Category: Malcolm Gladwell

The notion of the “self made man” is defined as having achieved success or prominence by one’s own efforts. This is what many big entrepreneurs claim when they talk about their success: being a self made man. We as a society have come to believe that the self-made man attains their success through education, hard work, and sheer willpower. In addition, society believes that it’s not luck that makes you successful. Nor is it external help or special relationships that make the crucial difference in the self-made man’s rise. As a society, we have come to focus too much on intelligence, ambition, and personality traits when it comes to understanding successful people. However, Malcolm Galdwell, in his book, Outliers, attacks this American myth of the self made man. Instead, Gladwell argued that we should observe the world that surrounds the successful rather than the individual itself. We cling to the idea that success is a function of individual merit. However, that is not the case. Success is not solely based on an individual’s intelligence and ambition, but rather on the elements that surround them. Such elements include opportunity, timing, and effort that bring upon success onto the individual. It is the external help and special relationships that the individual encounters that truly makes them successful.

The time of year in which you are born can play a role in your success. In his book, Gladwell examines how your birth month can have an impact on your success. When observing a group of the best Canadian hockey players, Gladwell notices that the majority of them are born in January or February, while two or three are born between October through December (22). The reason for this is that the eligibility cut off date for youth hockey is the first of January. That means that the players born in January gain nearly a year advantage over the players that are born far later in the year, and gives the older players an extra year to grow physically and improve their skills. The older child that outperforms the rest, gains increased interest from coaches. It is then that this particular older child is met with greater opportunities to advance their career by moving up to a higher rank. These players receive better coaching, better teammates, and play fifty percent more games than a regular league. At the same time, the younger child who is seen as maybe “untalented” gets left behind and doesn’t get the opportunity to increase their skill. As Gladwell states, “ Yes the hockey players who make it to the professional level are more talented than or me. But they also got a big head start, an opportunity that they neither deserved nor earned. And that opportunity played a critical role in their success (30).” In sum, players born earlier hold higher advantages. Over the course of five years the attention and opportunities add up to drastic improvement that the younger player did not receive. The players’ birth month ultimately dictated whether they were met with the opportunity to become successful or not. One has no control in what month a player can be born. Thus pushing the limits on the idea of the self-made man. Timing and opportunity played a key role that accumulated to the player’s success, and determined whether a hockey player made it to the professional level.

A second aspect that plays an important one to one’s success is practice. Gladwell suggests that alongside hard work and passion, practice takes account into their success. Specifically, the ten thousand hour rule of deliberate practice. But more importantly, Gladwell emphasizes the hidden opportunities that allowed the individuals to put in those ten thousand hours of work. In his book, Gladwell examines the story of Bill Gates before he makes his breakthrough. In 1968, Gates was met with his first unusual opportunity. He attended a private school which had a computer club that offered students access to a time shared computer. Around this time most colleges did not have computer clubs. From that moment on Gate’s life was full of similar opportunities that kept him in front of a computer. As Gladwell states, “ And what did virtually all those opportunities have in common? They all gave Bill Gates extra time to practice. By the time Gates dropped out of Harvard… he had been programming practically nonstop for seven consecutive years. He was way past ten thousand hours(54-55).” This chance of luck and timing gave Gates the opportunity to become a master at computer programming. To refer back to Gladwell, he also states, “But what distinguishes their histories is not their extraordinary talent but their extraordinary opportunities (55).” Gates and the other individuals he examined in his book came about through the unusual and unexpected opportunities they encountered that gave them the ability to improve their practice. Their success was brought up with the special relationships they encountered and external help.The people who are given the opportunity to put in their ten thousand hours of practice have a greater chance of success. These opportunities were rare in life, and those who put in the practice were prepared for the next sign of another great opportunity. The timing and location again were essential to their success.

On the other hand, many believe that success is not just a matter of luck or due to factors outside of our control. Others assert that it is their intelligence and personality traits that drive them to be successful. They argue that it is a matter of taking the time to learn, applying your knowledge and sticking with it. Successful people set clear cut goals for themselves and have a strong drive to achieve them. But even in the examples illustrated above, they all carried a drive and aspiration to improve their practice. It was not just their talent alone that led to success, but the extraordinary opportunities that allowed them to put in the work. Gates and the Beatles happen to be where they were and happen to get the opportunities others didn’t. If it wasn’t for Hamburg, the Beatles would not have been the success they are now. Same goes for Gates, if he hadn’t been in that private school at the time he was he would’ve missed becoming one of the richest men in the world. It is all about the chances of opportunity one gets. They all seized the opportunities they were met with.

Gladwell’s book explores the way that often-overlooked factors can have an enormous impact on an individual’s success. He emphasizes that success comes from people who are given unique opportunities to work hard, but also happened to come of age at the time that hard work and effort was rewarded. They were at the right place at the right time. As he states, “ Their success was not just of their own making. It was a product of the world in which they grew up.”Success is not solely based on the ambition and drive of the individual rather than the experiences and opportunities they encounter. Elements such as timing, effort, and opportunities are what contribute to one’s success.

