The genius in all of us: Why everything you’ve been told about genetics, talent, and IQ is wrong
By David Shenk
Book review by Richard L. Weaver II, Ph.D.
One of the most interesting features of this 302-page book (total pages) is that there is only 134 pages of text. There is an 18 page bibliography (pages 279-297), and there is a 138-page "Sources and Notes, Clarifications and Amplifications" section (pages 139-277). There is no index.
Just a note here on the "Sources and Notes. . ." section: Shenk uses 134 pages of text to make his case, and it is engrossing reading. But, if you think "Sources and Notes" would be a long, tedious, boring section of the book, you would be sadly mistaken here. For each and every assertion that Shenk makes in his argument (we’ll get to that in a moment), he has a source or note to verify it. This is a highly researched, evidence specific, thoroughly developed argument that is worth every minute you spend with it.
If you are looking for a motivational book that will support all that you do in life, this is where to start. If you think for one moment that you are limited by the genes with which you were born, think again. Shenk claims your genetic heritage may account for only about 50% of your talent, and the other 50% is determined by nurture and your environment. What you do, and how you feel about what you do matters.
If I was looking for support for all of the motivational essays, speeches, articles, and books I have written throughout the years, this would be the book — and the evidence. What Shenk is saying is that the intensity of your motivation, ambition, persistence, and self-discipline are not genetically determined but are shaped by nurture and environment. Just as you teach children how to take responsibility for their lives, you, too, can have a direct, sustained, ongoing, positive, and productive influence on your own talent and ability. This is good news, and if you don’t believe it, read this book, and bathe in the evidence that supports his assertions.
All of the books that have been (and are being) written on neuroplasticity — "[the] term referring to the ability of the brain and nervous system in all species to change structurally and functionally as a result of input from the environment" — gain support from Shenk’s work. Shenk makes the case for the plasticity of intelligence.
Shenk explains how genes really work, that intelligence is a process not a thing, that talents are not innate gifts "but the result of a slow, invisible accretion of skills," as well as how to be a genius, how to inspire children, how to foster cultural excellence, and how to improve your genes. This is an amazing book!
Having been an advocate of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s work on flow, I was delighted to find Shenk referring to Csikszentmihalyi: " . . . intelligence isn’t fixed. Intelligence isn’t general. Intelligence is not a thing. Intelligence is a dynamic, diffuse, and ongoing process. This finding fits perfectly with the earlier work of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and colleagues, who concluded that ‘high academic achievers are not necessarily born ‘smarter’ than others, but work harder and develop more self-discipline’" (p. 42).
Whether you are a supporter of the interactionist perspective or not, the book will introduce you to the way genius is made. That is especially interesting to read.
I think the author made a superb decision to separate his argument and the evidence used to support his argument. He is an excellent writer, and 134 pages may be all you have to read. I have found that the more technical you become by incorporating all your evidence and references within your narrative turns off more readers than it encourages. Shenk’s argument is so well presented, so smoothly offered, and so effective that it should be readable by a large audience — especially, I might add, educators. Educators are often those prone to picking out and doting upon their brighter students. After reading and absorbing what Shenk has to say may make them think twice about this approach.
The use of examples such as David Beckham, Michael Jordan, and Tiger Woods, as well as Friedrich Nietzsche, Beethoven, and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was delightful information.
Because of Shenk’s argument, and because of his emphasis on the interaction between genes, nurture, and environment, I loved the following paragraph: "For deliberate practice to work, the demands have to be serious and sustained. Simply playing lots of chess or soccer or golf isn’t enough. Simply taking lessons from a wonderful teacher is not enough. Simply wanting it badly enough is not enough. Deliberate practice requires a mind-set of never, ever, being satisfied with your current ability. It requires a constant self-critique, a pathological restlessness, a passion to aim consistently just beyond one’s capability so that daily disappointment and failure is actually desired, and a never-ending resolve to dust oneself off and try again and again and again" (p.55). Talk about motivation to excel!
