On page 244, Larry Shiner explains the origin of the term “genius” as it used today, saying that the definition had been changed from a talent endowed within everyone to a type of person. However, in the context of the book’s title, is Shenk implying that we each have, within ourselves, the potential to be a gifted person or that we each have a talent? How would you define “genius” after having read the book, and would it be closer to the old definition or the current one? Discuss behavior and forms of learning (51.2 in Campbell) in the context of development, and thematically relate this discussion to either the development of “genius” via evolution or interactions with the biotic and abiotic environment.
-Kyle Mueting (kylemueting@comcast.net)
The title of Shenk’s book, The Genius in all of Us, does not mean that everyone has an inner genius, but rather acknowledges the genius of human’s design. During our Skype session yesterday, Shenk addressed his title and he confirmed my suspicions about the title. Shenk saw the design in the “gene x environment” (Shenk 19) interaction, and calls that genius. The design of selective splicing, operons, and the body’s adaptability could only have been the doing of a genius, not random mutations and a string of coincidences.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this book, I would define genius as the current definition: “a dynamic… ongoing process… of competencies in development.” (Shenk 51) Webster says that a genius is a person with “a strong leaning or inclination”( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genius) Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi said that genius’s “are not necessarily born ‘smarter’ than others, but work harder and develop more self-discipline.” ( Shenk 51) People that are more successful in life are, in general, the most disciplined, determined, and industrious. Larry Shiner says that geniuses have changed from “having a genius for something, [to] a few people [are] said to be geniuses.” (Shenk 244)
Geniuses have a higher cognitive learning capability. According to Campbell, cognition “is the process of knowing represented by reasoning and recollection.” (Campbell 1128) Many animals, ranging from insects to mammals, are able to differentiate between objects, but humans have perfected their method of cognitive learning. Now days, those considered to be geniuses have a more efficient cognitive learning process. This process has been made more efficient due to practice and repetition.
The biological theme of evolution relates to our ability to cognitively learn. Over time, human’s capability to learn has greatly increased. According to standardized tests, our ancestors one generation back were “mentally retarded.”(Shenk 42)
Josh Gerber (grbr_jsh@yahoo.com)
The use of the word ‘genius’ in its full meaning is rare in our society. A genius is a person who has the capability to accomplish great feats at incredibly faster rates than the average man. After reading this book, I believe that a genius is not born with his incredible aptitude for his skill but is nurtured and cared for correctly from young ages. The small fraction of pre-determined intelligence would come from factors that only set the brain up to be able to understand information; one cannot be born with intelligence of worldly function. A potential genius would receive his knowledge from small events in their sensitive period such as seeing pictures or hearing sounds or performing small actions. The difference between one baby and the rest that makes that baby a genius is that the baby’s brain is able to make connections a lot faster and easier than the others.
ReplyDeleteIf a child hears sounds and at some point the child begins playing with a piano, when the child presses a key and makes a connection of a note to a song, the child tries pressing other keys to find the other notes in a song. This can go on until the child has the entire Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star song under his belt at age one. When the brain can quickly process and connect information, it becomes a form of operant learning when this musician child begins pressing keys and trying to order the notes correctly for the melody of the song they wish to mimic. I call this operant learning because if the child presses the next note correct, they are rewarded with the satisfaction of the sound they made; however, if the child plays the wrong note, he is punished with a bad sound. The genius “then tends to repeat […] the behavior” (Campbell 1127) and this goes on to different, more complicated songs. As Shenk retells, “Mozart was bathed in music from well before his birth, and his childhood was quite unlike any other,” (61) so the case I’ve already described may very well be the case of the young Wolfgang Mozart. In addition, what may distinguish Mozart from his siblings is the development of a superior prefrontal cortex such that he could act upon his emotions more beneficially. Being able to focus his attention and organize detailed thought would prove key aspects in the development of such a genius. (http://www. hhs.gov/opa/familylife/tech_assistance/etraining/adolescent_brain/Development/prefrontal_cortex)
In respect to a biological theme, I would like to propose that a possible reason the human intelligence capability has come so far since pre-historic times is that such ‘geniuses’ of their time were able to surpass all others and reproduce. Any possible physical growth or change that allowed for this human to harbor a superior intellect to his peers may be the reason that the average man of today is what he is. A genius can simply be an anomaly from the norm in our society where his selective advantage is that he is capable of achieving, on his own, what would take multiple others.
