Gold Medals Prove Accomplishment, Not Character.

Watching The Olympics over the past few weeks has really gotten me thinking about dreams. When you're an Olympic athlete, you train so incredible hard for at least the four years prior to your games, if not your whole life. Imagine the 40 hour work week that the typical American puts in. Now imagine having to push yourself to the most extreme physical limits of your body for that amount of time, every week, for years and years. Even more than that, you don't get holidays off. Your body needs to stay in top form, so you work it every single day. In the end, you go through all that relentless training for years and years, all for just those few minutes on stage. That's such a heavy weight. These athletes have so little time to prove what they really can do and how hard they've worked for all that time to get up there on that stage.
Even worse yet, if they mess up, be it nerves, or be it just a temporary lapse in judgment or slight miscalculation - They can't undo it. They were given only those few minutes, and it won't ever be possible to get that back again. Sure, there might be other years, but it will never be the same. After they've slip up, they've already tarnished what the country that they represent and what the people of the world think about them. Not only that, but they've even let down themselves and diminished their idea that they could make their dreams come true. Athletics may be mostly physical, however it's also a large portion mental - Once that athlete falls into that mindset that they might fail again, it's hard to come back from that. They may never be able to compete at the same level again because they can't get over there mental obstacle that they might fail. All because of what happened during their one defining moment.
Whereas if you and I typical people work a regular, boring office job, We can screw up many times. We will never have that one truly defining moment of our careers that is nearly close to that of athletes and The Olympics. We will never be able to truly face a challenge like that, that will either make or break our careers. Most every challenge that we face in a regular job can be fixed. And never at any time will any one of us with regular jobs ever have as many eyes looking at us, watching us, and judging us if we fail as an Olympian does at The Olympics.
For any athletes choosing to take the less-traveled, more risky path of becoming an Olympian, I admire that. I don't have that strength. I don't even pursue my comparatively small dreams because I'm afraid of failure, and it's not even nearly to the extent of that of an Olympian. Even less than that, I can't even mentally face the challenge of potentially disappointing millions, if not billions, of people, let alone if it actually were to happen.
Regardless if you mess up in your defining moment, you still tried. Some people don't even attempt risk. I don't really attempt risk either. Maybe that makes me a fuddy duddy, but I don't think that I will ever have the guts to do anything like that. Failure terrifies me, and I admire the fact that athletes face that fear head-on every day to purse their dreams. In defense of people like me, it's easier to have to keep taking steps down when you can't reach the next step up, and have your dreams die slowly over the course of a lifetime, than to lose everything that you've worked for in a single moment.
And every once in a while when these athletes do slip up, and people have the nerve to say "It's your one job, can't you do that right?" - That's ridiculous. Honestly, the people that act like that can back off. These athletes work so much harder than those people for their one defining moment, whereas most of these people have never reached anything nearly of that caliber, so they couldn't possibly understand what all that pressure feels like. Even more than that, the majority of the time, the athlete's worst critic is himself or herself. Don't you think that the athlete get enough grief from themself that they don't need help from other people, too?
Maybe I do take this a little too personally, but I can't stand how ridiculous some people can be. They get much too competitive. You might need a gold medal to make history, but making history doesn't make you a winner. It's overcoming obstacles, working hard for what you want, and being a team player that makes you a winner - The fact that they got that far is already what makes them a winner. Gold medals prove accomplishment, not character. Yes, the gold medal is the nice cherry on top to prove to the world what a winner you are, but it's not what makes you the winner.
I have so much respect for Olympic athletes. These athletes work so hard their whole lives just for the few minutes that they get in the spotlight. That determination that they believe that they can make it is really what's amazing. No matter what happens, I hope these athletes know that they're still appreciated, no matter the outcome, just because they made it that far.

Stay Tuned... More Coming Soon!

This used to be my blog for my English class. But as you can easily tell from the dates on my previous posts, that class is over. But I've been jotting down a lot of my thoughts lately, and I'm going to start sharing them. I have a lot to say, and I'm not going to just let them set in untitled documents on my computer or not. Whether you'll be interested in that or not, that's up to you - If so... Come back soon for new stuff!

Annotated Bibliography Individual Progress Report

This annotated bibliography project is a little bit more difficult than I thought it would be. At first, I thought that it was just finding articles and summarizing them, but unfortunately that is not as easy as it sounds.

