Culture & Random 17 Nov 2007 01:32 pm
Can any individual take all the credit for anything they do?
I was taking stock of my strengths and weaknesses this morning — something I periodically do to see if there are any ways in which I can improve myself — while cleaning up the kitchen, and I got to wondering whether a person can truly take credit for anything they are or do.
Scenario 1: A successful athlete
To be really really great at one thing is very rare. I'm talking 99th percentile great. The kind of great that allows you to play professional baseball or basketball. Or to write a well-received book of fiction, or create a new scientific theory. These people often have big egos, and big salaries. (Salary and ego seem to go hand-in-hand, you may have noticed.)
They are great at what they do. Even the worst of the greats is still better than 99% of the rest of us.
Examples: Barry Bonds, Peyton Manning, Stephen King, Albert Einstein, Bill Gates. (And yes, I know that not all of them have/had mountainous egos.)
Scenario 2: 90%+ multiplied by two or more
Most people that achieve greatness are ~90% good at more than one thing. For instance, they may have an ability to write AND be a great entrepreneur. They are multi-talented. They often combine their two (or more) gifts and make a niche and a name for themselves. They may have learned a great deal about some particular topic, and by combining another one of their skills (writing), they are able to capitalize on it in some way.
Examples: Choose any non-fiction author who works in their field. Sid Schwab, perhaps.
Scenario 3: Someone who comes from a rough background and achieves greatness
The third scenario might be someone that grows up in a rough neighborhood with no family to support him, who makes good on his dreams in spite of the challenges he faced. Surely, of the three people, this person is more able to take all the credit for accomplishing what he has accomplished? Maybe.
Examples: Deval Patrick, some pro athletes, I'm sure.
Thoughts
Can any of these three people take credit for who they are and what they've accomplished? I think not. Person #1 is probably a combination of genetics and hard work. Person #2 is probably a combination of genetics and hard work. Person #3 may have genetics, or maybe they discovered a drive within themselves to rise above no matter the cost: inspired, hard work.
Genetics is responsible for potential physical prowess and potential intelligence. These are limits coded into one's genetic makeup, and behavioral patterns can enhance or detract from one's potential. Interestingly, there seems to be almost no limit to how much behavioral cues can hurt someone, but there's a pretty solid upper boundary that you cannot cross no matter how hard you try. Not everyone can be a world-famous physicist or play pro football, despite that feel-good politically correct bullshit that's fed to today's kids — but anyone can be a dumb, fat, leech on society no matter their IQ or body makeup.
Behavior is where Person #3 seems to stand alone. They may have genetics, too, but it's not necessary. But how alone could they really be? Person #3 didn't grow up isolated from all human contact. (In fact, people that are raised in pure isolation usually die or develop severe mental problems very quickly.) Finding the drive to succeed that I mentioned above doesn't happen by magic, and it's not coded into one's genetics. It's a product of behavior, and even though a specific cause may not be pinned down, it doesn't mean it isn't there. Maybe he saw someone who had something and it triggered something a desire ( "I want that for myself someday." ) Or a negative interaction ultimately had a positive effect ( "I will not beat my children if I decide to have them." )
Both stimuli are external. So I would argue that even Person #3 cannot take full credit for who they are and where they are today because they learned what greatness is from other people. So while the ego may seep from every pore in Person 1-3's body, they really have the rest of the world to thank for where they are. Even the people who hurt them and by doing so, inspired them to be better as a result. Then, of course, there are the unnamed support systems: teachers and coaches and mentors who helped these people be great by demonstrating greatness or its opposite which allowed their pupils to learn. And of course their parents for donating genetic material, even if that's all they did. This doesn't mean that these standouts owe society a debt, or that society should treat them as though they are indebted to the masses.