This book talks about the importance of instincts and snap judgements and how they can be a very influential moment in someone’s life. Throughout the book the author argues this important concept where he states that people can make better, effective decisions based on their snap judgements instead of a more rational thought process. Everyday we are presented with opportunities to make many decisions and we can sometimes make them so quickly we don’t even realize it. In Blink, Gladwell argues the benefits of instincts and our unconscious intuition. Each chapter in the book begins with a different topic or example that illustrates the same message of the benefits of our intuition.

With each scenario presented there is always a reference to snap judgments where he mentions that “snap judgements and rapid cognition take place behind a locked door” meaning that many of our knowledge and traits are established without us really knowing about it which was the main idea proven through the entire book.

One of the primary objectives that are represented in Blink is the concept of thin slicing, when he states that people can make good decisions just based on their initial instincts. It is a concept that is used in psychology and philosophy where our minds have the ability to find patterns in small windows of our experiences. In context, an example of thin slicing that was used in the book was our perception of actors that we see on tv. Malcolm Gladwell illustrated that a very famous Hollywood producer used this same language of perception the first time he met Tom Hanks for the movie Splash released in 1983. The producer describes that he instantly knew that Tom Hanks was special and would play a really big role in the future of Hollywood all because of the initial impression he received from him before they even interacted.

Today I thought I would present in the form of a TED talk about the two biggest ideas that were represented in Blink and how it can be a very useful thing to know and observe

First it is the concept of fast and frugal thinking or rapid cognition and how that is a very natural route for the human mind to follow as there are many moments where it works better than a more careful approach. It is a common thing among people that rational and timely decisions tend to be more accurate but many scenarios in blink show that the quick instincts that flash in our minds is something to take note of as, most times it can be more useful in the long run. Body language always says a lot but the interactions between people say more. Our behavior and manners express a lot of our unconscious emotions, rapid cognition can have a lot of influence during instances that lack information.

A few ways you can test this out is being more attentive about the things around you. Rapid cognition plays a very important role in various careers around the world. It goes from fire fighters to police officers, improv performers and hair dressers. As mentioned before in the book Gladwell shows that this is an unconscious action where your brain doesn’t realize what is happening as it is almost like a sixth sense. For example if you worked as a hair stylist and have been practicing for years, you will meet lots of people each day and soon it would become an unconscious reaction when you are able to predict the hairstyle the person was looking for, all because you are paying attention to detail like their clothes or body structure while being unaware that you have made that decision.

A similar example of this is also improv performers, they are one of the most accurate examples of rapid cognition as everything that you see is all done through instinct. They are able to show accurate emotion and be specific at the right time when it is needed. It is obvious that a lot of it comes from practice, but Gladwell argues that a portion of it is based on a person’s fast thinking which is done through thin slicing as they are able to associate the situation that they are present in along with any of their experiences in the past.

The next big concept in the book is that more isn’t always better, it’s commonly known that accurate decisions need to be time consuming and done in a very complex manner.

As mentioned in the book, “Often a sign of expertise is noticing what doesn’t happen.”This concept again plays a big role in our lives as it leads to the question of when to trust our instincts and when you cannot. These play a very significant role in different environments.

Stress often holds us back when associated with decision making by reducing the brain’s capability to look past distractions in our environment. What decision would you make if you knew there wasn’t a wrong one? Which is why it is important to know how to control these emotions and Gladwell shares that through an example of doctors, they are always in stressful situations where they need to have the confidence and the ability to make fast decisions in a limited amount of time.

In Blink, Gladwell shares that it is important for doctors to keep their mind clear during moments like these as “There can be as much value in the blink of an eye as in months of rational analysis.” he writes that people make bad decisions because they have too much information, because they are unable to determine which aspects of that information are irrelevant. Knowing when to rely on our snap judgments shows the growth in a person’s character and proves that our small windows of experiences are a very big part in making decisions and and more importantly making the right one.

After reading the book and understanding the main idea of snap judgements I was able to understand the significance of our snap judgments, but the most important thing that I took away from this book was that relying on rapid cognition and thin slicing is important but I also think it is important when to question this mental process as well. After finishing the book I found myself agreeing with Gladwell as I felt that we are always known to trust our conscious decision making but I believe that snap judgments are very useful in times of stress where first impressions have the chance to offer a better sense of the world. Gladwell was able to challenge his readers and offer a new way to be a critical thinker and to see the significance in the first two seconds of our instincts.

Questions

The subtitle of Malcolm Gladwell’s article asks, “How different are dogfighting and football?” Does he explicitly answer the question? What does he think? What do you think?

