Lo 1

Solomon Lo

Mr. Ruiz

Honors English 10

31 October 2016

Unit 1:Argumentative Essay

Last year, an article by The Washington Times revealed that “52 percent of Americans say

they believe in fate.”(Harper). This study demonstrates how divided we are in the belief of fate,

which is the belief that an unchangeable force controls our lives. Some people argue that an

unchangeable force affects the way a person’s life will develop, while others argue that we alone

fully control the direction of our lives. This age-old debate over whether we fully control our

lives continues to this day. David Epstein attempts to end this debate in thehis nonfiction article

“The Sports Gene,” by using an example of how genetic predisposition trumps hard work and

dedication to prove that we control very little of our lives. However, Malcolm Gladwell also

responds to this debate by analysing violin players in an excerpt from the nonfiction articlenovel

“Outliers: The Story of Success” as an example of how hard work and dedication, not fate,

determine what our destinies will be. By using scientific analysis, credible outside opinions, and

a wealth of examples that support his claim, Gladwell builds a more convincing argument that

asserts how we control everything which happens in our lives.

Gladwell uses scientific analysis to make a compelling argument,. In the novel

Outliers:The Story of Success, he usesutilizes a study conducted by the elite Academy of Music

in Berlin to support this claim that fate doesn’t affect one’s future. In this study, violin students

were organized into three different groups based on their skill level and potential. Those in the
 Lo 2

group who had most skill and potential were found to have practiced much more than the

students in the other groups. By analysing this study, Gladwell logically deduces that “Once a

musician has enough ability to get into a top music school, the thing that distinguishes one

performer from another is how hard he or she works. That’s it.”(12). By using a scientific study,

Gladwell provides strong evidence which supports his claim. This study further propagates the

idea that hard work determines one’s future, since every single musician who got into a top

music school practiced for many more hours than the average musicians. This shows a direct

correlation between our actions and our futures, since the musician’s choice to practice later lead

to them getting into an elite music school. HoweverHowever, unlike Gladwell, Epstein only uses

a single anecdote about Donald Thomas, as evidence for his argument that our genes control the

destiny of our lives. This is weaker than the scientific evidence that Gladwell uses, since

anecdotal evidence relies on perception instead of methodical analysis. It also only considers a

small amount of observation from just one person, unlike the study conducted by the Academy

of Music which considers a whole school's group of violin students. This makes the argument

much less compelling, because Epstein’s evidence of the high jumper could’ve been a fluke.

Gladwell also creates a more compelling argument by quoting logical findings from

qualified experts to support his claim. For example, he uses a statement from neurologist Daniel

Levitin to support his argument:

“Ten thousand hours of practice is required to achieve the level of mastery associated

with being a world-class expert--in anything. In study after study...this number comes up

again and again.”(12).

 Lo 3

By incorporating this statement from a neurologist, Gladwell provides strong evidence from an

acclaimed source that practice, and not genes or any other factors outside of our control, is

responsible for our future. Levitin’s statement shows us how importantmuch hard work and

dedication is, and uses thisaffect us, and uses this as a counterpoint to Epstein’s claim that how

genetics and predetermined factors in our lives aren’t a factor of how successful we areplay the

largest role in determining our future. Epstein also uses expert opinions to support his claim, but

the claims made from these experts don’t fully support Epstein’s claimclaim., Epstein uses

claims that are one-sided and that only show how genetics can play a part in someone’s fate.

However, t hese claims don’t fully support Epstein's argument that fate is the deciding factor

which affects our destiny. The claims that Epstein uses to back up his arguments are very

one-dimensional and only show how genetics can play a part in someone’s fate. However, they

do not analyse whether or not fate is the only factor that decides one’s future. In fact, Epstein

even states, “Neither Ishikawa nor Hunter would suggest that the sole secret to the jumping

success of Holm and Thomas is in their Achilles tendon,”(8) showing that they scientists

themselves see a weakness in their own analysis. Because of thisTherefore, because of Epstein’s

weak evidence, Gladwell’s argument is more compelling, since because his references are more

wholesome and relevant.

Gladwell also uses additional examples of people who succeeded through hard work, and

not fate, to further strengthen his assertion. By using these examples as evidence, Gladwell adds

credibility to his argument. Gladwell uses Michael Howe’s analysis that Mozart’s earliest piece

of music “that is now regarded as a masterwork” wasn’t created until Mozart was 21 years old,

when “Mozart had already been composing concertos for ten years.”(13). By including this
 Lo 4

remark, Gladwell shows how Mozart acquired his musical expertise through hard work, and not

predetermined fate. This strengthens Gladwell’s argument by providing an additional example of

how our futures are determined through hard work. This example of how Mozart achieved

success acts as a counterpoint to Epstein’s sole example of Donald Thomas. Epstein’s anecdote

about Donald Thomas was the only example of how fate determined someone’s future. Amd ,

and he doesn’t include any additional examples other than Donald Thomas. This shortfall of

evidence causes Epstein’s argument to be weaker than Gladwell’s.

Gladwell and Epstein both have differing answers to the question, “How much of our

lives do we actual control?” Gladwell argues that hard work is the only thing that determines our

future, while Epstein argues that fate decides where our futures lead. However, b Both authors

use different strategies to argue whether or not fate affects our future. However, by using strong

evidence, compelling references, and a plethora of examples, Gladwell constructs an argument

that is much stronger and more convincing than Epstein.

 Lo 5

Works Cited

Harper, Jennifer. "Majority of Americans Believe in Fate: Poll." Washington Times. The

Washington Times, 2016. Web. 31 Oct. 2016.

<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/13/poll-61-percent-republicans-believe-fate-h

orosocop/>.