On page 70, Shenk states that "sublime pianists" to "profound physicists" all required the average “ten-thousand-hour mark” of practicing in order to achieve greatness. Daniel Levitin supports this claim that this is a known number for success and that no one has ever been able to prove that perfection is possible in less time than this (256). How do you respond to this claim that an average of 3 hours a day over 10 years is all that is needed for greatness? Why this number and how have scientists been able to prove this to be true? Also, how do so many hours of practice play into gene development? Are genes made more complex during training, or how are they controlled in order to achieve such muscle memory and perfection? Do people with certain genes for memory have an advantage over others starting from scratch? Cite specific real world examples and make biological connections to muscle development, memory, or motor skill refinement.
Lily Walker (lwalker220@gmail.com)
Although ten thousand hours are a threshold for achieving mastery, it is not correct to say that simply fulfilling this amount of practice is enough to make one extraordinary. Shenk makes a clear distinction between mindless practice that doesn’t do any good, and deliberate practice that truly improves. “The ten thousand hour phenomenon…has become corrupted and confused,” he writes, because while it is a part of the requirement to excel, it is not sufficient: “critics have somehow understood it to be a claim that anyone can achieve anything by putting in ten thousand hours of practice” (Shenk 70). Simply going through the motions isn’t enough; there must be a mindset of targeting the specific areas that need improvement and not becoming complacent. In the example of why Michael Jordan excelled so much more than other basketball players, Shenk explains that “there was a tendency…for players to resort to what they did best, to reinforce their strengths and avoid going to any part of their game that was essentially weak. But Jordan was constantly working on the weaker part of his game trying to bring it up” (Shenk 97). Deliberate practice is the only way that people can undergo the necessary biological changes that repetition engraves on their brains, leading to “talent”.
ReplyDeleteThese changes are all based on brain plasticity. When we repeat a task over and over again, “our muscles and brain regions adapt to the demands that we make of them…for any specific task being honed, the relevant brain regions adapt accordingly” (Shenk 67). This applies even for athletes and their muscle memory in reaction to practice. “Even among athletes, changes in the brain are arguably the most profound, with a vast increase in precise task knowledge, a shift from conscious analysis to intuitive thinking” (Shenk 65). This means that when the brain becomes accustomed to sending signals via the motor neurons, which “transmit signals to muscle cells, causing them to contract”, it is easier for the athlete to access this knowledge in the future, such as during game time (Campbell 1048). This applies to the idea of muscle memory, because “muscles retain a memory of their former fitness even as they wither from lack of use. That memory is stored as DNA-containing nuclei, which proliferate when a muscle is exercised” (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/08/muscle-memory/). This means that even if a muscle is not used, its cells will retain the knowledge of past fitness; therefore, if it is kept in constant use, it will not only maintain past fitness but improve. Neurons, “the nerve cells that transfer information within the body”, (Campbell 1047) can be modified to become stronger. So while genes don’t necessarily become more complex during training, the cells that carry out those genes can become stronger. “Repetitive correlated spiking of pre- and postsynaptic neurons can induce a persistent increase or decrease in synaptic strength”. (http://www.bilab.neurobio.pitt.edu/PDF/Bi99.pdf) This affects the performance in the future. Scientists conducting separate studies have turned out with the same common number (Shenk 70) of 10,000 hours. This is probably because it takes three hours every day for ten years of deliberate practice for the stimulation of the neurons in the brain to become permanently engraved; if they are not continuously reinforced, muscle memory may keep some of it, but brain plasticity is such that it cannot be ensured without constant reinforcement.
People do not have set genes for memory, though. Our short-term memory is extremely limited, and “when it comes to memory skills, there is no escaping human biology” (Shenk 56). People who seem to have a good memory therefore don’t actually have a genetic advantage over those who have a bad memory, they just have different ways of stringing together information; it’s all in the process. Likewise, there is no evidence for “any genetic constraints for attaining elite levels…rather, nonachievers seem to be missing something in their process”- aka their style of practice (Shenk 69). So when Michael Jordan beat out all his teammates, it wasn’t some magic gene that enhanced his muscle memory; it was that he specifically targeted his weak spots in an effort to improve rather than settling into complacency.
ReplyDeleteVivian Wang (vivian.wang9895@gmail.com)