In his article, Gladwell doesn’t explicitly answer the question but he hints that football is similar to dogfighting as well as stock-car racing. On page 655, Gladwell quotes Carl Semencic when he’s talking about dog fights and when a dog sees their owner rooting for them they work twice as hard to please them. Gladwell then goes on comparing it to football players wanting to please their coaches even after they’ve been injured. This shows that Gladwell believes that dogfighting and football isn’t all that different. I also believe that dogfighting aren’t that different because in both the “players” will continue to go at it even if they have been injured and when they see that someone else is cheering them on then they wouldn’t want to let them down.

What elements of fiction does Gladwell use to create his story?

Some elements that Gladwell uses throughout the story are conflict and character. The main point of this article is to address the issue of chronic traumatic encephalopathy and people who play football may have to deal with this disease but also have to deal with their coaches and wanting to make them proud and also their fans. Gladwell also introduces multiple characters who all just give facts about certain things. For example Gladwell introduces Kyle Turley, Michael Vick, Bennet Omalu, Ann McKee and Kevin Guskiewicz.

Why do you think Gladwell introduces Kyle Turley so early in his piece? What are your impressions of Turley? How does Gladwell’s characterization of him help Gladwell develop his argument?

Gladwell introduces Turley early in the piece to make the reader see someone’s experience and what they had to go through with chronic traumatic encephalopathy. When I was reading about Turley, I was wondering why he didn’t go to the hospital knowing that something was wrong with him and why he didn’t take care of himself. As Gladwell writes about Turley it goes to show what all those hits can do to someone’s brain and how they are wired when it comes to being praised that they feel the need to continue playing. On page 645, “‘I was really trying to use my head more, because I was so frustrated, and the coaches on the sidelines are, like, ‘Yeah. We’re going to win this game. He’s going to lead the team.’ That’s football.’” When Gladwell found out that dogs would work twice as hard when their owner would cheer them, this quote shows that football players did the same thing.

The article shifts gears gears in paragraph 9, moving from football to dogfighting. What strategies does Gladwell use to introduce the subject of dogfighting and Michael Vick? How does he establish his credibility on the subject?

When Gladwell introduces Michael Vick and his relation to illegal dogfighting, Gladwell gives background information on what happened, along with what other people have said about Vick and dogfighting. Gladwell establishes his credibility on the story of Michael Vick by including quotes from “the commissioner of the league, Roger Goodell.”(645) Other quotes from Rhonda Evans and Craig Forsyth who wrote about one of the dogfights that happened.

Paragraphs 16-29 are about research into chronic traumatic encephalopathy (C.T.E.), a condition that has symptoms similar to Alzheimer’s but is the result of head trauma. How does Gladwell make this scientific study accessible to the lay reader? How does he bring the statistics of the disease to life?

Gladwell makes the scientific study understandable to the reader by explaining everything that McKee has done such as in the last paragraph of page 649. He also brings in other neuropathologists own research on chronic traumatic encephalopathy like Bennet Omalu. He brings the statistics to life by including the findings of the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research and by including anecdotes of people who had C.T.E. as said by McKee.

Why does Gladwell provide some personal background for neuropathologist Ann McKee in paragraph 28?

Gladwell includes background information on McKee to show her outside of being a neuropathologist and her own personal opinion. It also shows the truth behind a person’s life and how the disease could impact someone’s life tremendously.

Having read “Offensive Play,” what do you think is the answer to the question Gladwell poses in paragraph 29: “is the kind of injury being uncovered by McKee and Omalu incidental to the game of football or inherent in it?” How is that question connected to the question he asks in the next paragraph: “So what is football? Is it dogfighting or is it stock-car racing?”

I think that chronic traumatic encephalopathy is incidental to the game of football because there may be more people who are susceptible to getting hurt easily while others can go on for a little longer not getting as hurt. These two questions are connected because it’s inherent that dogs will get hurt fighting while in stock-car racing its incidental because now “NASCAR mandates stronger seats, better seat belts and harnesses, and ignition kill switches.”(650) Now they won’t have to worry too much about big car crashes because everything got upgraded and safer.

Paragraph 49 comprises only two sentences. In what ways are those two sentences central to Gladwell’s argument? How are the ideas in that paragraph illustrated in paragraph 51?

Those two sentences are important to Gladwell’s argument because it shows what happens when trust is betrayed in both football and dogfighting. In paragraph 51, Turley has a friend that took a hit for the team but passed out for a second in an ice bath and told himself that he was fine. Trust was betrayed when he took a hit for the team but no one came by his side to ask if he was fine. The act of social reparation is Turkey’s friend staying on the team and getting praised instead of being looked after his hit.

How does Gladwell appeal to logos in the conclusion of “Offensive Play”?

Gladwell appeals to logos by including what Ira Casson said which was that not much can change in football to make it a safer sport because then people would stop watching it and it won’t be interesting without all the tackling that is done. He also uses a quote from “Dogmen and Dogfights” which says that winner or loser, they will always feel some way towards the other.

