In the Evidence section, Shenk provides back up for his ten
thousand hour phenomenon quote on page 70 with a quote from Levitin. The quote
says that it takes at least ten thousand hours, about 3 hours a day for 10
years, to be exceptional at an art, including pianists, writers, and even athletes.
It also references a chess study that confirms this in terms of starting age
and practice. This evidence is used to further counter the concept of geniuses through
genetics alone. (pg 256)
Is
there any evolutionary advantage to long term practice, in this case ten
thousand hours, and hard work? Explain why or why not and use examples if
appropriate. This book has addressed the GxE dynamic pushing the human limit in
terms of racing speed and various other activities. Will it be possible to
reduce this ten thousand hour mark? If so, what would be the best way to do
that?
Alvin Varghese (alvin.varghese@hotmail.com)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the evolutionary advantages to long term practice vary. According to UC-Berkley's 'An introduction to evolution', evolution is "descent with modification". So the question becomes does the long term practice cause a genetic change in future generations? In the case of humans, this long term practice is for a certain skill, such as piano playing, or painting. I don't believe these skills are an evolutionary advantage for humans. The ability to play the piano extremely well does not better suit one for survival more than a person with no piano ability. An example of an advantage for survival discussed earlier in the course would be would be a closed circulatory system, that allows for more efficient delivery of oxygen. This allows for a wider range of body types and habitats to be available (Campbell 42.1). Having a lot of skill in a particular field does not improve odds of survival in humans.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't believe that these skills provide an advantage in survival, I do believe that they will fit Berkeley's definition of evolution. This increase in practice time and skill, will cause a genetic change in future generations. Shenk describes this exact phenomenon in reference to an experiment conducted one rats. In this study, they found that mice that were surrounded with a stimulating environment, had an increase in mental ability. Not only this, but the offspring also demonstrated an increased mental ability. This experiment parallels the effects of long term practice. While the long term practice isn't an advantage to survival, it will change the genes of future generations.
As the people who practice for the coveted ten-thousand hour mark pass on their genes, it is more likely that their offspring will be able to achieve mastery in the same skill. They will be given the right tools to achieve mastery, perhaps in less time than their ancestors. However, after reading Shenk's book, it would be foolish to say that the ancestors with the improved genes are destined for greatness. They must cultivate their skills through practice, self discipline and focus. Through epigenetics, their already improved genes could become even better. On the other hand, if they do not practice, they could waste the advantages their ancestors gave them. Just because past generations passed on genes that helped with a particular skill, does not mean that the offspring is destined for greatness.
Link to UC-Berkely Evolution
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_02
Jonah May (jonah2020@aol.com)