|
On September 11 2011 20:10 karpo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2011 19:12 RedDragon571 wrote:
It seems the few that seem to rail out against this thread, are the ones that this is hitting too close too home. That just adds to the point. Seems like everyone who's critical either didn't undestand or is taking offence to the content. It's not like people can disagree on the actual science and argument made.
I've seen that exact thing so many times. It's a classic. It's in the same category of beliefs as thinking that homophobes usually are homosexuals themselves just because it just would be SO great if that were true. It would, perhaps, but it's just not true. Facts are ignored, reason is turned away at the door. It truly is wishful thinking.
I've studied psychometrics and heritability of intelligence and ability a great deal and I can only say that a lot of the things in the OP goes against uncontroversial, proven findings in those fields, such as correlation between IQ, general intelligence, and success in various endeavors. There just is no room for a theory of mindsets. If it were true that people can change their IQ's by willing it or reach success by changing mindsets, or that certain cultures with a more open mindset have more successful individuals, that would mean that the predictive powers of highly heritable factors such as IQ or general intelligence (as heritable as height), or socioeconomic status, on future success would be bad or even terrible. This is simply not the case.
If mindsets were all that mattered, then you could randomly take for instance people with a good income that work in honorable fields of science, and expect their IQ levels to not look different from a group of people that were drawn from the population in whole. You could repeat this with for instance the richest people in the world, or journalists, or lawyers, or top chess players. Looking at Kasparov's, Gates's, and Hawkin's IQ levels you'd be mystified as you'd expect them to hover around 100, and they instead go over 160. And they are just random people with good mindsets. Strange.
Certainly if this theory were true, RedDragon could link me some studies on these mindsets and where they are taught, and the correlations between individuals with open mindsets and success in "life" (be it income, sporting achievements, health, or whatever). I'd be very interested in seeing those, since it would mean a breakthrough in many fields of science, and a break without a through in others.
|
Great post. This will really help me because I've started out with a growth mindset and lately gone over to a FM. And its so true what you write about losing to friends etc because my prime goal for sc2 has always and will always be to be better then my friends. However lately one of my friends have or is about to pass me in skill and it's bothered me alot. But now I understand that it's good for me because now I have to get better aswell. We share the same minsset and will only push together from now on. Big cheers for the post.
|
Great article, it made me realize I too have quite a few characteristics typical of people with a fixed mindset. I do respond well to criticism but I have some serious trouble with challenging myself, coping with losses and putting in hard work.
Thanks for helping me realize this!
|
The whole fixed and growth mindsets thing looks very true from a certain perspective, but I think largely misses the real cultural difference that makes Korean players better. I've noticed foreign players still seem to have an adolescent perspective on what is required to make great achievements in life. This is unrelated to a growth/fixed mindset, but rather, how much players perceive is required to become great. Perhaps this is unsurprising, as one might expect that making a living from a computer game should be pure fun.
But to be blunt, to achieve world greatness in anything, you have to put in a world-class effort, whether or not talent is innate, in order to develop that talent. When I look at posts declaring that 40 hour weeks are not enough, and player should be aspiring to a Korean player's 60 hours of practice, I want to laugh. 60 hours? 60 hours is still very relaxed. In the working world, some people will invest over 80 hours of work a week simply to achieve the requirements of their job - never mind to excel to a world-class level. For short durations of time, people are even capable of 100-120 hours a week. That means almost NO time for leisure on ANY day of the week, as they are working for over 14 hours a day including the weekend. If you don't believe me, go read about how hospital doctors (obviously very smart people, but in very demanding jobs) tend to live in the US. The human limits for hard work are far and beyond anything I've seen discussed on TL, even when the Koreans are concerned.
Things maybe different for Starcraft, sure - at a certain point, you may become too fatigued to achieve the APM required to win, so yeah, perhaps you can't be playing matches for 100 hours a week. But that doesn't mean foreign players should spend 40, or even 60 hours a week playing, then spend the rest of the time relaxing. Even if they don't have the mental capacity at that time to play a game, if a player wants to become truly great, they should be strategising, drilling on micro/macro aspects of the game, and generally making the most efficient possible use of their time. After time, by consistently pushing your endurance limits to the max, you will develop them and be able to practice more effectively for longer.
Have you noticed how fatigue often plays a significant role for foreign players coming from the open brackets of tournaments? Have you noticed how little difference it seems to make for Korean players? That's because a full 3 days of Starcraft for them is nothing different from their ordinary lives.