All success stories have roots that run deep that determine to what extent they will succeed, and how they achieved that success. In Outliers, Gladwell’s second chapter highlights one of those trends as spending a lot of time practicing and working on their craft. Gladwell cites studies and sociologists who state that for an individual to become an expert in any skill, they need to spend about 10,000 hours practicing and honing their choice of activity. Overwhelmingly, almost all statistics show that successful people in their chosen fields had at least 10,000 hours of experience to get to where they are. Gladwell makes the point that to get 10,000 hours of practice, which usually takes atleast a decade of work, a person needs a lot of luck and extraordinary circumstances to make it happen. Only someone who is given the right opportunities for the right things at the right time can hope to be successful. In fact, Gladwell uses many success stories to prove his point that 10,000 hours is the magical number through examples such as Bill Joy, a renowned computer programmer and pioneer for Internet technology. Gladwell describes the same phenomenon occurring with Bill Gates—a series of fortunate events allowed Gates to gain 10,000 hours of practice at a very young age. Many successful people share the similar story that because of circumstances, timing, and sheer luck they were able to spend time doing what they loved doing most, which was vital for their future success.

Gladwell’s claim in this chapter is that most people don’t come across such fortunate circumstances that allow them to pursue their passions in such dedicated hours, and that in those dedicated hours, in order to truly master the craft, atleast 10,000 hours must be spent to be good at it. “…and without 10,000 hours under his belt, there is no way he can master the skills necessary.” In this chapter, the only opposing viewpoint that Gladwell addresses is when he talks about talent and how society has come to think that that’s what separates the good from the great, and how without it you could never truly excel at your craft. “…the smaller the role innate talent seems to play and the bigger the role preparation seems to play.” Later in the the chapter, Gladwell concedes that innate talent does exist, and it roots from deep within a person’s DNA. Throughout the chapter, Gladwell states the need for luck and fortune to be with you on your journey, as well as support and the necessary resources to get you to where you want to go. Gladwell utilizes research to back up his arguments because his claim that success derives from an extreme number of dedicated hours of practice works in the face of the traditional concept of success: that it comes from talent and “hard work” alone. Through his reasoning and evidence, Gladwell wants to challenge culturally dominant ideas about success and how we perceive it by using two very well-known success stories.

We all have a certain perception of success. We all think we know what success looks like. People that hold this title seem to be placed into a specific form; that all of them started with nothing and worked their way up the system, however, the author shows us otherwise. In Malcolm Gladwell’s “Outliers,” it is clear that success isn’t a gift but an achievable outcome determined by a multitude of circumstances that mostly aren’t in our control. The author narrates the stories of different successful figures and pulls out certain patterns that lead to their success. He accentuates the fact that success isn’t an outlier, and that there is a science to it. That success isn’t reserved for people of unusual power or abilities, but rather a result of the combination of the right factors coming into play. These can include hard work, support, and even the given opportunity. In most cases the opportunities people are given attribute to more than just their aptitude. In fact, IQ is such a small factor in someone’s success. Instead, these opportunities can arise from a variety of other conditions such as, the month someone was born in, their height, and their cultural background.

After reading the book you could tell Malcolm Gladwell put forth a great effort into structuring his ideas and beliefs. One way he accomplishes this is by following the development of a different successful figure every chapter. A specific example used in the book would be Bill Gates. Gates had multiple opportunities that most others did not have. For example, he was exposed to computer technology early in his life because his school decided to add a computer room for their students. This was one of the few schools that had a computer room at the time. He began coding day and night, sneaking out of the house to get to school early and code even more. Another example is the time period he happened to be born into. Gates being born during the industrial revolution was a key factor in his success. This was an era when computers were just being introduced and needed a lot of upgrades. Gladwell introduced a study that revealed how some of the biggest people in software development were born in the same era. Gates was given experience in a skill that his society needed at the time. His hard work combined with the many factors that helped him along the way lead to his success. Gladwell also decided to end his book with the last chapter reflecting his own personal experience. He mentioned how he began writing due to his grandmother’s origins, and that lead him to where he is now.

A single word to describe how this book made me feel would be ambitious. Not only did it give hope to my adrift future, but it also gave me motivation. I felt reassured when I found out that having an aptitude for something wasn’t even a major component of your success. I also found it very intriguing that Gladwell used people that I have always looked up to growing up like Bill Gates and Bill Joy. I’ve always been a tech savy kind of person yet I always accepted the fact that it probably just wasn’t for me. This personal connection to the book convinced me to change my mind. Gladwell stressed what he believed were the two factors of success: social skills and practice time. He wrote about the ten thousand hour rule, that one will master anything they put ten thousand hours of practice into. Outliers gave me the desire to take on a technology career and prove myself wrong.

