How Did Malcolm Gladwell Spend 10, 000 Hours

The 10,000 Hour Rule Imagine hearing that if you did something over and over again for 10,000 hours, then you would instantly become an expert regardless of personal talent, therefore saying that success coincides with hard work every time. This is basically the argument Malcolm Gladwell gives in the book, Outliers. In contrast to this is the point stated by the article. That talent plus hard work, equals success. I agree with this point for many reasons. Many people, however, agree with Gladwell’s views. They think that working at something repeatedly and putting hard work into it, will make you good at it. Gladwell backs this point up very well, providing details from the lives of some of the most influential people to live. He shows how all of …show more content…
It was that if you have no talent whatsoever at something then it is almost impossible to work hard at it for a long period of time. If a person was a horrible athlete but like to play sports on the side, then would they spend 10,000 hours on it to be successful saying, “I like to swim, to play soccer, to jog, and to play football. So I will try to become a professional at one of these.” The article gives a perfect example of this, “ I was hopeless. My brain simply doesn’t work in a way that allows me to write code. So saying that if I’d spent ten thousand hours talking to Rax, I would be a successful computer programmer, because anyone can be a successful computer programmer, is crazy.” This perfectly sums up the point. He had plenty of interest; therefore, why would he waste years working on something that he has no skill at. So, all in all, I agree with the article. Talent + Hard Work does equal success. But on another level, hard work and no talent, simply does not appear to be a factor in successful people. To be successful, it takes talent, hard work, environment, and more. Therefore you cannot make it solely by following the rule of 10,000