As for Josh’s response to this question, while I agree that the meaning Josh provides for the word Genius, I cannot confirm Shenk’s opinion (as I wasn’t at the Skype session), but the use of the word genius overall would apply to my context of the word as described above. The mechanisms and wonders of the human body can be described as ‘genius’, but in my opinion, using a word traditionally implying a sense of intelligence would provide me a connotation that intelligent design, rather than evolution an chance, was involved.
Jesse Pukshansky (jesse.pukshansky@gmail.com)
PART ONE
ReplyDeleteI don’t think that through his title of The Genius In All of Us, he is implying that we each have the potential within us to be a genius or that we have talent. Based on the Skype session with David Shenk yesterday, he said that many people often misconstrue the meaning of his book title. What Shenk meant by the “genius” was the system endowed in every human. He was referring to the plasticity of our brains and how humans work; how the interaction and genes and environment can cause such phenomenon. After reading this book, I personally would define genius as someone who has made the most of the environmental factors and has persisted and used motivation and dedication to reach their goals. I would no longer say that one is naturally a genius or that a person has innate talent; rather, I would say that they worked hard and even though certain GXE interactions may have been in their favor, they had to strive to achieve their success.
There are numerous behaviors that animals exhibit: Fixed action patterns, kinesis, taxis, migration, release of pheromones, single communication, etc. Kinesis and taxis are direct response to the environment and this demonstrates the biological theme of interdependence of nature and the interactions between organisms and their environment. For example, the definition of kinesis itself is “a change in activity or turning rate in response to a stimulus" (Campbell 1122) and a taxis is “an oriented movement towards or away from some stimulus” (1122). Also, animals have many different methods of learning. One example if habituation. Habituation can be a selective advantage for some species or in general for all species because it allows “an animals’ nervous system to focus on stimuli that signal the presence of food, a mate, or real danger” (1125). Habituation being a selective advantage can be the reason why so many species use this method of learning; habituation has been selected as a good method by evolution and the method has been passed down through generations. Another important learning method is spatial learning which is “the establishment of a memory that reflects the environment’s spatial structure” (1126). Wasps specifically locate their nest position relative to landmarks and through spatial learning. This is a very important method as mobile species need to be able to relocate to where their home base is. Two popular methods of learning in humans are classical condition and operant condition. A lot of these methods have proven useful for many species and have evolved as a result through natural selection. But these methods don’t necessarily create “geniuses” as these are methods used by all individuals of a population; a learning method isn’t specific to one particular individual making that individual stand out and is characterized as a “genius”.
One article discusses the five basic ways that a human being learns: Pattern recognition, repetition, virtual cognition, association, and themes. Several of this ways are not only prevalent amongst humans but can also be found in other species. For example, chimpanzees and mice use pattern recognition to be able to travel through a maze or complete a task assigned; virtual cognition is used by wasps as mentioned; all species employ repetition, and many species learn to make associations between ideas and new things. Many individuals of the human race use these ways of learning in their daily life, and thus what distinguishes certain individuals is what they do with these methods/learning techniques. I don’t believe that there are innate geniuses but one can become a “genius” or very successful if they use the proper methods and work hard.
Nikitha (lakshmi_nikitha_1@yahoo.com)
PART TWO
ReplyDeleteShiner tells us that before people “believed that everyone had a genius or talent for something” (244) but at the end of the century “a few people were said to be geniuses” (244). The first perspective is saying that everyone is talented and each person is born with something they are very good at. The second perspective states that only some people are geniuses, but it’s not clear if this genius is referring to it being innate or through environment and development. Either way, I disagree with both views. A “genius” is someone well advanced beyond the expectations of society for a particular age, but I don’t think that anyone and everyone can become a genius, because not everyone has the persistence and skills required. I also don’t believe that people are innately born geniuses.
Josh Gerber said that “people that are more successful in life, are, in general, the most disciplined, determined, and industrious”. I agree with this because as Shenk mentioned before, “persistence is the difference between mediocrity and enormous success” (139). More than skill, hard work and dedication are crucial. Also, Josh’s entire first paragraph is similar to my own in that when Shenk was referring to “the genius in all of us”, he meant the genius of the human design and the GXE complex. The variability in traits and our body’s ability to adapt are such great phenomenon that Shenk finds them to be “genius”, so to speak.
Overall, I don’t believe that there are innate geniuses, but that people who persist and have some skill will succeed in life. And the skill is derived from GXE interaction before birth and during development.
http://www.angelfire.com/games3/lifemasteraj/aj_psy_lrn1.html
Nikitha (lakshmi_nikitha_1@yahoo.com)