Maybe a few years ago, people were still strange to the Internet. It seems to be at the top of high technology, which makes many people felt out of reach. But today, it is already in every corner of the society, it is no longer a distant or an unfamiliar thing. In a society with high-speed information circulation, the Internet has become an indispensable channel. However, Internet is a ‘two-sided’ sword, which has advantages and disadvantages. people believe that social networking sites, such as Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram, have exerted a huge negative impact on individuals as well as society. In the article of the “Small Change: Why the revolution will not be tweeted” by Malcolm Gladwell, “The Braindead Megaphone” by George Saunders and “Mirror, Mirror on the Web” by Lakshmi Chaudhry all have proven that social media and the Web 2.0 has negative influence of the society.

Web 2.0 is the name used to describe the second generation of the world wide web. It is focused on the ability for people to collaborate and share information online via social media, blogging and Web-based communities. There is no denying that social network has brought us such a great convenience that we are able to contact others anytime and anywhere. Sharing personal feelings with their friends or strangers through words, photos or videos provides social websites users with great satisfaction so that they feel they are accepted by a community to which they belong. People are obsessed with the feeling of being admired by everyone, and as a result of that, many people will pay any price for being famous. Social media often brings the incorrect guide to teenagers. In the reading, “Mirror Mirror On the Web,” by Lakshmi Chaudhry stated that, “Since a key component of narcissism is the need to be admired and to be the center of attention, Generation Me’s attraction to fame is inevitable. “You teach kids they’re special. And then they watch TV, the impression they get is that everyone should be rich and famous. Then they hear, ‘You can be anything you want.’ So they’re like, ‘Well, I want to be rich and famous.’ says Twenge. Or if not rich and famous, at least to be seen.” The fame always plays a big role in misleading society and the youth. The article emphasized that “fame” has mostly impacted children ranging from the range of five to twelve. There are many platforms that people can simply upload videos, some of them luckily got known by the public. People understood that you do not need to have huge contribution to society or be talented to become a celebrity, all you have to do is to grab others’ attention. These factors led those young people to think that being famous is a very necessary thing.

In contrast with the real society, the network is a ‘virtual society’ that will affect people’s ability to survive in real life. People spent a lot of their spare time on social media so that they are less concerned and pay less attention to the people and things around them. The network information is mixed and flooded, and the spam has an impact on the overall quality of people. In the article “Social Media’s Small, Positive Role in Human Relationships”, Zeynep Tufecki stated that, “What I’ve not seen in the data I look at extensively (national surveys, qualitative research and other accounts) are the significant number of people who were otherwise able and willing to be social face-to-face and are now lost to their devices.” Many people rely too much on the interpersonal relationship of social media, however they lose the ability to communicate with people in real life. Deviating from reality, indulging in the virtual network world has made many people’s interpersonal relationships unreal. They are even afraid to communicate with people in reality because building virtual relationships makes them feel more secure, and they worried that their performance in reality is not as perfect as in social media. It is difficult for those who are addicted to social media to clarify whether the “virtual society” that they built up is more important or the reality.

In the article, “Small Change, Why the revolution will not be tweeted”, Malcolm Gladwell discussed that in the past, people joined together to protests because of the encouragement of their friends or acquaintances because they do not have any type of technologies that can communicate with each other other than face-to-face. Like today, before using the internet, people often go out to meet friends, such as in cafes, bars or restaurants. On the other hand, people now prefer to stay alone and chat online. This is a negative development that can lead to isolation, potentially harmful situations and future life problems. As a result, people began to spend most of their time at home alone in their rooms without knowing others. This isolation is unhealthy and can sometimes lead to depression and other problems.

Some may argue that social media can be a great way to communicate easily and quickly. However, the information online could be wrong. Malcolm Gladwell also mentioned this point in the article, “The marvels of communication technology in the present have produced a false consciousness about the past”. Another serious problem is that making friends online can be risky. In other words, people can fake their identity online and hide their true characteristics. This is especially worrying for young people who are vulnerable to danger. In addition, because this interaction is online, so parents can not monitor it and protect their children. Finally, with the advent of forgotten conversations and shared photos, online socialization in a few years may be in trouble. At present, this situation is very important for many people, especially for teenagers who have not carefully considered before releasing the network. That is to say, information posted online can remain there forever, although people can share intimate communication with close friends, but these words may then surface, causing a lot of embarrassment.

The introduction to Malcolm Gladwell’s book is aptly titled “Goliath”. That is to say, the author retells the famous legend in his own way here, mixing the biblical facts with nuggets of historically accurate (as Gladwell claims) facts to show that the moral of the story is not as it appears to be at the first glance. The “extended” version supplied by Gladwell includes references to the types of warriors both David and Goliath belonged to; the author insists that what really happened there was a hopeless (for Goliath) stand-off between a “projectile” warrior (a slinger) and an infantryman. David saw this, recognized the possible advantage he could have if he broke the rules of the fair close combat, and seized the opportunity, thus beating the enemy on his (David’s) own terms. Gladwell uses this as an example of how a man can defeat a “giant” if that said man refuses to be blinded into stupidity by fear. The central thesis of the introduction is that “defeating a giant” (completing a task that seems impossible) can be done if a person analyzes the task first, disregarding its enormity to keep a cool head, and then rejects obvious solutions that make the task look so difficult.

