[Discussion] Fwd: RE: The Beshik, or why we do not speak Tatar.

[gonul@bilkent.edu.tr]

------------- Forwarded Message -------------
Date: 12 Aug 2002 17:23 EEST
From: Iskandar Ahunov <iskandar_ahunov@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: The Beshik, or why we do not speak Tatar.

For Gauhar.

1. I can’t tell anything about current researches. I’m
not psychologist or doctor.
I just told about fact which I know and conclusions
which I could made of this facts.
I am quite sure that the new tests will not say
anything new. 
2. I don’t know exactly how much people use it now.
But based on my observations
I can estimate the number of beshik users as at least
50% in cities and 90-100 % in rural areas.
It is real disaster!
3. I brought up following facts
	1. Domans theory which is based on 40 years of
experiments.
	2. Kureks article with the tests of Shtilerman
	3. My own observation and comparison of children
	4. Historical fact that all Trucik empires have
collapsed despite they had
	more ancient culture and more advantageous positions
in the past.
Isn’t this the facts? There might be other factors
which could affect the rate of
the development of nations, but in this particular
case I think the influence of beshik was most
significant.




--- gauhar <gauhar@uvic.ca> wrote:
> That was quite fascinating reading. I just have some
> questions.
> 
> 1)>>>I made a search on the Internet for the word
> "beshik". The first attempt
> >brought me the article of Nicolay urek, a Russian
> doctor of psychology. 1928,
> >Soviet psychologist A. Shtillerman published the
> esults of these tests on
> >Russian, Uzbek and Ukrainian children. The test
> demonstrated that there was 
> 2-5
> >time more mentally normal children among Russians
> than among Uzbeks. The
> >number of severely backward children among Uzbeks
> was almost 10 times higher
> >than it should be in any normal population.
> Moreover by the age of 12-14, the
> >results of Uzbeks got even worse. Shtillerman also
> suggested that the reason
> >for the backwardness of the Uzbeks was the beshik.
> Thus my hypothesis found
> >corroboration in Kurek's article.
> 
> It's great that you can support your hypothesis with
> the research that goes so 
> way back. Is there anything current of the same line
> of research? any 
> comparison numbers of Russian, Uzbek, and Ukrainian,
> or any other 
> former-Soviet republic's children?
> 
> 2) >> Appropriate measures to inform people about
> the harm the beshik causes 
> have to be taken 80 years later! Because Beshik is
> used by all Turkic people, 
> I think that is why the development of Turkic
> nations has slowed down. For 
> centuries they have been experiencing the lack of
> qualified people. I think 
> this also explains the decay and destruction of the
> great Turkic empires of 
> Chingiz Khan and Tamerlane. The worst is that Turkic
> people continue to use 
> the
> >beshik even today. I presume that half the
> population of Central Asia use it 
> today. It is quite obvious that it is nothing but
> barbarism to continue to use 
> such a relic.
> 
> Do you have any data on whether Turkic people still
> use the beshik or not, and 
> how much? I believe during Soviet time some of the
> Turkic people, especially 
> urban population abandoned beshik tradition. So it
> would be interesting to see 
> if there is any data available on the use of beshik
> in modern society. It 
> would also be interesting to see a current
> comparison between 2 groups of 
> kids, the first one, who were in the beshik during
> their first year of 
> development, and the second, who were brought
> without a beshik present.
> 
> 3)>Taking into account all the facts, we can also
> >conclude that the rate of development of a nation
> >depends on their nursery traditions, which defines
> the
> >average IQ of the nation.
> 
> I would like to see all the facts accounted if we
> are talking about nation 
> development. Are factors like socio-economic
> background, level of education, 
> urban or rural living, time spent with a kid, native
> language, language spoken 
> to a kid, age, marital status (single parent,
> divorced, etc.), and mental 
> health of the parents included into your hypothesis?
> Any historical factors 
> like a lot of Turkic population was educated mostly
> in Russian or had no 
> access to formal education, forced to abandon the
> traditions and religion, 
> died because of starvation, repression, or diseases
> brought into the 
> countries? There might be many other factors, I'm
> just trying to think of the 
> most common.
> 
> I would assume this is still a hypothesis under
> development, since I don't see 
> much quantitative or qualitative data and more than
> one or two references to 
> support it. I'm not pro or against beshik, I would
> just love to see something 
> more than assumptions. Are you planning to develop
> the idea beyond the 
> article?
> I think the topic is interesting, however, without
> proper support of data and 
> evidences, it might be considered as one of those
> articles when researchers 
> tell us that coffee is good, and then another
> article says that no, coffee is 
> bad; posting an alphabet over your child's cradle is
> good, and moments later 
> another research reports that overwhelming your
> child with too much 
> information too soon is harmful. It always makes me
> wonder whether it's a new 
> trend or truth. I guess the reality is a matter of
> perception. Hope to hear 
> answers to my questions, Gauhar
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from AnthEurasia, send the text
> "unsubscribe AnthEurasia-L"
> to: <majordomo@fas.harvard.edu>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com

To unsubscribe from AnthEurasia, send the text "unsubscribe AnthEurasia-L"
to: <majordomo@fas.harvard.edu>