Who is Malcom Gladwell: And Why do I want to Disagree?
Gladwell puts forth two arguments in The Trouble with Geniuses Parts 1 & 2, first is that without advantages, notably financial (he uses Lareau’s study to emphasize this in Chapter 4 (pgs.101-104)); the second is regardless of measured IQ after a point there is little to no difference in accomplishment based on intelligence in what he terms a “threshold effect”. Admittedly my immediate reaction was, that is just silly. From there I went on to read both chapters with a bias and wondering the extent of his research. Gladwell seems to be speaking to an everyman audience, yet seems to show a certain bias. On the surface he argues success comes with advantage, aided by intelligence, hard
…show more content…
The Craft of Research, Booth, Colomb and Williams (Kindle location 291, 2008) tells us we are assessing our readers and they are assessing us. Is Gladwell really talking to everyman of is he having an internal conversation? Gladwell committed to his ideas or committed to starting a dialog. I had the feeling he wasn’t sure himself.
Gladwell was born into what would seem to be an above average income household, his father was a Professor, his mother a psychotherapist FamousAuthors.org (2012). I found it ironic that Gladwell’s grades were not good enough to get him into graduate school and thought that perhaps that was the inkling of bias I thought peeked out in his analogy of Langon and Oppenheimer, Outlier, (pgs. 96-97
…show more content…
Gladwell details this argument with analogy and rhetoric, albeit effectively if we don’t did deeper. Gladwell doesn’t hold himself up to be an expert, merely an observer, a chronicler, piecing together observations and presenting his point of few. Gladwell took yarns, analogies, true or false, woven with threads, studies, relevant or not, sewn together with rhetoric* and made a blanket that he spread over the entire subject of intelligence. Gladwell encompassed many ideas under one thought…intelligence doesn’t really matter. He may be right, but not for the reasons he
I found Gladwell’s first chapter of Outliers entitled “The Matthew Effect” to be both interesting, confusing, and perhaps somewhat lopsided. Based on Matthew 25:2, Gladwell simply explains, “It is those who are successful, in other words, who are most likely to be given to the kinds of special opportunities that lead to further success.” (Gladwell 2008, pg. 30) The Matthew Effect seems to extend special advantages and opportunities to some simply based on their date of birth.
While inherent/innate skills may be beneficial, it is the other stuff that really leads to success. Basically, Gladwell has taken a stereotype, which is defined by Merrimack-Webster as, “a widely held but fixed or oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing,” and helped perpetuate it, in my opinion. The common stereotype that Asians are good at math is a widespread belief in America. And Gladwell's oversimplification and, in my opinion, brilliant way of correlating factors has just strengthened the stereotype that already exists, whether he meant to or not. So, as much as I admire his ability to tidily wrap up an argument in a way that makes me tend to think, “Wow, that makes complete sense,” Gladwell has unmistakably joined the “I perpetuate stereotypes club” by writing this chapter. The thing is that stereotyping doesn’t always have to hold a negative connotation. I think that people sometimes mix-up what a stereotype is and what an ethnic slurs (ethnophaulisms)
Gladwell and Graff, both agrees that education defines intellectualism. Both authors believe there are two types of educated people: street
In Malcolm Gladwell's “The Talent Myth,” he draws attention to the issue of star talent in large and well-respected companies. A major point that he addresses is that intelligence and job performance are not necessarily correlated, if at all. I agree that being “smart” does not mean that you are better than someone else who has a lower IQ in terms of completing a task with efficiency and results. It was interesting to learn that IQ does not encompass common sense, which is an essential part of surviving in life and the real world beyond school. Gladwell provides several examples of companies that promoted employees simply because of their credentials instead of their true abilities. I thought that this was extremely unfair because having
Throughout life people are always seeking something, whether it is finding out ideals, desires, lovers, and perhaps themselves. However, recognizing, fulfilling, and rising above one’s true self are the hardest things in the world because one always seems certain of him or herself and is strongly influenced by his or her surroundings. Hence, taking the time to practice experiences is a way for an individual to precisely know him or herself and actively participate in society. In the essay, “The Power of Context,” Malcolm Gladwell states that the features of one’s current social and physical environment will strongly influence his or her behaviors. Those actions that an individual conduct in response to the situation
With the quote, “first, the IQ scores in every country, including the United States, have been rising since the 1930’s,” Begley appeals to the logical side of the audience. By doing so, he makes the audience reason that if numbers and statistics adhere to his claim, then that means that they can believe his argument. More importantly, today’s society associate IQ with intelligence. Therefore, that particular statement convinces the audience that the young
In the essay Mike Rose challenges the view that the amount of schooling one has achieved is the degree of intelligence by one should be measured. He describes the generalizations thought about people when it comes to how education relates to intelligence. He details his experiences growing up observing his mother as a waitress in restaurants and how she found fulfillment in the work she did. The way she was able to not only memorize customer orders but to anticipate their emotional needs shows a unique intelligence. He also details his Uncle Joe’s work in an auto manufacturer and how his intelligence saw him through to promotions. From his examples growing up with blue-collar workers, it shaped his opinion of how much grit and intelligence is required of them.
