In the writing of Joan Freeman, it is explained that the path to what we understand to be success is, according to research, best enabled by self-esteem, optimism, and pugnacity which are teachable (293). Is success then the result of learning and practicing these traits and can be mastered by anyone? If so can success then be considered an adaptation to an environment? How then can the large disparity of "success" in the modern western world be explained by the GxE model? Use evidence to support your claim.
Kate White (kw2020@gmail.com)
According to the GxE model, success is a goal attainable by all. To better understand this statement, one must first back up and define exactly what is meant by “success” in this context. There are many different types of success: biological success, monetary success, etc. With a few exceptions (as is always the case in biology), all types of success can be attained simply by practice, perseverance, and drive. Though optimism, self-esteem, and pugnacity are incredibly vital tools to achieve success, they are not the only ones. One such factor that can help a person succeed has to do with the biological theme of interdependence in nature. Humans, by nature, are social beings; without companionship/interaction, human beings slowly go insane. In fact, “Enforced loneliness (solitary confinement) has been a punishment method throughout history. It is often considered a form of torture […] In animal experiments, solitude has been shown to cause psychosis.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitude). The fact that humans, without other humans, go insane shows how interdependent members of our species are. An especially important dependence and one that greatly affects one’s chances of success is the family unit. Throughout human history, families have functioned as one, allowing for a transfer of knowledge from one generation to the next as well as the protection of offspring, and later, the parents. Here is where this theme starts to blend with another theme: evolution. The family is a group of people who share a larger amount of genetic information than is normal between individuals, and as a result, due to altruism (Campbell 1138), more capable individuals care for dependents. This action, while it may not be helpful to the independents, helps them to pass on their genetic information through offspring. Eventually, as the independents age, they turn into dependents of the former dependents, which then become independents. This cycle continues through the generations, assisting in the passage of genetic information. As a consequence, the family unit has formed because it is advantageous to survival and reproduction as well as because humans require others (for similar reasons). Thus, the family unit helps individuals, as well as the species as a whole, succeed. Because family and, by proxy, upbringing, are so important to success, a success gap has formed in Western Society. Those who are wealthy, as shown in the novel, are exposed to millions more words (38), as well as a significantly higher proportion of positive vs. negative feedback given by parents when compared to working class, and especially poor, families (39). This word gap as well as the parity in positive reinforcement (which has been shown to increase chances of success) serve to keep the wealthy successful, and stop the poor from becoming such. As such, despite lack of significant genetic difference between socioeconomic strata, the E portion of GxE comes into play, and as a result, those who were exposed to better environments as children (aka the wealthy) are far more likely to achieve success in terms of “climbing the corporate ladder.”
ReplyDelete(Eric Savin, Dallastarsfan13@gmail.com)