A primary question that I'm forever asking is: "Does there exist a gene determining strong will?" I've written about this in the past, in my quest to determine to what extent a person's likelihood to succeed in life is predetermined. For policy-makers this question has huge implications. Do laissez-faire systems encourage an advantaged group to leverage that advantage at the cost of the less-well motivated masses? Do redistributionist welfare systems sap motivation from those whose levels are the lowest? Speaking to many UK employers with Polish migrant workers, I constantly hear the opinion that the British welfare system has created an entire class of people unwilling to cross the road for a job.
In blogging, there's no doubt that prolific bloggers with something to say (viz. Toyah, Charles Crawford linked from this blog) generate ten or even hundred times as much traffic as those who post only infrequently. It's the same in one's career, in one's business - work hard at it, and the rewards will come in multiples. A truism - but then, why is it that some people work their nuts off while others just can't be arsed? What makes a billionaire work 16-hour days to make his next billion?
How much is learned, and how much is innate? The 'muscle memory' of action is something I'm aware of whenever I cycle in town. Unbidden, my head swivels this way and that to see what traffic's coming from the left, from the right, what's behind me. Urban cycling requires total situational awareness. Nine years of riding around central London has resulted in an instinctive reaction to look down sidestreets and across junctions without needing to think before doing so. This is the result of basic, evolutionary self-preservation.
But can muscle memory function in the everyday tasks that face even children? Making your bed in the morning, putting plates and cutlery into the dishwasher, brushing your teeth twice daily? So as to do what needs to be done, without even thinking about it?
There was an interesting book review in last week's Economist (linked here): Choice by Renata Salecl (and a link to a review on Amazon here). The book looks at the choices we have in life and the theory that the more choice you have, the happier you are. Child-rearing in considered. As the Economist puts it, "[p]arents who make their offspring's choices for them create one set of problems; those who farm out choice to their children at an early age risk another." Making children put away their toys after they've played with them does create a sense of orderliness, but is this, in itself, a spur for enhanced motivation in adult life?
Incidentally, how do you say 'a failure' and 'a success' in Polish in reference to people? (don't bother searching the dictionaries - your own suggestions please).
Googling the Renata Salecl book, I came across this fascinating TED lecture on the same subject, but dating back to 2005. In it, psychologist Barry Schwartz argues convincingly that more choice makes us less happy. I tend to agree with him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
I'll jump on with the first answers. The Polish speaker in my house suggests 'przegrany' and 'wygrany' for 'a failure' and 'a success' respectively.
We should take care not to conflate the notions of success and motivation. I don't necessarily agree that hard work is what brings rewards in multiples. As I think you have remarked before, luck is an important factor - like it or not. In determining behaviour, scientists seem to agree that complex behaviours are not determined by a single gene, but by some complicated relationship between several possible genetic factors AND the influences of environment. To answer your question, I venture to answer that yes, there are a set of genes that play a large *part* in determining 'strong' will.
When it comes to motivation, I remember that my father always says that anything worth doing is worth doing well. But I remember even more clearly, the person who told me: "Work smarter, not harder!"
Fascinating how the two reviews of the book could almost be for different books: the Economist virtually describing it as presenting a pretty self-evident analysis of the difficulties for individuals in making choices, whilst Amazon describes a book about the role of individual choice within the context of social alternatives.
I could wax lyrical on the main subject for hours so maybe another time - when I feel inspired ;).
As for the last question, I'll take a shot before googling. 'On jest 'nieudacznikiem' (or 'ale z niego nieudacznik') is, I believe, the way to describe someone who is a failure although come to think of it I've never heard the phrase 'on jest udacznikiem' used to describe someone who is a success.
if there are a set of genes that play a large *part* in determining 'strong' will, then surely we would see this effect throughout world history, however successful dynasties (whether creative, administrative or natural born leaders) seem to be the minority, only the Bachs spring to mind in producing more than 3 generations of notable contributors.
I think you ought to read an uptodate genetics primer. It is a very fast moving field, all has changed in the last 10 years. The discovery of single gene causes for diseases such as Huntington's chorea were soon seen to be the low hanging fruit. The media optimism and hype of the late 90's now seems as quaint as the idea of us all commuting to work with jet packs.
@ marek
Dynasties are a good example, but like empires they rise and fall.
Can you recommend an easy-to-read yet up-to-date genetics primer?
@ KM
You're right about hard work not necessarily bringing in rewards in multiples - it must be, as you say, smart hard work.
Post a Comment