My group has the topic of biology. Each member of our group took a certain aspect of success in biology to research. So for my part, I have the topic of what success is to evolution in biology. This is pretty difficult for me because, to be perfectly honest, I do not understand science worth anything. The language is challenging, and to be frank, boring. I cannot get myself to concentrate on it. As if concentrating on reading weren't difficult enough, trying to weed through the results that I get during the research process is a challenge in itself. I really struggle with finding good results. I am aware that at some point I should seek outside help from a librarian, but I just haven't gotten to it. I'm sure that I will eventually, but right now, I'm being a little stubborn and am trying to figure it out on my own because I don't particularly like asking for help. So thus far I am still in the process of figuring out how to weed through the results and am working on summarizing the results that I pick. As bad as this sounds, I have about none of the sources done of the four that I need to do. But I know that I will get more done soon. I know I shouldn't have put it off this long, but it's hard not to look at a challenge like this and turn away. But the point is that I am confident that once I have a little more time to look at it I will figure it out. The point of this blog was not to tell you that I have been sitting around doing nothing, but to tell you honestly that I have experienced challenges in this assignment so far.

This project is especially difficult because not only is it about every group member pulling his or her weight, but it also about making every group member's effort work together. So try to make that work, my group is in the process of making plans to get together. In the mean time, we're all just trying to work on our own and use each other as a reference for questions when needed.

Discourse Community: Vegans

A discourse community is defined as “a group of people who share similar thoughts, ideas and behaviors, as well as common ways of writing and speaking about theses ideas and practices with each other and with others.” On multiple occasions throughout the day, the majority of us as humans move in and out of our own various discourse communities. When we think about it, you wake up and you're in the discourse community of your neighborhood. Then you might commute somewhere, where you would be in the discourse community of commuters. After that, you might go to school and/or work, where you are in another discourse community with other students and/or workers. I did not even mention half of the many other things a person would do on a daily basis which would result in the person being among even more discourse communities. But just from that, that person has been a part of over three different discourse communities.
Out of all of the videos for discourse communities, I chose to write about the discourse community of vegans. I chose this because it is something that I personally relate to and I feel that I can speak the most effectively about. Vegans compose their own discourse community because they possess all the fulfillments of being it's own community. To start, vegans share their own language or vocabulary. Most people outside of veganism wouldn't understand words such as tempeh, Teese, or seitan, which are all common elements in a vegan diet. Another element that makes vegans a discourse community is the sharing of common behaviors, practices, and/or procedures for doing things. This also ties in with the element that a discourse community shares common goals, beliefs, attitudes, and assumptions. And of course those practices and behaviors would be to eliminate the consumption of animal products in all forms. Some may advocate to non-vegans that this is what they should do, too, but overall, the groups' goal is to just eliminate animal product consumption and live a healthier way of life. This one is a little tricky, but if you think about it, vegans are also a discourse community because they share common ways of communication with one another. Much like any other community, they communicate through mutual vegans. Because vegans don't make up a large percentage of the population, it's not so easy to find other vegans. So those that do communicate are often through online forums or other means of vegan meeting groups, such as a cooking class. One last reason that vegans are their own discourse community is because there is a common threshold for membership, or a means of recognizing who does and does not belong to the community. This one is kind of obvious to tell who does and does not not participate in this way of life, as a person who does not belong would consume animal products. While this discourse community may not seem as typical as other discourse communities, it still fulfills the requirements of being it's own individual community.

Response to "The 10,000- Hour Rule" from Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

Question: "If you could spend ten years to become an 'expert' in anything, what would it be? Why?"

The whole idea of that chapter, “The 10,000- Hour Rule,” is that in order to become an expert in a certain field, a person must have put at 10,000 hours towards the development of that field. The words of Malcolm Gladwell explain this best: “The idea that excellence at performing a complex task requires a critical minimum level of practice surfaces again and again in studies of expertise. In fact, researchers have settled on what they believe is the magic number for true expertise: ten thousand hours.” In the chapter, Gladwell further explains this concept by quoting the neurologist, Daniel Levitin. Levitin said “No one has yet found a case in which true world-class expertise was accomplished in less time. It seems that it takes the brain this long to assimilate all that it needs to know to achieve true mastery.” That amount of time, 10,000 hours, is equivalent to spending 416.666 straight days practicing that task. That is over one year of your life, without stopping, working towards achieving mastery in that task. The bottom line is that people such as Mozart, Bill Gates, and The Beatles achieved the fame and expertise that they did in their fields by putting in 10,000 hours, or about ten years, worth of work towards that task.

