Shenk used Michael Jordan as an example of a man who had the "willingness to do anything to improve his skills" (96), which he explained was the reason he became one of the best basketball players of all time. His "desperate personal desire" (97) to be the best is what got him to where he is today.
Jordan didn't achieve this desire until he was in tenth grade, while many gain this desire as a child, becoming prodigies. Do you think, between achieving desire at a young age and as an adult, one is better or more favored in nature? What are some specific differences between the environment that gives a child the desire and an adult the desire? Does this catalyst for desire have to continue for the drive to continue or can one incident change someone's attitude?
Lili Malone (lilimalone@ameritech.net)
The timing of achieving desire does not matter. Although when a person desires something ever since they were a child, they might be more desperate to accomplish that desire; but I do not think it will change the "degree of prodigy" in a person.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Daniel Pink, he thinks that there needs to be an environment where it does not force you to do the work, but it drives you to go further. For instance, a company that pays you extra for overtime is forcing you to do the work rather than working overtime yourself because you are eager to work. These company would not be favorable in terms of getting that desire. However, there are companies like Google where during work you get a period of time and you can work on anything you would like. This time period allows creative thinking to happen and many of the works of Google has been created this way. Not only giving the employees the free time to do whatever they want, it allows them to strive for the desire creatively and they would be favored to work rather than being forced. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y)
Being honest, I'm not really sure what you mean by "catalyst for desire have to continue for the drive to continue," but I do not think one incident can change someone's attitude, unless it was very impactful. There is something called habits and they are hard to break.
Going back to the example on the TedTalk, it relates to the biological theme of evolution. Because so many people have been used to the system where they get reinforced if they work more, the desire or the motive has been only focused on doing more to get the reinforcement and not doing more because they like what they are doing. People are more and more used to this and adapting to this type of environment, so it would be people going through evolution as the time goes by. In the past, people would be in trouble when they do like a scientific experiment because it was not allowed by the churches. However, many scientists despite the negative reinforcements, have continued their researching because they had the motivation for it.
Relating this whole post to Campbell, there is also a source of competition that may increase the desire to do well. An "interspecific competition is a -/- interaction that occurs when individuals of different species compete for a resource that limits their growth and survival" (Campbell 1199). Because we are all humans, our species are the same. In some environment, for example, some companies make the employers become competitive in order to get a higher position. That competitiveness may enforce the desire to do better because higher position may mean better pay, and better pay is for the survival.
-Sally Park (sypark1029@gmail.com)