Now, after writing a paragraph like that, Shenk offers a realistic assessment of what it takes to excel: "It also requires enormous, life-altering amounts of time—a daily grinding commitment to becoming better. In the long term, the results can be highly satisfying. But in the short term, from day to day and month to month, there’s nothing particularly fun about the process or the substantial sacrifices involved" (p. 55). Do you wonder why the information in this book — even when read by those seemingly committed to change — is likely to go in one ear and out the other?
Oh well. Even if you are familiar with the ideas here, even if you wave off social-science research as bogus, and even if you believe that talent comes primarily from genetic inheritance, this book is a good read. Shenk makes you think — and that’s a healthy thing to do whether you agree or disagree with him. Five stars out of five!
Showing posts with label talent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label talent. Show all posts
Monday, December 30, 2013
Monday, November 22, 2010
The genius in all of us: Why everything you’ve been told about genetics, talent, and IQ is wrong
Book Club... And Then Some!
The genius in all of us: Why everything you’ve been told about genetics, talent, and IQ is wrong
by David Shenk
Book Review by Richard L. Weaver II, Ph.D.
For a 302-page book, this is an amazingly short one, and here’s why. The “Sources and Notes, Clarifications and Amplifications” section is 140-pages long! 140 pages!!! Then there is a 20-page “Bibliography,” and there is no index. So, the book ends with a 1 1/2-page “Epilogue,” on page 134! There are ten chapters; thus, average chapter length is about 13 pages.
Despite its brevity, this is an amazingly interesting, very well written, captivating through stories and anecdotes, seemingly accurately explained and described, and thoroughly documented book.
All those who might be interested in purchasing this book should be advised to read the reviews at Amazon.com. Todd Stark’s (from Philadelphia, PA), writes (as part of his review): “In deconstructing talent, Shenk leaves no room to think about what little the scandalously politically incorrect Galton, Spearman, and Terman might have somehow gotten right, what stable developmental trajectories genes might actually provide us under a wide range of environments, and what sorts of things the people Shenk cites favorably might actually disagree with him about.” Be sure to look at Stark’s list of additional readings while you are there.
Then, there is Kevin Currie-Knight from Newark, Delaware, who writes (as part of his review), “WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! It is true, of course, that studies deal with groups and averages, not individuals and specifics. But, this does not mean that studies can't be generalized, as that is the whole point of studies with controls on variables, sufficient sample sizes, etc.”
M. A. Glenn, of Santa Cruz Mountains, CA, writes: “Shenk's premise is that there are no geniuses, there are no exceptional people, we just have to work at developing the talent that is latent in all of us. He relies on a marginal branch of genetics that holds that genes don't have much to do with our natural endowments. We are all mostly the same and factors other than our genes shape us. Hence, no need to discuss nature vs. nurture because it's all nurture.
"No doubt, hard work and drive are important, but Shenk never addresses the source of this hard work and drive. Could it be part of one's genetic makeup? No, Shenk is convinced that genes have little to do with talent and achievement. He uses this premise to attack IQ, the Bell Curve, genius, talent, and even Ayn Rand. Incredible! Of course, if there are no exceptions, then we, as individuals, are not only equal under the law, but equal in all ways. The subtext is that individuality and merit are old notions that we must move beyond. How democratic! I hated it at summer camp when everyone was a winner. Competition drives us and pushes us to our inherited limits.
"Most troubling is the logical inconsistency in Shenk's argument: if genes play little role in achievement, then what about natural selection. His handling of the Kenyan runners is laughable. After centuries of natural selection to run faster, Shenk concludes that we don't know that genes have anything to do with it. Unanswered, of course, is how this idea relates to such hot topics as homosexuality. If this is gene determined,w hy the exception? If this is part of Shenk's theory, then is he really saying that homosexuality is learned? He's stays far away from any unpopular implication of his premise. This is a shallow, PC argument for mediocrity and a not so subtle attack on individual achievement, written by a popularizer with little, if any, education in the subject.
