Sunday, March 18, 2012
Argument: Talent Gene
Shenk states that some children today play as well as young Mozart did (64). He also said that there was no gene for talent. In terms of the evolutionary process learned in class, how would the idea of evolution interact with an idea of a gene pool for talent? Would children today have more talent because of an evolved gene? What sort of external environmental pressures would create the advantage for a change in the talent gene?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThough David Shenk places emphasis on the impact of the environment on talent, he also acknowledges that genes play a vital role in talent. The idea of a talent gene pool raises ideas of evolution. Evolution is “the theory that groups of organisms change with passage of time, mainly as a result of natural selection, so that descendants differ morphologically and physiologically from their ancestors”(http://necsi.edu/projects/evolution/cover/evolution_cover.html). This process starts with genetic variation, which is immense within the human population. Individuals are defined by their genetic makeup and almost everyone possesses a unique genetic makeup (the exception being twins). This is due to sexual reproduction as well as mutations. Through sexual reproduction, the offspring receives half its genes from mom and the other half from dad. Therefore, the offspring’s genetic makeup is different from both of its parents. The genetic makeup is also different from siblings since the genes each offspring receives from its parents are different. Mutations are also always viable to occur. Mutations that change the DNA sequence of a gene (genotype) may completely change the trait it causes (phenotype). For example, a mutation could occur that gives an individual longer fingers. This mutation might give the individual an advantage in playing the piano.
ReplyDeleteGiven this wide variation in population, an external pressure would then spark natural selection. External pressures could include the demand for certain skills, technology, and culture tastes. Going with the earlier example, having the “talent gene” (longer fingers) for being a talented piano musician may give the individual a selective advantage. With an external environmental pressure, such as high demand from rich patrons for talented musicians, the individual with the “talent gene” is more likely to survive since he/she is likely to be well-paid for their music. Being wealthier increases the individual’s chances of survival and reproduction. They are better-equipped to take care of their health and find a mate. On the other hand, those that don’t have the certain musician “talent gene” are unable to find intellectual work and are poor, decreasing their chances of survival and reproduction. Over time, adaptation would occur and more people who survive will have this “talent gene” leading to evolution. This seems to support the idea of progress: landing on the moon, invention of the internet, growing proportion of educated people. Indeed people in the present seem generally more “talented” than people back then. Do more and more child geniuses seem to prove the existence of this evolved talent gene?
Christine Zhao (c_zhao@ymail.com)
(continued)
ReplyDeleteDavid Shenk challenges this popular notion of an evolved talent gene through his G X E model. He attributes talents due to “the combined consequence of early exposure, exceptional instruction, constant practice, family nurturance, and a child’s intense will to learn.”(64) Instead of natural selection and evolution, a child’s exceptional talent “evolves” at the hands of environmental factors after he/she is born. Instead of being born with talented genes, the child is born with normal genes and environmental factors create the talent. For example, the growing population of educated people is not because more people have the “educated gene”. No such thing exists. Instead it’s because children have been growing up in an environment that places emphasis on education as the road to success. Education is said to be necessary for getting a good job, a good house, a good car, etc. This emphasis encourages more people to get an education. Also, more and more children are becoming talented musicians not because they have longer fingers or another physical advantage. Instead exposure to music at an early age, private lessons, and encouragement have bred these child geniuses. At the core is interdependence in nature, “the dependence of every form of life on other living things and on the natural resources in its environment, such as air, soil, and water” (http://kids.britannica.com/comptons/article-273213/ecology). Children development depends heavily on their parents, on mentors, on the environment they are exposed to. Therefore, children today do indeed have more talent but not because of an evolved gene. They are more talented because they grow up in an environment that is more rigorous in exposing, teaching, and nurturing them. Environmental pressures such as high expectations, a desire/need to succeed, and practice can create talent but not a “talent gene” that can be passed on.
Christine Zhao (c_zhao@ymail.com)