Do you agree, to some degree, with Malcolm Gladwell. Is less than 10 year possible at times? More?
Do you agree, to some degree, with Malcolm Gladwell. Is less than 10 year possible at times? More?
Luck is everything. For every story that's retrospectively edited to fit the argument in true Texas Sharpshooter fashion, you will never hear the other 10,000 failures who worked themselves to death for little reward.
The one thing I notice with all these stories of success is that the common feature is that they had an initial massive helping hand, usually from a parent or relative. That bit's usually glossed over to exploit the futile hope of millions of others in selling snake oil self-help books. The secret to success is to be lucky.
^ Agree with everything.
But then I suppose that's why the video is titled "Outliers", a term from statistics describing unusual or unexpected data.
There is no, ".....thus you can too.", it's just luck.
Having said that, it's true that to some extent people create their own luck.
You can increase your chances by looking for opportunities and moving to other places, but I still think you are totally subject to luck... i.e.: a complex ocean of dynamic multifaceted interconnecting possibilities that collide with hard-to-predict timing and consequences. If you trace back the path of your own life, you may find certain small events or choices that had a butterfly effect in your life in terms of the directions you ended up taking... like those moments when you did or did not choose to talk to someone or nudge further into that conversation, and then years later, you have a career or a family that ultimately resulted from that one choice to extend a conversation beyond polite pleasantries. It's fascinating to ponder...
^ Yeah. The aphorism is not literal. By "creating your own luck" it means, as you say, increasing your chances by getting off your arse and seeking your fortune, not waiting for it to come to you.
Having said that, lol....I knew a guy years ago who was always coming up with ideas, investing time and money in them, and ultimately failing. The eternal optimist, and good on him. I once said after another of his bankruptcies that if Bob (his real name, nothing to do with our Bob) ever invested in an undertaker's business, the elixir of life would be invented the next day and people would stop dying. Some people are just unlucky.
I read Outliers a couple/few years ago.
Very interesting book.
The 10,000 rule is quite logical.
Many (most perhaps) have the genetic talent (e.g. Mozart) but he also practiced and practiced.
I think of Cristiano Ronaldo. Top football people think it was mostly his hard work that got him to level he achieved in football, by going to the intensive football camp at age 11, where his parents sent him to train where you eat, breathe, and train in football.
14:05 I take it he's not spent much time in LOS.
Interesting points, he's relying on overly simple generalizations though. I've known plenty of tee-totlin hard working white farmers . Plenty of drunk Asian's too. He'd been better off taking the Confucius angle over Western education to support his Asians are better at math statement. Also is he talking about all Asians are better at math or just the ones that end up in the US or western countries.
The bit about luck is dead on though.
Last edited by uncle junior; 06-01-2018 at 08:27 AM.
His take on Asian rice farming and persistence is a theory. (I assume.)
East Asians (China, Korea, VN,) do have higher non-verbal IQs and yes, they are better at mathematics than other regions of the world.
Luck plays a role, no doubt. In some cases luck is almost everything, and in others a small portion of what it means to be "successful."The bit about luck is dead on though.
But being "good" at something does not always translate into "success" obviously.
Captain Nemo stated "luck is everything." - IMO, it depends on the situation on how much "luck" is involved.
And yet when you name famous mathematicians how many are East Asian. He says asian not east asian, Indians are historically very good at math as are the Arabs, he doesn't touch on that....Indians might be included in the Asian heading; not Arabs tho. There are probably close to 3 billion east asians, I doubt the stats exist to prove that they're all superior in math to whitey. But asian school kids who score consistently better on college entrance exams can be shown. Big difference between saying all asians and asian kids of immigrant parents/grandparents. Kids of immigrants are most likely more motivated to do well in school to help out there parents and family members than most native born kids.
It's not a theory, it's just some guys random notions. Theories are based on facts. He hasn't put any evidence to show what he based his ideas on other than popular examples of extreme success. I think he's probably right about the 10 years experience though. Pretty sure most tradesmen would agree too.
My note of higher non-verbal IQs in East Asia is just stating a fact. I have not really considered why this is the case. I've only seen IQ data for East Asian living in East Asia, not in other nations (children of immigrants).
As for Arabs, they were innovative in math centuries ago. Now, I have not idea what Arabic capabilites in Math are in general.
Yes, Gladwell using the term "Asian" is way too broad.
I appreciate this point you make.It's not a theory, it's just some guys random notions. Theories are based on facts. He hasn't put any evidence to show what he based his ideas on other than popular examples of extreme success. I think he's probably right about the 10 years experience though. Pretty sure most tradesmen would agree too.
The fact is that East Asians (particularly in China) have higher non verbal IQs, so perhaps Gladwell is making a theory as to why.
Or course, we cannot link rice farming to high verbal IQs, IMO.
As for discussing regional differences or ethnic differences in IQ, it's a taboo topic that is not really allowed to be discussed.
In general, IQs can be raised to a certain degree. Also, high school students sore lower in IQ test after taking a Summer break.
IMO, IQs are not a sole determiner.
Part of the reason discussing IQ differences being prohibited/taboo is that people fear (perhaps rightly so?) that it could lead to: You're of this nationality/ethnic group/race, therefore you cannot do this job.
My experience with Asians is, they're better at being students than westerners. They follow the teacher, do homework, spend more time with their heads in the school books while the whites are taking a broader approach, playing sports, band, part time jobs, socializing etc. But the hard-working student model doesn't happen throughout all of asia. Thais are crap students generally speakiing with a crap educational system. But once in the US they seem to be willing to take advantage of the opportunities to get ahead. If he really wants to pursue this angle he needs to factor in the Confucian influence. That's where the being a good student, hard worker stuff is usually attributed in East Asian countries. Especially, PRC,VN,Korea and Japan.
It seems to me all he's done is take one of most obvious differences between east and west and used it to answer for a generalization about Asians. His first book was based on the same kind of ' looking out the window' observations. Nothing factually based or researched, just his notions . It's pop philosophy., it won't hold up under a microscope.
IMO anyways.
Concur.
I think that book, was "What the dog saw."It seems to me all he's done is take one of most obvious differences between east and west and used it to answer for a generalization about Asians. His first book was based on the same kind of ' looking out the window' observations. Nothing factually based or researched, just his notions . It's pop philosophy., it won't hold up under a microscope.
I didn't like it very much.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)