Gladwell starts off by retelling the original legend in a way that suggests some sort of criticism. The author conveys the worldwide known plot in a dry, almost journalist-like manner. He then proceeds to make several witty remarks about the customs described in the Bible and how these customs were challenged when David faced Goliath with a sling. An important note to make here is that the smoothness of the transition between dry facts and the author’s opinionated conclusions renders the whole piece surprisingly credible. That is, Gladwell makes several rather far-fetched suggestions (such as Goliath’s illness) which would probably make a critic frown in disbelief (or, rather, in concern for the author’s mental health), but these suggestions are predeceased by certain arguments which make the following claims look logical within the metaphorical significance of the relayed story.

Gladwell bases his “They Say” component on three pillars or, rather, sources of information. Firstly, the author, obviously, uses the original story and even cites certain passages. Secondly, Gladwell utilizes the knowledge of ancient warfare, albeit in an overly simplified and abridged manner. Finally, the author uses the opinions of certain “experts” who put some muscle on the skeleton of the biblical story (namely, the author reveals some facts about the usage of ancient slings, their power, and utilization on the battlefield): “Eitan Hirsch, a ballistics expert with the Israel Defense Force, recently did a series of calculations…” (Gladwell 8). An important note to make here is that Gladwell does not add unnecessary complicity into background information: for example, the author tells that ancient warfare was, basically a bloody version of the modern “rock-paper-scissors” game with only three types of units for a general to choose from.

The overall simplicity of Gladwell’s factoids that he bases his reasoning upon can be justified if one is not entitled to view them in direct practical terms. That is, the author wants to convey the message related to the cunning approach of David versus the bulky and ponderous simple-mindedness of Goliath. In order to do it, Gladwell constructs an argument that can only be the fruit of the author’s imagination – the author says that, in accordance with the rules of ancient warfare and universally acknowledged prowess of a slinger, Goliath was supposed to be “terrified” with the approaching David rather than feel insulted and assured in his victory (Gladwell 12). Moreover, Gladwell continues this line of reasoning, stating that, since Goliath was professed to be the mightiest (the most experienced) warrior, he was expected to assess the situation much faster than he did; in Gladwell’s views it implies that Goliath suffered from some kind of disease that involved brain tumors, vision impairment, and near-senility. It is up to discussion whether such matters even bothered the people who wrote the original story down, but, but this way it suits the author’s intent well enough. That is, the whole point of the author’s chain of thought is to prove that even the scariest task at hand can be approached differently because it is not as scary and impregnable as it might seem at first glance.

The introduction to Gladwell’s book retells the old story in a new and slightly ridiculous way. Despite certain logical flaws in the “They Say” part and unobvious conclusions made in “I Say” section, Gladwell manages to fuse these parts together to create a persuasive argument with enough attention-getters to prove the point. “Giants”, apparently, are not always ultimate undisputable challenges – that is, not when one attempts to seek ways around their advantages toward victory. In other words, the obvious solution to a difficult problem is not always the best one, similarly to the fact that a person trying to “beat a Giant” on their terms is less likely to succeed than a person thinking creatively.

In chapter one of Malcolm Gladwell’s book David & Goliath, Gladwell makes an argument of how there are advantages of disadvantages and also disadvantages of advantages. He continues in the chapter with some examples proving his statement by using Vivek Ranadive coaching his daughter’s basketball team, as well as political scientist Ivan Arreguin-Toft’s example of why wars are usually won by the stronger countries. In the book They Say/ I Say it states that a good argument can easily tell what side of the argument you are on, and then prove your side of that argument. The book says you can do this by not only proving you have a solid argument, but also having the evidence to back it up. I believe that Gladwell easily did that in chapter one of David & Goliath.

The first chapter of David & Goliath talks about how Vivek Ranadive starts coaching his daughter’s little league basketball team. Even though he has very little experience to coaching, he uses disadvantages of the other teams to his team’s own advantage. Gladwell argues that when Vivek started using a full court press instead of the traditional way of playing basketball, he could use the disadvantages of his team, such as not having many skilled players or tall players, into an advantage. Gladwell goes on to explain that by Vivek using this strategy he was able to take his unskilled team to the national championship. One of Gladwell’s arguments in this chapter was that you can use disadvantages as advantages if you have the knowledge and capability. In They say/I Say, it states that when it comes to arguments one main thing that you needed in your argument was to prove your side and have evidence to support it. When Gladwell used Vivek’s basketball coaching experience and the team member’s skill level as an example of a disadvantage he not only explained his side of the argument, but also had the brief to back it up such as Vivek using the advantage of full court press and his team going to the national championship because of it.

