Disclaimer: I am extremely biased towards the Heisig method over others and will never believe anyone who claims it doesn't work and/or the rote is better.

Skeptic Calling out to all Heisig fans

I've been reading this over at the 3yen blog, Tae Kim's blog writer of the popular grammar guide. Wow, how can so many people hate the Heisig method?

What gets me isn't Tae's comments on the method but rather the comments filled with beginners in Japanese who don't even give the Heisig method a chance and are mostly misinformed of what the book aims to do, a few quotes from the comments:

"You?re left with learning what is just a list of useless information."
"Why would you teach 吾 before 私 or even 我?"
"I seriously believe the only thing the system does is add an unnecessary step to the internalization process."


I know Tae is extremely misinformed and stubborn because of this comment:

"As soon as the book specifically mentioned that you shouldn?t learn reading with writing, I stopped reading."


Anyway, end rant, sorry I'm just so angry that so many peolpe are giving themselves unnecessary work by discarding the method without giving it a proper chance and being informed from the start that the book does not teach readings.

Any opinions on the subject or stories about turning non-believers onto the method?

EDIT: typos

meolox Wrote:"You're left with learning what is just a list of useless information."

I'm afraid I said that. It sounds a lot worse in isolation than it was intended to in the context of my post though. I was referring to the fact that I thought that the lack of a proper context would be detrimental as we learn better things that are in a useful context rather than lists of random things. Which I believe is true in general but I realize now that stories provide enough meaningful context so that doesn't apply.

As I said at the time, it was the first time I heard about the Heisig method and based on my initial impression. Obviously I've changed my mind since then (and posted about it in Tae Kim's follow up blog entry).

The introduction definitely needs to be read before considering- or judging- the method. Any systemized method for learning a set of information needs to be understood in total before it can be evaluated.

Take the simple multiplication table for instance, someone might list it's detractors as:

- It only teaches the numbers 1 to 100
- It forces you to memorize a huge ammount of information
- It's simpler just to work out each sum with your head and fingers

These arguements demonstrate an uninformed opinion of the benefits of the system. They disregard that, once memorized, you can determine the product of two numbers instantly, and that they can be used to break down larger multiplications.

I'm tired of defending a very logical program to people who won't take the time to understand it fully before trying to poke holes in its fundamentals.

I think he probably doesn't give it much of a chance because he never tried it, and at this point he knows Japanese well enough that he's not likely to try it.

Same goes for most of the people leaving comments. They've never tried it, or if they did they didn't stick with it long enough. People tend to disbelieve things when they seem too easy. Heisig's method actually requires a lot of work, but just reading the summery of it, it sounds "too easy", hence most people will disbelieve it unless they actually try it themselves. But then pride or ego steps in and they won't even give it a chance because they already don't believe it in, thus you get some of the posts that show an incredibly amount of anger and hatred towards it.

Try not to get too pissed at them. They've already made up their minds and have too much invested in their opposition to Heisig to listen to you, no matter how logical and good your argument may be. So I say just let them alone. Live and let live, eh? With luck they'll come around eventually.

i like heisig but i miss the point of this topic

One of the "reasons" that some people say they don't believe the system works is something like:

"I've never seen a 'Japanese 10th dan black belt' expert promoting the system"

Well, something they never say is that those "Japanese experts" aren't very common on internet fora and webs alike at all. I could say something like: "I've never met a non-native speaker of Japanese that had mastered the language" and that wouldn't mean at all that learning Japanese is impossible. Besides, if you get such a high level of fluency in Japanese, most probably you won't be messing around on a forum about learning Japanese.

Well, the best "we" can do is just go through RTK, work hard, "reach" fluency and come back here to tell other people what happened. =)

meolox Wrote:Any opinions on the subject or stories about turning non-believers onto the method?

There's no point to it. They will either learn some other way, give up (most likely), or eventually come to the method when they're ready to. There's not really a whole lot you can say to someone who isn't willing to listen, and frankly, I'd rather use my free time learning, and not wasting it on people who won't listen.

Personally, I was skeptical of the method until I downloaded the first 125 pages and tried it myself. Only after I understood what he was getting at by experiencing it myself did I come to believe in it.

All you can do is relate your own experiences with the method, and leave them to come to their own conclusions. Trying to do anything more than that is probably a waste of time. People who don't want to believe something won't believe it no matter how much evidence you present to the contrary.

rich_f Wrote:

meolox Wrote:Any opinions on the subject or stories about turning non-believers onto the method?