Once again, the growth of intellectual abilities was necessary for our ancestors to survive the harsh conditions of that age. As things became easier, intelligence became less imperative. In early times, someone who wasn’t clever enough to provide for their survival likely died, and through this process only the sharpest of people produced offspring (Kim). However, the idea of humans getting more stupid instead of smarter is very controversial. All the technologies of today’s world were invented by some amazing minds, and the incredibleness of those objects cannot be denied (Pappas). Despite the evidence that human minds are still growing in capacity, the fact still stands true that people are “allowed” to be less intellectually capable and still live quite comfortably. Grand intelligence isn’t necessary. This permits many people to “feed off of” the brilliance of others while still being routine
He explains that talent is only a small portion of someone's success, it is how they are raised and what opportunities they are given that define how they fare later on in life. This produces a paradox. One such paradox is Chris Langan, a 64-year-old man living in Princeton, Missouri, who has been described as one of the smartest men to ever live, with an IQ ranging from 190 to 210. Gladwell explains that due to his financial situation and his lack of assertiveness, he never finished college. He never went on to change the world, as one would expect from someone so intelligent. From these situations, a paradox in society is revealed; a brilliant person who could easily have a huge impact on the world ends up doing nothing substantial due to the lack of opportunities and social graces given to him. This paradox can be found everywhere, plenty of men and women whose genius is never harnessed due to lack of
In today’s world, intelligence remains the key to success. The wise minister Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. Intelligence plus character - that is the goal of true education.” Intelligence is the ability to obtain and apply knowledge and skill. In Chaim Potok’s novel The Chosen, the main characters Danny Saunders and Reuven Malter display immense intelligence throughout the story. Reb Saunders demonstrates his intelligence by intentionally cultivating thought-provoking questions for every situation with his son, Danny, and others. Reuven, Danny, and Reb Saunders all display exceptional qualities, but intelligence remains the most prominent trait in each
“How could that be a bad bargain? Everything we have learned in Outliers says that success follows a predictable course. It is not the brightest who succeed. If it were, Chris Langan would be up there with Einstein” (Gladwell 267). Chris Langan, according to Gladwell, has currently the highest IQ; he is a genius but cannot be influential. Gladwell describes him as a genius without social intelligence. Langan did not finish college, he only went for a year and a half, accusing the school system of being unfair and calling schools such as Harvard “glorified corporations” (Gladwell 96). Another example he gave is Bill Gates, he described him as a successful person because he had the luck of having spent more than ten thousand hours as a programmer. His high school had a computer club in which he spent most of his time, when he had the chance to use his programming abilities he was already an expert because of his previous experience. Gladwell gave more reasons why a person could be an outlier, including birthdate, diligence, and rigorous schedule during childhood. All these can result in a person being an
The evolution of humans is one that allows, and even thrives on constant adaptations. By becoming reactors to the environment humans have been able to survive and eventually thrive. However, these powerful abilities would also bring about some not so obvious implications. In Malcolm Gladwell’s “The Power of Context”, as well as Oliver Sacks’ “The Mind’s Eye” both authors explore the impact of this evolutionary trait. When taken together Gladwell, and Sacks’ essays help to teach that our brains are highly adaptive. Also they both show that reactions are largely out of the individuals control and that reaction influenced by the environment is what prevails. To demonstration how adaptive the brain actually is both authors show that the brain adapts
...est high school students in America” (Gladwell 82). It was shocking to learn that all the Nobel Prize in Medicine winners did not all come from the most prestigious schools. Also, in the third chapter I notices some aspects that were highly relatable to me. My life relates to subjects included in chapter three because I am a student. It is interesting and helpful to learn that one does not need the highest IQ to succeed in today’s world. This is how I relate to chapter three. The third chapter in Outlier by Malcolm Gladwell had striking information that stated that IQs do not always determine who will be successful, and I can relate to the information in the chapter because I am student who has thought about my IQ before.
On the ‘nature’ side of the debate is the psychometric approach, considered to be the most dominant in the study of intelligence, which “inspired the most research and attracted the most attention” (Neisser et al. 1996, p. 77). It argues that there is one general (‘g’) factor which accounts for intelligence. In the 1880s, Francis Galton conducted many tests (measuring reaction times to cognitive tasks), (Boundless 2013), in order to scientifically measure intelligence. These tests were linked to the eugenic breeding programme, which aimed to eliminate biologically inferior people from society. Galton believed that as intelligence was inherited, social class or position were significant indicators of intelligence. If an individual was of high social standing, they would be more intelligent than those of a lower position. However he failed to show any consistency across the tests for this hypothesis, weakening his theory that social class correlated with intelligence. Nevertheless, his creation of the intelligence test led many to continue to develop...
... is intelligent and who is not. And this change would exist in how, those who are truly intelligent will know how to apply their knowledge rather than just vomiting out ideas, or memorizing that book the night before the test. With the elimination of guessing being an opportunity for intelligence to be displayed, we will see a rise in the productivity of society, and accurate representation of intelligence for institutions such as colleges to rate students and how they will actually succeed in the college, rather than basing it off of an assumption of correlating GPA with “the goods”. All in all GPA does equate to intelligence, and that with new methods of testing applications and extension of knowledge student’s “brains” will accurately be portrayed. Thus creating for a new breakdown of intelligence that would run on real world brains rather than just book brains.