难道没有人使用wiki吗？--关于杜曼你应该知道的。

vincirain

其实我也曾经买过一堆杜曼的材料，
不过没有各位杜曼妈妈的毅力，几乎没有进行太多的努力，
且女儿并不感兴趣，早已不再进行杜曼的早教。
我觉得自己当初一时兴起买卡时就犯了一个错误--没有进行调查，这个并不符合自己的习惯。
今天无意在wiki上查到了关于杜曼的介绍与评价，
让我觉得有必要让大家从另一方面了解它（相信已有人看过类似的评价），
老实说，由于杜曼在美国已经被认为是有悖科学的，相关英文资料并不多。
下面我摘一段wiki上的介绍，有兴趣的妈妈可以自己搜索下：

The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential
The Institutes for The Achievement of Human Potential is a non-profit organization providing teaching programs and literature which it promotes as improving the health and neurological development of normal children and of children who have sustained a brain injury. Although the institute's programs were supported by some notable individuals such as Linus Pauling and Raymond Dart, the programs have been widely criticized.[1] According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the institute's patterning treatment is based on an outmoded and oversimplified theory of brain development, its effectiveness is not supported by evidence-based medicine, and its use is unwarranted.

Founded in 1955, the Institutes for The Achievement of Human Potential (IAHP, also known as "The Institutes") is located in a suburb of northwest Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The founder, Glenn Doman (a physical therapist), together with Carl Delacato (an educational psychologist), developed an approach to treating children with brain injury, published in 1960 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).[3] Their work drew heavily on the ideas of Temple Fay (a neurophysiologist), who was head of the Department of Neurosurgery at Temple University Medical School and president of the Philadelphia Neurological Society.[4] Fay believed that the infant brain evolves (as with evolution of the species) through stages of development similar to a fish, a reptile, a mammal and finally a human. This idea, encapsulated as "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny", also known as the recapitulation theory, is considered obsolete by modern mainstream biologists.[5] The IAHP claim that brain injury at a given level of neurological development prevents further progress.[6] The IAHP states that its therapies are based on the theory of neuroplasticity, or the brain’s inherent ability to grow both functionally and anatomically. It claims that traditional medicine has attempted to treat brain injured children by medicating them, and that such medications can have negative side effects.[7] The IAHP claims that due to neuroplasticity, their programs of increased sensory stimulation can actually physically grow the brain and produce improved neurological function in their patients. Another aspect of the IAHP's theories is that a lack of oxygen to the brain is a key cause of many problems in brain-injured children. The IAHP asserts that their program includes techniques that improve this oxygen supply, and that increased oxygen to the brain will help their patients recover.[citation needed]
Glenn Doman published the book What To Do About Your Brain-Injured Child[8] in 1974, which describes the ideas and techniques used by IAHP. The subtitle of the book or your Brain-damaged, Mentally Retarded, Mentally Deficient, Cerebral-Palsied, Epileptic, Autistic, Athetoid, Hyperactive, Attention Deficit Disordered, Developmentally Delayed, Down’s Child lists the many conditions the author regards as being encompassed by "brain injured" – the term favoured by IAHP. Since 1964, Glen Doman (later also Janet and Douglas Doman) has published a number of books in the "Gentle Revolution Series", a line of books for parents of normal children, covering topics such as reading,[9] math,[10] intelligence,[11] and swimming.[12] Programs for "well children" are a significant aspect of the IAHP's promotional material, literature and web site.

vincirain

感谢楼上的回复 不过我也想再提两点，做抛砖引玉之用：
1、我不太清楚大家口中的‘效果’指什么？
是高贵的品格还是审美的能力？
是科学的态度还是创新的精神？
恕我直言，我曾见看到过有些杜曼家庭的视频，在为孩子看世界名画。
我环顾其家里的陈设却异常的俗丽（和家里物质财富无关）。
你会为了“INCEPTION”中充满的数学与哲学奥妙而击节拍掌吗？
你会在吴冠中的“残荷新柳”面前痴迷不已吗？
你会在时寒冰的博客中体味到何谓民生吗？
......
我只想说的是早教的重点不在于教孩子，而在于提升自己。这个又老又烂的说法。
但确实如此。家庭、社会的气场会强烈的作用于孩子的塑造中，和具体的某一方法无甚关系。

2、大家应该还是承认‘Doman的理论并未得到证实’这个基础事实吧，科学也
可以有假说但是如果在假说之上，又提出一系列非常具体的实施措施，那么就需要
大家仔细辨识并做出判断的。不要无谓做小白鼠。
科学不同于文学艺术作品，后者带有强烈的个人主义色彩是对objective world从另外一个角度（情感）的诠释。
你会说梵高生前环境非常落魄，死后却享有盛誉，因为当时人们并不了解他的艺术价值。
但我想说一百年后也很难有人为Doman正名。

tianxi002

实践是检验真理的唯一标准。我反感某些所谓专家坐而论道。