Later on in the chapter, Gladwell went on to give another example of how people can use disadvantages to their advantages, further proving Gladwell’s argument. Gladwell used a research study conducted by political scientist Ivan Arreguin-Toft. In this research, it goes on to explain that over the past two hundred years, 71.5% of all the wars that were fought were won by the stronger of the two countries. Seems to make sense and be perfectly normal right? However, the statistics changed when it included that through the use of guerrilla tactics and other hit and run methods, the weaker party’s winning percentage rose almost 40% compared to the original data. The give an example of such account by mentioning when T.E Lawrence led the Arab revolt against the Turkish army during the First World War. Even though Lawrence’s army was smaller than and not as equipped as the Turkish army, they were tough and very mobile making their attacks strong and deadly. By using this example, Gladwell was once again able to prove his argument. By choosing this research topic, it seemed to show that that he was on the side of the stronger sides winning the war, and not the smaller countries. By then adding the details about the smaller countries using guerilla warfare, it seemed that Gladwell was again showing that disadvantages can be used as advantages when the time is right and people know how to use such disadvantages to their advantage. Gladwell then further proves what said he was on in the argument by giving the example of Lawrence and how Lawrence used the disadvantage of a small, unequipped army to an advantage army that can easily do hit n runs against a much larger force.

Arguments are one type of way for a person to express his or her side of an opinion. It’s important for people to be able to express their beliefs on a matter as long as they have a few things to support their argument. In the book They Say/I Say it states that a strong argument shows what side of the argument you are on and also have enough evidence to be able to support your argument. In chapter one of David & Goliath I believe that Gladwell did both of these. He had the argument that disadvantages can be used as advantages, stated what side of the argument he was on, and then had evidence to support his argument. The book They Say/I Say helped me better understand how an argument essay works, how I can easily read and understand it, and also make me a better writer for an argument essay.

David and Goliath are a novel by Malcolm Gladwell, this novel discusses the sociology of underdogs, misfits and the art of battling the giants. David and Goliath indicate two main points, they are lopsided battles that sometimes ended with an underdog of victories as it may seem. In other words, the true capabilities of our opponents are assessing them on attributes they might not value themselves. The other point, Gladwell tries to interpret his readers into understanding the advantages and disadvantages in the mindset of showing difficult events to lead to great success if a person is facing those struggles to their advantage. A quote that I thought was interesting from chapter one is, “The powerful and strong aren’t always as they seem”. (Gladwell pg. 29) That quote typically refreshed the advantages and disadvantages between the opponents.

Now that I have analyzed, the main points Gladwell interprets his readers to understand. In other words, I am going to interpret the readers a little bit of what I learned about chapter four and the way Gladwell used the terms of “They say/ I say.

In chapter four (Desirable Difficulties), Gladwell typically provided several benefits of how and why dyslexia were related towards the underdog misfit. In other words, Gladwell writes; “the fact of being an underdog can change people in ways that we often fall to appreciate.” The quote referred to Typically, the main points Gladwell, proves that there are people struggling and lacking by themselves in which parents couldn’t get their children help, but it is harder for dyslexics to gain recognition of their conditions from educators or early diagnosis that is effective from many dealt with the same problems. A person Gladwell, pointed out that had similar issues with dyslexia was a lawyer David bole, who was involved with the same issues struggled for a while, but he knew that he couldn’t give up and turned his weakness into his strengths after all the struggles he received his blessings and became a lawyer to practice corporate law. Gladwell argues that David’s are considered the underdog because if of their strengths and accuracy, goliaths are the ones who are weak as clumsy and slow. He also argues that people suffer from the disadvantage of dyslexia have the advantage and some social aspects to weld their way up into becoming successful. Most tend to become successful because they had to overcompensate when they were young for their difficulty reading, another reason is that he thinks parents are most difficult for the poor. In other words, Gladwell connected his readers, into asking “You wouldn’t wish dyslexia on your child, or would you? No parent should want to consider wishing dyslexia a child, or to struggle with reading and writing but other consider because that’s the only for them for them to receive success in the long run of their lives. It was an early inability to read that which gave them the ability to focus diligence. The evidence Gladwell provides is how he illustrates the possible challenges how successful people can be when dealing with dyslexia especially what David boles experienced. The biggest meaning towards “desirable difficulties” refers to the quote, example when one door closes another door opens provides many blessings, in which the evidence provided David boles experiences into becoming a lawyer in turning his weakness into greatness. Gladwell uses Nayser for many reasons, example; he describes how those who work in elite environments become victims of their own success and lose confidence in their abilities because they compare their progress towards their peers and those who are operating highly selective microcosm. This could often lead to disillusionment and failure in appreciating accomplishments and overall values on a more global scale. I say, Gladwell’s arguments win because he wants others to become successful, but it starts with the person working to be able to overcome dyslexia and know that they can strive better success for their lives. Others say dyslexics may or may not have contributed to the success of very high achieving individuals. In other words, the biggest meaning Gladwell makes is that he doesn’t claim success works for all dyslexics, it typically means the underdogs can win but not always win. Gladwell does uses metacommentary a lot with the topic of dyslexia by describing and illustrating the strategies dyslexia could be resolved and how people cold turn their weaknesses into strengths. His opinion made a big difference brought readers attention that underdogs had the ability to achieve and do anything they wanted to do if they had confidence and strengthen themselves and believe that they could do it.

