relationships and really don't understand their own discuss such things in the Relationships threads. I've seen people who are not parents -- or who have not been well-parented -- participate in discussions in the Parenting threads. Politics? Is everyone involved in those threads a student - formal or otherwise -- of economics, foreign policy, public policy, health care management, etc.? I've also seen people who did not study education, and who do not feel they received a great education provide input in the Deaf education threads. Not least, there are even people who haven't studied cochlear implants who attempt to discuss topics related to CIs, from evaluation to surgery to outcomes.

Besides, DrPhil interacts with other deaf in organized activities, shares with them distinctive experiences, some common values, interacts on this forum (and likely others) etc. -- who is to say that what he has been living every day isn't how Deaf Culture can manifest in some environments and for some people.

There is discussion, and then there is consistent and constant negative contribution based on a lack of information that one appears not to be willing to remediate. I don't limit discussion. However, in the OP of my pwn thread, I did request that these innane comments be absent. They contribute nothing to an awareness or an understanding of the culture.

Deaf swimming? But to answer your question, because manifestation of cultural affiliation contains facets completely absent from drphil's existence and precludes many that are present.
 
Back
Top