In page 146 of the Argument section, David Shenk argues that achievement is just as much as a product of society as it is a product of the individual. Although "we tend to think of achievement as an individual phenomenon", Shenk states that humans "learn from one another, share with one another, and constantly compare and compete with one another", claiming that human work together to achieve as a whole. Shenk also claims that competition placed by the culture of society allows individuals to achieve greater things.
How does Shenk's claim further develop the biological theme of interdependence in nature? In addition, how does this claim compliment the theory of evolution in which environmental pressures "force" organisms to evolve? Do you agree that every culture must place these pressures in order to "foster values that bring out the best in its people" (146)? How does Shenk's claim cohere with history which contains periods of concentrated achievement and periods of time nearly devoid of achievement? What factors may have caused this distribution?
~Jimmy Chang (jimmychang95@gmail.com)
In relation to interdependence in nature -- which involves various interactions such as competition, predation, and symbiosis in the forms of parasitism, mutualism, and commensalism (Campbell) -- Shenk's claim of cultural pressure to enhance human achievement makes sense. In the Western world, competition for a particular resource takes the form of a pursuit of money which provides stability in the basic areas of food, shelter, and societal influence. In order to out compete others for this vital resource, humans have adopted the various forms of symbiosis to enhance their chances. Using the educational system as a model because better education is generally considered in our society to be a fundamental step in the process of acquiring money, mutualism is evident in the student/teacher relationship. It is described as a kind of "biological barter" and positive interdependent interaction as the student receives information and skills that will ultimately improve his or her chances in competition for the resource of money and the teacher in exchange for their knowledge and skill directly receives money (http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Mutualism). Continuing with the school model, a parasitic relationship would be that of the lazy student and the active student where the lazy student benefits from copying the homework from the active student and thus improving their grade and overall image in the school environment and future possibilities based on that grade or image while the active student is harmed in the process because they have allowed the lazy student to become their potential competition for the money resource where image and grades are concerned. Beyond the school setting, these symbiotic relationships to compete for the money resource continue as scientists and engineers are inspired or learn new techniques or ideas from their peers that in turn allow them to achieve a higher level of performance. Taking this view, I would argue that rather than the species evolving, this process of cultural pressures and competition demonstrates an evolution of ideas. This is in accord with evidence of pockets of historical cultural achievement contrasting cultural stagnation. Shenk explains that one such pocket, the Italian Renaissance, began with a catalyst, a specific contest that inspired in the culture a spirit of "agonism" or the importance of struggling in the face of tough competition (148,149). Without a premium placed on contest for fostering new, better ideas or achievements, cultures are left dwell in their developmental rut.
ReplyDeleteI would agree that cultural pressures are crucial for development and evolution in ideas, however as to the notion of "bringing out the best in [...] people" I believe and accept Shenk's take that cultivating greatness in people results from the interaction of training/practice intensity and methods, and sheer desire in addition to competitive pressures (111). Also the necessity of this interaction of factors to create human greatness is evidenced by the presence of "LAMs (low in achievement motivation)" individuals in addition to "HAMs (high in achievement motivation)" individuals in what we consider to be great cultures and societies (150); if cultural pressures alone were able to bring out the best in people, great societies would be HAMs alone. So while cultural pressures are necessary for the betterment of human, they must be present with various other factors in order to be effective.
I agree. Culture is a huge factor in evolvement. What the environment regards as the “survival” gene, it brings out by enhancing the gene that the culture regards highly. Using a stereotype, Asians are known for being smart, but it is mostly the cultural influence. Asians regard education as the highest priority, therefore, at younger age’s parents train or discipline their child to study and bring out or enhance their academic skills. The reason why academics and education is so highly regarded for this culture is because they believe that this is the best way for survival and bettering yourself in society. For African Americans, being a star in athletic is highly devoted upon, in a stereotypical term, because they find that being more athletically developed is the better means for survival. This can be expressed by interdependence in nature because how the environment is made up and what society has pressured on the individuals can change how a person/gene can process. It’s also what the society offers as a mean for someone/thing to grow. I do agree that a society should try to bring out and influence “foster” these values in people because it’s a certain way of bringing out competition. A little competition can be good, but too much can backfire. High competition can be a burden in that, if a person strives for something, but fails to reach it because of someone’s interference it can create either disappointment or frustration leading to a more fixed mindset or it can allow a person to push themselves. (http://dandlee.blogspot.com/) This can also be an example of negative feedback; in that too much can lead to less of itself.
ReplyDeleteAn example where there were concentrated achievements were during the industrial revolution, a time period where great advancement in machinery growth were arriving. People were using their minds more in order to fulfill more of their desires by creating a greater advancement in technology. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution) It is one of the smoggiest and most disturbing and difficult time period for Americans, but it was the most developed and influential period that changed history. Some factors involved were the growth-mind set. This was where people knew that there are ways to improve their situation. They used their mind by observing their surroundings. This involves the theme of interdependence in nature. People developed their minds by observing what the society could improve on and how they can contribute to make it better for their surroundings and for themselves. This brings out the business/marketing people. The affluence of parents of their child to be inventive and creative, by starting it in the child’s imagination. Bringing the idea of epigenetics via parental views and actions and their presence on bringing their offspring to who they are today.
(Christine Park go2christine@hotmail.com)
Delete