In conclusion, desirable dyslexia disabilities presented unique challenges which force Gladwell readers to have the to make them believe they could become successful and prove to motive them to want to do better.

Gladwell’s novel “Outliers” is about how practice and talent play a role in success, but opportunities and social standing is what makes a true outlier. An example of an outlier would be Jim Carrey, Carrey is an exceptional Canadian-American actor, impressionist, comedian, producer, and screenwriter. As many say, Jim Carrey is the Man of a Million Faces. The reason why Carrey seems to stand out is due to the fact that his personality embodies how most teenagers feel and act. It is said that Jim Carrey can turn any monotonous moment into something exciting and hilarious just by being himself. Jim Carrey became successful due to his individual talent that was inherent.

Carrey is different, unlike other successful celebrities that came from rich families, Carrey achieved his fame by working hard and having dedication. Since he was only a child, his dream was to become a comedian and he was committed to that goal. Carrey had it rough growing up, despite all the struggles he had gone through, he never gave up. He grew up poor and worked his way up to the top. Jim Carrey’s Net Worth today is currently $150 million United States Dollars.

The novel Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell gave us many examples of how people became successful. Out of the seven examples, Jim Carrey best fits with the 10,000 hours of practice to become proficient. Carrey was diagnosed with dyslexia at a young age. This learning disorder made him struggle to learn in school and make friends. Once he would finish his work, he would begin to distract his classmates leading to him getting in trouble. His dad was supportive, on the other hand, his mother was concerned “Although his dad tended to encourage his craziness, his mom was alarmed and often sent him to his room. No problem – just more time to practice in front of the mirror” (Bass) . In a 1984 December issue of Interview magazine, when asked about his childhood Carrey said ‘Well, I spent most of my time in my room staring at a mirror. I never knew I was supposed to socialize.” He then went on to say that he would spend hours making funny faces at himself to simply “have a good time.” Jim Carrey eventually reached the 10,000 hours of practice and mastered his acting/comedic skills, just like how Bill Gates was mentioned in Gladwell’s novel on how he also became successful due to all the hours he put in practice.

Eventually, Carrey dropped out of school. He would try to juggle around an 8-hour shift at a factory while still having to go to school during the day. Earning money for Jim Carrey’s family was an obstacle, they lived in terrible neighborhoods and low rent houses, they were living in poverty. At the age of 16, Carrey decided to call it quits and drop out of school. He had no friends and he feared that if he were to get close to people, they would figure out he was living in poverty and make fun of him.

Another great phenomenon Jim Carrey experienced that Gladwell mentioned was hard work. Soon after dropping out of school Carrey and his family became homeless and had to live in a van for eight months. They decided to move to Canada and lived off of parking in campgrounds. Jim Carrey claims that being homeless was “a traumatic kick in the guts”. Although Carrey was homeless, it never stopped him from chasing his goal of being a comedian. A biographer wrote, “His greatest bursts of creativity were born out of desperation; so was his remarkable willingness to take risks.” Carrey went on to chase his dreams by performing for the first time in a club called Yuk-Yuk Comedy Club. When he wasn’t on the stage, he would sit back and observe the other comedians taking notes quietly. The club’s publicist saw Carrey’s potency and said: “You could see him watching and listening – observing closely, paying attention to everything that was going on.”.

Carrey went on to Hollywood and started to star in television programs. These performances made him land a role in a program called Living Color which was a major hit back in the day. Jim was discovered and admired by many audiences in 1994 when he starred in comedy Ace Ventura. Soon after, many more projects came such as The Mask, Dumb and Dumber, Batman Forever, The Cable Guy and Liar Liar. This event was the time where Jim Carrey’s career skyrocketed and he became famous. Jim Carrey was passionate about his dream career and due to his hard work, he became the comedian he wanted to be since he was a child.

Opportunities, another phenomenon Gladwell discussed on. Opportunities are a set of circumstances that make it possible to do something, in this case in point Jim Carrey’s opportunities made it possible for him to become successful. If it weren’t for the fact that poverty drove Carrey to drop out of school, he most likely wouldn’t have been the comedian we know him as today. Having the opportunity to perform in the Yuk-Yuk Comedy Club gave his career a head start. If it weren’t for that, he wouldn’t have starred in multiple television programs that lead him to star in major movie roles that made him stand out and become successful.

Although being homeless played a part in Jim Carrey’s success, it has become an issue. We need institutional reform, housing prices need to be lowered. There are multiple families every day being kicked out of their own homes struggling to survive and trying to find somewhere to go and stay safe. Lowering housing prices will get rid of these problems and help struggling families stay say and survive. Furthermore, hard work, dedication, opportunities, practice, and never giving up made Jim Carrey the man he desired to be.