There's no point to it. They will either learn some other way, give up (most likely), or eventually come to the method when they're ready to. There's not really a whole lot you can say to someone who isn't willing to listen, and frankly, I'd rather use my free time learning, and not wasting it on people who won't listen.

Personally, I was skeptical of the method until I downloaded the first 125 pages and tried it myself. Only after I understood what he was getting at by experiencing it myself did I come to believe in it.

All you can do is relate your own experiences with the method, and leave them to come to their own conclusions. Trying to do anything more than that is probably a waste of time. People who don't want to believe something won't believe it no matter how much evidence you present to the contrary.

I think you got it dead on, if they don't want help from the Heisig method to make things easier for them then they don't deserve it

Tae says he was complaining about some of the claims Heisig made such as being able to write and recognize kanji at a native level. Anyway, its probably more appropriate to discuss Tae's statements on Tae's blog. He more than able to back up what he says even though I disagree with him.

That said, yes, there seems to be this odd pre-requisite that detractors are looking for. They want someone that began their Japanese studies with Heisig (Tae goes into an even more inane pre-requisite about wanting a pure Heisig methos that does not exist), then want on to obtain proficiency. No other way counts. I may not even qualify since I live in Japan.

To be honest, that was why I posted a thread "Congratulate me, I just obtained Japanese Fluency" thread. The idea is once you pass the JLPT 2 or whatever ever other benchmark you choose to use to determine fluency, you'd post your accomplishments and, more importantly, your methods there.

I am biased towards the Heisig method as well but I don't see how linking to other forum threads that disagree with it is going to help anything except to provoke an argument. There are better ways to spend your energy.

We got us a bunch of non-argumentative types here, I take it!
What are you doing on forums if you don't want to argue? :boggle:

No, not non-argumentative types, but rather a lot of us had enough arguments for some time on the topic. And the existence of this forums is not primarily to argue, at least I don't see it that way.
I stopped arguing about the Heisig-method in another forum until I've finished the book. So back to the book....

I was in the discussion in the comments for Tae Kim's thread. I think he's an extremely smart guy who "got" kanji without RtK and thus didn't need it; and I think it's probably as hard for him to get out of his own head & see how you'd need the method, as it is for me to get out of mine & see how you wouldn't.

If someone doesn't need a method, no need to convert them. But if they like the method & it works, no need to cut 'em down.

(FWIW, I'm reading web sites & articles in Japanese now, slowly-- but I wasn't able to do that when I was posting to the comments there. And I owe some thanks to Kim's grammar guide.)

There are many beginners among the comments who really could use the benefits of the Heisig system who denounce it's effectiveness before even giving it a chance, I think many of them are jumping on the "Lots of fluent people did it the rote way so that must be the best way to do it" bandwagon, I pity beginners who doubt the Heisig method having once been a Heisig-nonbeliever myself I'm glad I gave it a proper chance and actually realized from the start that RTK is just one step and it doesn't promise anything more than that described in the intro.

I think there is a stigma attached to doing something easily that is traditionally hard in a short amount of time and most people will doubt you know kanji just as well as someone who did it via rote, it's a shame because there are too many smart people who have used the Heisig method, well more people find the Hesig method everyday and like it so our numbers are sure to increase

Biene Wrote:No, not non-argumentative types, but rather a lot of us had enough arguments for some time on the topic.

Bingo. I spent way too much time arguing the virtues of Heisig with unbelievers who a) had only faulty knowledge of the method and b) had no intention of listening anyway. I realized that I was wasting my time, time which I should have been spending on actually studying Japanese and using the method I was defending. When people get religious about their learning methods, there's little point in arguing with them.

_Qbe_ Wrote:When people get religious about their learning methods, there's little point in arguing with them.

Like us, right? We're all calling them "unbelievers," after all.

I suggest "infidels." Or "the unwashed."

billyclyde Wrote:

_Qbe_ Wrote:When people get religious about their learning methods, there's little point in arguing with them.

Like us, right? We're all calling them "unbelievers," after all.

I suggest "infidels." Or "the unwashed."

Or "unsaved"? "Cursed"?

Or maybe, as Heisig puts it, "malefici"

In any case, ours isn't an exclusivist religion: this method may work for some, may not work for others, but feel free to give it a try! The malefici insist without exception that the Heisig method is a sure road to kanji damnation.

