THE
ARGUMENT: Chapter 9 (p. 146-147) If “Achievement clusters” exist, then what other
kinds of “clusters” are there?
In Chapter 9, author David Shenk talks specifically about cultural renaissances as “achievement clusters” (146). My proposal is that there are such clusters for other areas of intellectual enlightenment other than “achievement” in the artistic and scientific sense. For example, a popular “cluster” in history has been political upheaval.
In Chapter 9, author David Shenk talks specifically about cultural renaissances as “achievement clusters” (146). My proposal is that there are such clusters for other areas of intellectual enlightenment other than “achievement” in the artistic and scientific sense. For example, a popular “cluster” in history has been political upheaval.
To prove the similarity
of these two kinds of “clusters,” a parallel between renaissance “clusters” and
“clusters” of political upheaval is that individuals in the midst of both are
competing for a reward.
In artistic and cultural
achievement, individuals are contesting for artistic recognition and the
prestige that comes with such recognition. According to the text, “we learn
from one another, share with one another, and constantly compare and compete
with one another for affection, accomplishment, and resources.”
Assuming that political
upheaval follows the same structure as intellectual manifestations
(Renaissances), aren’t individuals “constantly compar[ing] and compet[ing]” for
power in the struggle for political change?
So, relating back to the recurring theme in biology that:
“structure and function are related at all levels of organization,”
How are the structure of
these culturally-centered “clusters” of achievement versus these
culturally-centered “clusters” political upheaval similar? How are they
different?
What is the function of
these structures? In other words, what is the ultimate goal of these two
different “clusters?” Is it to carry out the function of overall enlightenment
or are these “clusters” all motivated by personal gain? Feel free to disagree
with my previous proposal about what artistic and political “clusters” are
competing for.
In order to support your position, please make parallels between the “Renaissance clusters” mentioned by David Shenk (pages 146-147) and “Political clusters.” Also, feel free to make connections to populations and communities from our Ecology unit to discuss competition within a species or an ecosystem to occupy a certain niche (analogous in this context to the “reward” that clusters are competing for).
(Tina Ding: yuning.tina.ding@gmail.com)
In the prompt above, Tina proposes that there are similarities between people who strive to achieve similar goals, not just in cultural renaissances, but also throughout history. I agree that competition in the environment around one is an outside pressure that changes the way an individual has to think and act in order to survive in the environment around him or her.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, I believe that both of these structures depend on being in close association with one another during development toward a similar goal. Being within close proximity of one another will facilitate for easy distribution of ideas and interaction with the available resources around. For example, the manifestations and "renaissances" that Shenk states in chapter 9 are results of the competition between one another and the desire to come out on top. This journal article titled "The coevolution of Cultural Groups and Ingroup Favoritism" describes the pressures and favorable traits that are easily developed within a culture, or just simply a group of similarly minded individuals (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/321/5897/1844.abstract?sid=02ddfdba-6229-404d-b360-97d1136babbc). The article states the selective advantage of being able to solve problems faster with the benefit of having heterozygous individuals working together on a issue that requires cooperation. Political "clusters" are different in that a resolution requires cooperation of individuals from different life-styles, cultures, and hometowns. One can argue that the environment around us shapes who we are, and growing up in different environments when brought together facilitates room for discussion and conflict. Once again, political "clusters" require more effort, since the outcome and vision of those may not be the same.
According to Campbell, the patterns of dispersion are influenced by the, "social interactions between members of the population" (1176). Organisms have determined the most favorable type of dispersion to gain the most from their environment and survive and reproduce. For example, "Sea stars group together in tide pools, where food is readily available and where they can breed successfully" (1176). However, the sea stars also are striving to occupy the same niche, where competition is now prevailing in the same food-abundant location. The structure of the organisms cluster is favorable for the organism to gain food and survive in its environment demonstrating a relationship by the organization of the cluster with the structure v. function theme.
(Weronika Dudkiewicz wpd1414@gmail.com)