The Argument
David Shenk argues that "practice changes your body," but "ordinary practice, where your current skill level is simply being reinforced, is not enough to get better" (65-66). According to Shenk, rather than simply repeating a single motion or thought process, one must "push themselves beyond the zone of relative comfort," causing "biochemical states [that] will trigger the activation [of] dormant genes within the cells' DNA" (69). Considering a strictly mental skill or behavioral context, how does this deliberate practice contrast with the animal learning processes we studied in the Animal Behavior unit (Chapter 51) at the start of the school year? Is learning even a process that affects an individual on the level of gene expression? Remember the processes of habituation and associative learning. Couldn't the unfamiliar conditions found in classical conditioning and the changing reactions of the subject also be considered a form of practice and extending from a "zone of relative comfort" (69)? How would these learning processes then be different from engaging in practice that is not deliberate, demanding, and sustained (e.g. "simply playing lots of chess") (67)? Remember to relate your response to at least one biological theme.
- Justin Doong (jbdoong@gmail.com)
In the above prompt, Justin argues that learning is essential and has long lasting effects on an organism’s body. From studying the Animal Behavior unit, I similarly believe that conditioning and repetitive practice is enough to alter one's responses to small changed in the environment around you. The "trigger" to push oneself beyond the limit according to Shenk, should in fact "cause alterations of the dormant genes in our DNA" (69). The deliberate practice and processes the body undergoes to condition itself will ultimately improve and force the body to move away from its homeostatic set point at times. Such changes can in fact have a long-lasting genetic effect on the human body.
ReplyDeleteThe animal learning processes we studied earlier in the year relate to imprinting, which according to Campbell is the, "formation at a specific stage in life of a long-lasting behavioral response to a particular individual or object" (1126). Campbell did not discuss the effect that imprinting has on the "dormant" genes of individuals, but it may be possible that such conditioning at an earlier age has even more influence on the developing body of an organism such as the young greylag geese that imprinted on ethologist Konrad Lorenz (1126).
In an article titled "Play and Exercise Protect Mouse Brain From Amyloid Buildup", the idea of changing genes as a result of excessive repetitive activity can be proven with the study done by these scientists on mice. For example, playing and exercising could have been processes that altered the genes of the mice, hence the mice avoided buildup of Amyloid in the brain.
An interesting connection to make would be to the theme of Regulation and homeostasis. As the body is moved away from the homeostatic set point, changes that are good for the body may help alter genes for a better and stronger individual such as in the mice in the article above.
(Weronika Dudkiewicz wpd1414@gmail.com)
David Shenk’s argument that we must “push [ourselves] beyond the zone of relative comfort
ReplyDeletein order to improve our skills (for intellectual and/or physical purposes) contrasts with both types of associative learning: classical conditioning and operant conditioning. According to Campbell, classical conditioning is when “an arbitrary stimulus becomes associated with a particular outcome” (Campbell 1127) and operant conditioning is “trial-and-error learning”, in which “an animal learns to associate one of its own behavior with a reward or punishment and then tends to repeat or avoid that behavior”(Campbell 1127). Associative learning helps animals quicken their reaction to a certain stimulus, but doesn’t necessarily make them “better” at reacting to the stimulus. For example, a repeated whistle call from a dog owner to his pet may mean that they will play Frisbee, or that it is time to go back inside. If all whistle calls were to play Frisbee, the dog will automatically begin running toward its owner without waiting to sight the Frisbee (classical conditioning). However, if the dog finds that some of the whistles result in the dog going back into the house, the dog may refuse to walk towards his owner in order to avoid the house and stay outdoors as much as possible. These types of behaviors speeds up the process in which the dog makes his decisions, not make them “better” in any way.
Shenk supports that learning is a process that affects an individual on the level of gene expression by saying that “what an individual does in his/her life before having children can change the biological inheritance of those children and their descendants”(p. 161). Lifestyle before pregnancy “offers not just another mechanism by which species can adapt to changing environments, but also the prospect of an evolutionary process that is more interactive, less random, and runs along several parallel tracks at the same time”(p. 161). According to Li-Huei Tsai, PhD, at MIT, experience can enhance brain functions and elasticity, and the enhanced learning behaviors may be transmitted to that person’s offspring (p.162). This process aids in the process of adaptation throughout generations of that individual. Environmental changes will allow that person to find ways to adapt to it in order to live to its optimal survival range, to make its surroundings beneficial for that individual to survive and reproduce. These adaptations are also continually changing with the environment, evolving the human responses and behaviors to certain stimuli so that the human individual is able to maintain homeostasis.
As said before, associative learning is different from pushing oneself “beyond the zone of relative comfort”(p. 69) to get better physically or intellectually, since associative learning only quickens the response to a certain key stimulus. However, these learning processes are different from other learning practices such as chess, since chess has the capability to develop memory, concentration, logical thinking, creativity, and self-motivation. (http://www.quadcitychess.com/benefits_of_chess.html#facts). Practicing strategies in chess for hours at a time will allow the player to encounter problems(pushing them outside their comfort zone) and find multiple answers to them (better problem-solvers and players).
Tracy Lai (tracymlai@hotmail.com)
I disagree with Tracy's point - Shenk's argument that practice changes your body is not at all contrasting with the processes we learned during the Animal Behavior unit - specifically, the process of trial-and-error learning. Learning processes such as operant conditioning, another name for trial and error learning, an animal "learns to associate one of its own behaviors with a reward or punishment" - success or failure in the task attempted - "and then tends to repeat or avoid that behavior." (Campbell 1127). The act of deliberate practice is an extremely refined form of trial and error learning. As the individual learns, changes in the person's body and mind lead to increased skill based on avoiding undesirable behavior and utilizing desirable behavior, that has been honed by the deliberate, intentional practice used by continued repetition of the action. Learning is a process that affects the organism significantly; indeed, one study suggests that the only major difference between humans and other organisms in terms of learning is the presence of a mutant FOXP2 gene, a gene that is inactivated in some humans with learning disabilities. (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=language-gene-speeds-learning) The aforementioned study also noted an increase of learning capability of mice with the mutant (human) form of the gene when compared to regular mice that contained the regular version of the gene. This study suggests that there is a genetic relation to learning - one that Shenk seems to support. Rather than contrast, as Tracy would suggest, operant conditioning seems to support Shenk's claims, rather than refute them.
ReplyDeleteShenk also notes that there is a significant effect of the environment on the genes. The epigenome, the packaging that surrounds DNA, can, according to Shenk, "be affected by the environment." (159). Given that fact, it may be possible that the epigenome is changed with deliberate practice; after all, seeing as deliberate practice is the best way to hone a specific skill, and environment affects the epigenome. After all, if changes in the epigenome are enough to completely change the physical appearance of a toadflax, it seems likely that deliberate practice would affect the epigenome to the point where humans who have practiced in a deliberate manner will be extremely good at the task they are honing. As Annie points out, as well, imprinting may also have a significant effect on the genes of an individual that are "dormant" (i.e., not expressed by the epigenome) and, via the effect of the epigenome, change the behavior of the organism.
This relates to the theme of the relationship organisms have with their environment, a theme that states that organisms "interact continuously with [their] environment" (Campbell 6). In this case, the organism is consciously attempting to change his or her own environment, via extensive practice, and attempting to harness the relation of the self to the environment - in this case, that of the genes to the environment, and changing the way the organism expresses its characteristics by interacting with that enivronment.
Ari Bakke
-Aribakke@gmail.com