Shenk explains that many people have the "belief in inborn gifts" (117). They believe that certain people were born with certain talents that set them apart from everyone else. But as Shenk reveals, Beethoven suffered "horrific abuse" from his father (116) to become one of the most famous musicians of all time. But to most, the idea of talent "relieves a person of the burden of expectation" (117).
To what extent is talent real? Is it healthy for parents and/or friends to push someone like Beethoven's father pushed him to become well known or the best at something? What are the benefits of depending on one another to become the best we can be?
Lili Malone (lilimalone@ameritech.net)
Talent is very real, but not in the sense that society today views it as. Typically, talent is viewed as an "inborn gift": a natural ability that causes someone to be astoundingly adept at a certain skill. But Shenk disagrees. "Talent is not the cause but the result of something. It doesn't create a process but is the end result of that process." (60)In other words, talent is also a dynamic process; talent is fostered. Ever since the day we were born, we were subject to "potential catalysts" (96) that would genetically stimulate us to develop skills in a particular field. It's very biological, in fact. In Campbell Chapter 51, the nature of stimuli and response is explained. A stimuli is a trigger that elicits an action, a change in behavior, or a development. Shenk is describing the same thing, but on a genetic level. Environmental Factors ranging from deliberate intensive practice to a pushing parent expective of success are all stimuli which cause the cells to enter an "abnormal biochemical state" that will in turn trigger the "activation of dormant genes...that will stimulate systems designed to cause bodily reorganization and adaptive change." (69)
ReplyDeleteIn both Beethoven's case with his horribly abusive father and Mozart's case with his whole family expecting him to be the pride and bread-winner of the family, these became factors that greatly contributed to the devlopment of their amazing musical abilities. But there's no guarantee that doing the same will end up with the same results; how one's body may respond to having friends and family push someone is unpredictable, and for some, the stress and burden may even act as a negative stimulant. Therefore, while it may be helpful for some to have a parent or friend pushing them, it may also equally end up being very unhealthy and not at all helpful. As Shenk explains, "the collection of potential catalysts for intense ambition...will surely never be easily reproducible" (96). So no matter how parents try to replicate factors they believe contributed to the success of others, there's so much more factors that are unknown and undetected that it's unreasonable to believe that it will result in the same thing.
Depending on one another to become the best that we can is comforting in ways. Not everyone is capable of the intense ambition and drive to practice and improve, a major contribuent to amazing skills in an area. So to know that external factors such as the support of others and the helpful pushing of parents can contribute to one's skills is beneficial as well as comforting. I think, though, that this can also be very harmful in ways. There's so many possibilities for people having negative effects on us as well. Greg Downey explains a clear example of this, "a difference that makes a difference". If people deem someone early on as having "no talent" in a certain skill, it can be detrimental to development and may inhibit extreme abilities from emerging. (http://neuroanthropology.net/2009/05/20/talent-a-difference-that-makes-a-difference/)
Sara Yoojin Lee (yoojin3795@hotmail.com)
I agree with Sara that talent comes from potential catalysts which stimulate us to develop skills in a particular field. I think Shenk does a great job of explaining what talent really is and not what the common idea of talent is. However, instead of taking a genetic approach to it like Sara, I explored the effect of the idea of talent as an “inborn gift” and what people usually think about it. Also going along with Sara, I agree that depending on one another can be healthy and harmful, but I think in more cases than not, the dependence drives the chain of individuals to do better because of the support and encouragement they receive.
DeleteI think that talent is not real. Shenk states on p. 58-59 that “’Talent’ is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as ‘mental endowment; natural ability’.” However, I feel similarly to that of David Shenk that people have the “belief in inborn gifts” (117) which allows them to compare themselves to others and either strive for better, stay at the same level, or release any expectations so that we are merely jealous of others’ “talent” and wish for the same in ourselves.
I think that it is unhealthy to push someone as hard as Beethoven was pushed by his father in order to become great at music and well known. However, I believe that motivating a person more moderately can be healthy. For instance, motivating a person to change their lifestyle so it will benefit their health is totally health if the motivation is done with simple prodding and help. However, motivation doesn’t always work. If people feel no drive within themselves and need to be rewarded each time, once that reward is taken away, the person will not attempt the change (http://www.indianmba.com/Faculty_Column/FC818/fc818.html). But if there is a drive within the person, then they will keep trying all means possible in order to improve and attain their full potential.
Interdependence among humans to be the best we can be puts a pressure on the individuals involved which causes them to want to be the best. They try to improve their skills and keep up with or surpass those who depend on them so that they can aid the others at any time. Trying to always improve helps people to gain intelligence and make new discoveries. An example of this in the animal kingdom is a pack of lions. They depend on each other to get food, sit watch, and reproduce to keep the back and its traits alive. All members are constantly depended on to do their duty and to do it the best they can. If one does not, then all the lions in the population could be at serious risk for an attack which could result in death and the loss of important traits to future generations. If all lions are always performing at the top, then they will be safe, fed, and able to have a long lineage. (Regan Frieling, regan1995@yahoo.com)