"If we just work hard enough, and follow Shenk's suggestions, we might become a mid-life Mozart. Wrong. There is greatness and, yes, you have to inherit the basic stuff for greatness, such as long legs for jumping, before you can practice your way to stardom. If Shenk had been born with talent, it would not have taken him three years to write this thin polemic. Footnoted, but, so what? A waste of time.”
Brazen999, from Florida, writes: “This book sells hope to those that don't measure up genetically and those that wish everyone did measure up genetically. The book can be summed up as "You can do it!", said in the style of Rob Schneider. But he makes a whole mess of oxymoronic and contradictory claims to push that message through though.”
R. M. Smith, another reviewer of the book at Amazon.com, writes, “Sometimes journalists can make sense of complex scientific topics and sometimes they can't. Unfortunately, in this book, David Shenk falls into the latter category. "The Genius in All of Us" is another example of the romantic fantasy that is gripping some realms of popular psychology and all of public education at the moment (think No Child Left Behind). Yes, human nature is plastic, but it is not as yielding as Shenk would like us to believe. In the real world, our genomes impose tighter constraints. For instance, I doubt that David Shenk has an IQ of 85 which he has re-worked through 10,000 hours of writing practice culminating in the publication of a book.”
Now, I don’t want to suggest that all the reviews of this book at Amazon.com are negative as the above selections would indicate. There are a total (at this writing) of 34 reviews with an average customer rating of four stars out of five. But, what these reviews indicate is significant. Some of the positive reviews are rather superficial and don’t look below the surface. I feel, when you read the complete reviews of those who give the book a negative review (and I have been incredibly selective in the portions I have quoted above), they have some serious—and some quite in-depth—concerns.
If you want a quick-read motivational book, this is a good one to choose, after all, David Shenk’s bottom line is a simple one: all people can do better by working harder. Who can deny that? — scientific evidence or not!
-----
This book is available from Amazon.com: The genius in all of us: Why everything you’ve been told about genetics, talent, and IQ is wrong.
The genius in all of us: Why everything you’ve been told about genetics, talent, and IQ is wrong
by David Shenk
Book Review by Richard L. Weaver II, Ph.D.
For a 302-page book, this is an amazingly short one, and here’s why. The “Sources and Notes, Clarifications and Amplifications” section is 140-pages long! 140 pages!!! Then there is a 20-page “Bibliography,” and there is no index. So, the book ends with a 1 1/2-page “Epilogue,” on page 134! There are ten chapters; thus, average chapter length is about 13 pages.
Despite its brevity, this is an amazingly interesting, very well written, captivating through stories and anecdotes, seemingly accurately explained and described, and thoroughly documented book.
All those who might be interested in purchasing this book should be advised to read the reviews at Amazon.com. Todd Stark’s (from Philadelphia, PA), writes (as part of his review): “In deconstructing talent, Shenk leaves no room to think about what little the scandalously politically incorrect Galton, Spearman, and Terman might have somehow gotten right, what stable developmental trajectories genes might actually provide us under a wide range of environments, and what sorts of things the people Shenk cites favorably might actually disagree with him about.” Be sure to look at Stark’s list of additional readings while you are there.
Then, there is Kevin Currie-Knight from Newark, Delaware, who writes (as part of his review), “WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! It is true, of course, that studies deal with groups and averages, not individuals and specifics. But, this does not mean that studies can't be generalized, as that is the whole point of studies with controls on variables, sufficient sample sizes, etc.”
M. A. Glenn, of Santa Cruz Mountains, CA, writes: “Shenk's premise is that there are no geniuses, there are no exceptional people, we just have to work at developing the talent that is latent in all of us. He relies on a marginal branch of genetics that holds that genes don't have much to do with our natural endowments. We are all mostly the same and factors other than our genes shape us. Hence, no need to discuss nature vs. nurture because it's all nurture.