I love "inifidel" although lets not be too harsh on them, they'll see the light one day, I know i did

We're not crusaders, just missionaries.

Frankly I think that if you don't like the method and want to do it the rote way then go right ahead. Waste your time (Not that it won't work but I'll be able to do the same in about the 1/10 the time). When we both go in for interviews for a job and my kanji is better then the other guy's I think that will feel better then winning any argument on a forum.

Dangerous mindset to take. Finishing RTK is not learning Japanese. It's to make the LATER learning of Japanese more efficient (and for those that know Japanese to compliment their writings). The ones taking the "traditional" route are learning spoken Japanese in addition to writing. By the end of their study, they should have about 500 Kanji down to a level they can read reasonably well in addition to speaking. Nothing to sneeze at and can result in a job (JET at the very least, assuming you have a pulse, and even that can be waived).

Yes, I think the Heisig method is better. However, even I notice: some doing RTK cannot do the visual stories too well, some do not do the visual stories at all. Such RTK learners may hit that brick wall that stops their progress (and thereby their efforts to learn Japanese).

Basicly, don't take an elitist attitude. Have appreciation for any and all that want to learn Japanese (and Kanji, naturally). Except for a very select few on this board, none of us know Japanese yet so should not be saying we're better or even have the advantage. We've merely chosen a path, so should be wary until the destination has been reached.

Nukemarine Wrote:Dangerous mindset to take. Finishing RTK is not learning Japanese. It's to make the LATER learning of Japanese more efficient (and for those that know Japanese to compliment their writings). The ones taking the "traditional" route are learning spoken Japanese in addition to writing. By the end of their study, they should have about 500 Kanji down to a level they can read reasonably well in addition to speaking. Nothing to sneeze at and can result in a job (JET at the very least, assuming you have a pulse, and even that can be waived).

Yes, I think the Heisig method is better. However, even I notice: some doing RTK cannot do the visual stories too well, some do not do the visual stories at all. Such RTK learners may hit that brick wall that stops their progress (and thereby their efforts to learn Japanese).

Basicly, don't take an elitist attitude. Have appreciation for any and all that want to learn Japanese (and Kanji, naturally). Except for a very select few on this board, none of us know Japanese yet so should not be saying we're better or even have the advantage. We've merely chosen a path, so should be wary until the destination has been reached.

I agree with you that to each his own, as well as learning RTK is NOT by any means learning Japanese. But it is a much shorter path to learning Kanji in the long run. And if those don't want to take it that's fine. It's the fact that i have walked both paths and it's more the elitest attitude of those who aren't willing to give it a go (I'm referencing the comments made on Tae Kim's post) that I am referring to.

Transtic Wrote:"I've never seen a 'Japanese 10th dan black belt' expert promoting the system"

I recently took a 1 month intensive course at Kobe Toyo Japanese College . It's an excellent school, incidently. When I got there, they asked how much kanji I knew. I told them I could write and knew the meaning of 2200 or so, but can't read them very well yet. They didn't even bat an eye.

Later on, I mentioned that I used Heisig. They said something like "oh, what an excellent book. That one really helps english speakers!" These were the head teacher and her number 2. They have at least one copy of RTK1 that students are allowed to check out from their little library. They don't teach Heisig in class, but that's probably because over half of their students are Chinese.

Anyway, my point is, there are even some native Japanese teachers who approve of Heisig.

(time to brag a little: there were 10 people in my class, 6 of them Chinese. I was consistently 1st or 2nd in our daily kanji quizes, which included a) writing out the yomi, in kana, for kanji in a sentence b) writing kanji for yomi in a sentence c) given a kanji, writing a sample sentence. This goes far beyond the RTK1 level, so I think it's evidence that RTK1 worked, as a building block, for me in learning kanji)

Yeah, I had a similar experience at Yamasa this past October. My teacher was impressed that I got the kanji in her name right the first time, and could remember it. She wasn't too surprised to hear about Heisig, though, since I'm sure they get a lot of people there who have done it (and the rest are Chinese.)

We know from modern psychology that there are different learning modalities and not everyone is good at visualization or visual learning and the system relies on the ability to easily remember in a visual way, what he calls visual or imaginative memory I think (and I think that he assumes everyone is good at this already). I would guess that many of the people who tried the system and found it lacking do not have a strong visual imagination, although anyone who wants to develop one can do so through practice. They just might not be bringing one with them to the book to start.