And so the question is posed: “If I could spend ten years to become an 'expert' in anything, what would it be?” For me, the ideal answer to this question to me would seem to be practicing medicine. That time spent practicing medicine might help in the development of new realizations that would help in discovering cures for the world's deadly diseases. Like I said, that would the “ideal” answer. But to be perfectly honest, that is not the type of person that I am.

If I had my choice, I would study music. I would listen to it, read it, and study the history behind it. I would learn many artists, composers, and genres. I would find out what elements in music history led to the development of the music that we have today. I would learn to understand how the music works, and why it is so aesthetically pleasing. I would study not just the kinds of music in the world, but the elements working behind to create that music. I find any and every aspect dealing with music to incredibly fascinating. It is amazing that a mixture of a multitude of sounds can create so many wonderful and different things to hear. I would like to study why this is so and how the elements that create these sounds work together to form something so completely unique.

I realize that this may not be a traditional field to master, as it is more of a concept than a task. But I feel that I could gain as much expertise about this subject as a hockey player could develop skill in the game of hockey for instance. The reason that I would choose to spend ten years of my life to become an expert in music is because music is one of the greatest aspects of my life. I truly enjoy it and I would love to have a deeper understanding of it. Music is such a valuable part of my life that I wish that I had the opportunity to appreciate it in all it's entirety a little bit more. Music is my passion and would love to become an expert on everything about it.

Response to "The Matthew Effect" from Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

Question: "In what ways does Gladwell's examination of hockey challenge traditional notions of success as merely the result of hard work and talent?"

Gladwell's examination of hockey challenges traditional notions of success because Gladwell is suggesting that the success of young hockey players is because of a cut off date. Gladwell explains to the audience that because Canada sets the age-based deadline for players qualifying for the team for that year at January 1, a difference is established simply based on the month of the player's birth. There is a difference in attention and practice the players that are closest after that cut off date receive versus players born later in the previous year.

This notion is best explained in the words of Gladwell; “A boy who turns ten on January 2, then, could be playing alongside someone who doesn't turn ten until the end of the year—and at that age, in preadolescence, a twelvemonth gap in age represents an enormous difference in physical maturity.” This gives that player who was born on January 2 more attention from the coaches because he is more developed than the players on his team that were born sometime in November or December. This “twelvemonth gap in age” also allows that player with the January 2 birth date more time to practice and develop his skills than a player with the November or December birth date that may have barely made the age cut off for the team for the previous year. While in essence, these two players may have only been born a few months apart and may be developing in “physical maturity” at a similar rate, the January 2 player, who barely missed the age cut off date, has almost a whole extra year to improve his skills before he plays on the team. This gives the player an “enormous difference” over that other player. That other player with the November or December birth date has been lost in the shuffle of other players who were born many months before him in that same year and are many months more developed than him.

Gladwell challenges the traditional notions of success as merely being the result of hard work and talent because he believes that this age-based deadline is truly a significant factor in deciding the success of a player. He is saying that a player doesn't necessarily have to be a hard working and talented player, that player just has to have an advantage over the other players. Gladwell explains this best when he says, “Success is the result of what sociologists like to call "accumulative advantage." The professional hockey player starts out a little bit better than his peers. And that little difference leads to an opportunity that makes that difference a bit bigger, and that edge in turn leads to another opportunity, which makes the initially small difference bigger still—and on and on until the hockey player is a genuine outlier. But he didn't start out an outlier. He started out just a little bit better.”

The author also uses this “accumulative advantage” explanation to show that his same thing is happening in the education system. If the school has an August 1 birth date deadline for the class for the next year, a child born on August 2 will barely miss out on making that year's class. But the extra time that that child gets to develop his skills over other students born just a few months before the August 1 cut off date gives the child the advantage of being “a little bit better than his peers.” Every subsequent year, the “advantage” that the August 2 child has gets a little more better than it already was. This makes “the initially small difference bigger still.”

But after all of that, what do we get from what Gladwell is telling us? In the case of the age difference when it comes to schooling, “The small initial advantage that the child born in the early part of the year has over the child born at the end of the year persists. It locks children into patterns of achievement and underachievement, encouragement and discouragement, that stretch on and on for years.” To put it simply, “Opportunity plays a critical role in their success.” It's not so much talent that gets a child to exceed over his or her peers, Gladwell says it is opportunity. Our world may be much different today if we didn't have this conceptualization that we should be grouped by some made up cut off date. If we really think about it, certain people in history may or may not have succeeded simply due to this realization.