"No doubt, hard work and drive are important, but Shenk never addresses the source of this hard work and drive. Could it be part of one's genetic makeup? No, Shenk is convinced that genes have little to do with talent and achievement. He uses this premise to attack IQ, the Bell Curve, genius, talent, and even Ayn Rand. Incredible! Of course, if there are no exceptions, then we, as individuals, are not only equal under the law, but equal in all ways. The subtext is that individuality and merit are old notions that we must move beyond. How democratic! I hated it at summer camp when everyone was a winner. Competition drives us and pushes us to our inherited limits.
"Most troubling is the logical inconsistency in Shenk's argument: if genes play little role in achievement, then what about natural selection. His handling of the Kenyan runners is laughable. After centuries of natural selection to run faster, Shenk concludes that we don't know that genes have anything to do with it. Unanswered, of course, is how this idea relates to such hot topics as homosexuality. If this is gene determined,w hy the exception? If this is part of Shenk's theory, then is he really saying that homosexuality is learned? He's stays far away from any unpopular implication of his premise. This is a shallow, PC argument for mediocrity and a not so subtle attack on individual achievement, written by a popularizer with little, if any, education in the subject.
"If we just work hard enough, and follow Shenk's suggestions, we might become a mid-life Mozart. Wrong. There is greatness and, yes, you have to inherit the basic stuff for greatness, such as long legs for jumping, before you can practice your way to stardom. If Shenk had been born with talent, it would not have taken him three years to write this thin polemic. Footnoted, but, so what? A waste of time.”
Brazen999, from Florida, writes: “This book sells hope to those that don't measure up genetically and those that wish everyone did measure up genetically. The book can be summed up as "You can do it!", said in the style of Rob Schneider. But he makes a whole mess of oxymoronic and contradictory claims to push that message through though.”
R. M. Smith, another reviewer of the book at Amazon.com, writes, “Sometimes journalists can make sense of complex scientific topics and sometimes they can't. Unfortunately, in this book, David Shenk falls into the latter category. "The Genius in All of Us" is another example of the romantic fantasy that is gripping some realms of popular psychology and all of public education at the moment (think No Child Left Behind). Yes, human nature is plastic, but it is not as yielding as Shenk would like us to believe. In the real world, our genomes impose tighter constraints. For instance, I doubt that David Shenk has an IQ of 85 which he has re-worked through 10,000 hours of writing practice culminating in the publication of a book.”
Now, I don’t want to suggest that all the reviews of this book at Amazon.com are negative as the above selections would indicate. There are a total (at this writing) of 34 reviews with an average customer rating of four stars out of five. But, what these reviews indicate is significant. Some of the positive reviews are rather superficial and don’t look below the surface. I feel, when you read the complete reviews of those who give the book a negative review (and I have been incredibly selective in the portions I have quoted above), they have some serious—and some quite in-depth—concerns.
If you want a quick-read motivational book, this is a good one to choose, after all, David Shenk’s bottom line is a simple one: all people can do better by working harder. Who can deny that? — scientific evidence or not!
This book is available from Amazon.com: The genius in all of us: Why everything you’ve been told about genetics, talent, and IQ is wrong.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
SMOERs: Words of Wisdom
"Good character is more to be praised than outstanding talent. Most talents are, to some extent, a gift. Good character, by contrast, is not given to us. We have to build it, piece by piece --- by thought, choice, courage, and determination." ---H. Jacson Brown
Day #111 - Be of good character.
Day #111 - Be of good character.
SMOERs: Self-Motivation, Optimism, Encouragement Rules! - Daily Reminders for Outstanding Living
An everyday guide full of quotations to uplift your spirits.
Free 10-Day sample: smoers.com
An everyday guide full of quotations to uplift your spirits.
Free 10-Day sample: smoers.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
