Analyzing Oppenheimer's 'The Outliers'
Gladwell (2009) points out in chapter 3 and 4 of the Outliers that we possess a misunderstanding of the meaning of success. American education links the results of testing in children to offer them greater opportunities, depending in their IQ. But a high IQ result doesn’t measure the levels of creativity or creative thinking Therefore, Gladwell believes that success is the outcome from having a high IQ, education and upbringing. Gladwell proves his point by using Terman’s experiments, and the result proves that Gladwell was right all along by suggesting that children with superior scores aren’t necessarily the most successful adults.
Mr. Gladwell
One of the analogies that caught my attention is how Oppenheimer’s story differs from Lagan’s.
They are both considered geniuses, but Lagan’s tendency to quit and not be able to make his point across in his life time causes for him to become a regular individual in society. On the other hand, Oppenheimer is a highly-motivated individual that will not let other people decide the outcome of his life.
Another point that I found interesting is how social class has great influence in individual’s success in their lifetime. You make a point about parenting, and how wealthy parents let their children be outspoken, while on the other hand parents of poorer children do not praise them, therefore these children become limited. You have suggested that entitlement works in a child’s favor more than being constrained also, that practical intelligence must be learned. I do agree that wealthy children learn to manipulate their environment in a younger age, in contrast to poorer children that they just accept and learn to cope with their environment
I found it quite interesting the way you interpreted practical intelligence. I believe that an individual with a strong personality can be considered to possess practical intelligence. We all have the power to create our own destiny therefore being outspoken and know exactly what we what from life is a good start.
Thank you for sharing your ideas and findings, looking forward to read more of your work.
Sincerely
Silvia Tavara-Vivar
Mr. Gladwell
One of the analogies that caught my attention is how Oppenheimer’s story differs from Lagan’s.
They are both considered geniuses, but Lagan’s tendency to quit and not be able to make his point across in his life time causes for him to become a regular individual in society. On the other hand, Oppenheimer is a highly-motivated individual that will not let other people decide the outcome of his life.
Another point that I found interesting is how social class has great influence in individual’s success in their lifetime. You make a point about parenting, and how wealthy parents let their children be outspoken, while on the other hand parents of poorer children do not praise them, therefore these children become limited. You have suggested that entitlement works in a child’s favor more than being constrained also, that practical intelligence must be learned. I do agree that wealthy children learn to manipulate their environment in a younger age, in contrast to poorer children that they just accept and learn to cope with their environment
I found it quite interesting the way you interpreted practical intelligence. I believe that an individual with a strong personality can be considered to possess practical intelligence. We all have the power to create our own destiny therefore being outspoken and know exactly what we what from life is a good start.
Thank you for sharing your ideas and findings, looking forward to read more of your work.
Sincerely
Silvia Tavara-Vivar