Truth is, foreign players aren't willing to make the huge sacrifices to be the best, whereas such sacrifices are culturally accepted and honoured in Korea (and in Asia in general). Until more players adopt HuK's attitude, there will be no real competition between Koreans and foreigners.
|
Omg, nice article, insane number of drops : (
|
On September 11 2011 21:40 TheUltimate wrote:
Things maybe different for Starcraft, sure - at a certain point, you may become too fatigued to achieve the APM required to win, so yeah, perhaps you can't be playing matches for 100 hours a week. But that doesn't mean foreign players should spend 40, or even 60 hours a week playing, then spend the rest of the time relaxing. Even if they don't have the mental capacity at that time to play a game, if a player wants to become truly great, they should be strategising, drilling on micro/macro aspects of the game, and generally making the most efficient possible use of their time. After time, by consistently pushing your endurance limits to the max, you will develop them and be able to practice more effectively for longer.
I agree with some of what you're saying but this part is kinda weird to me. There's a huge difference between being great at sports and having a full time regular job. A regular job is very different to training for sports/esports as you can be tired as hell and still do a decent job at work due to much of it being rutine (yet it piles up and you need to get it done).
If you're that tired when training a sport/esport you're not getting much out of it. There's lots top end athletes that have seen improvements when scaling down on practise. An added benefit of scaling down the amount of practise is that you lover the risk of sustaining injuries, something that's prominent in both esports and regular sports.
I'm not saying that people should slack off. I'm just saying that increasing the time spent doesn't always equal better results.
|
On September 11 2011 22:05 karpo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2011 21:40 TheUltimate wrote:
Things maybe different for Starcraft, sure - at a certain point, you may become too fatigued to achieve the APM required to win, so yeah, perhaps you can't be playing matches for 100 hours a week. But that doesn't mean foreign players should spend 40, or even 60 hours a week playing, then spend the rest of the time relaxing. Even if they don't have the mental capacity at that time to play a game, if a player wants to become truly great, they should be strategising, drilling on micro/macro aspects of the game, and generally making the most efficient possible use of their time. After time, by consistently pushing your endurance limits to the max, you will develop them and be able to practice more effectively for longer.
I agree with some of what you're saying but this part is kinda weird to me. There's a huge difference between being great at sports and having a full time regular job. A regular job is very different to training for sports/esports as you can be tired as hell and still do a decent job at work due to much of it being rutine (yet it piles up and you need to get it done). If you're that tired when training a sport/esport you're not getting much out of it. There's lots top end athletes that have seen improvements when scaling down on practise. An added benefit of scaling down the amount of practise is that you lover the risk of sustaining injuries, something that's prominent in both esports and regular sports. I'm not saying that people should slack off. I'm just saying that increasing the time spent doesn't always equal better results.
Your first point is valid - equating workers and e-athletes might be fallacious. But at the same time I think you're making the same mistake, in equating sports and esports. For instance, in the Premier League of football, world class players usually play for only 40 hours a week, but this is because of very well established limits of physical endurance, before performance begins to suffer. Activities such as SC2, where the main component of performance is purely mental, are so different that it doesn't make sense to apply to it the same limitations.
Frankly, we don't know for sure how much someone can work before their performance begins to degrade, but based on the results that the harder working (especially Korean) players consistently show, at the very least 60 hours still shows improvement. And from all appearances, it seems that players' endurance scales with how much they practice.
(Perhaps this is a pointless discussion though; unless someone actually investigates it in a scientific way, there's no way to say whether or not going to 80 or 100 hours would result in further improvement.)
Your point about avoiding injury is also quite valid - however, this makes the assumption that the only way to use your time to become better is to spam games. While you obviously need to play a lot, especially to improve basic micro and macro skills, it's not clear at this point that this is the only way to improve. Players need not only to invest the practice time, but also use it in a way that is efficient. For instance, if a player is very prone to carpal tunnel for instance, there might be low APM drills that could be used to improve general game sense and tactics, while high APM games could be used only to practice the strategies that require it. At the world-class professional level, there may be even further steps you could take, when you need a break from actually playing: memorising all common timings, meditating to improve concentration, etc...
Of course, this is all pure speculation, as we simply don't know what the most efficient practice regime is; the only things we can say for sure is that to date harder working players generally deliver more consistently, and it is highly unlikely that the most efficient practice regime has yet been developed.
|
This isn't necessarily accurate, I think you are showing a pretty biased view of the 'fixed' and 'growth' mindsets when in reality both of them have their points and the reality is somwhere in between. For instance some people are naturally talented at things, that is indisputable otherwise every korean player would be equally as good as every korean player who trains 8 hours day or some such, clearly some players are able to do more with their time for some reason or another. On the other hand obviously the time you invest is beneficial, and nobody can rely on talent alone to take them through the game.
And 'growth' mindsets can create the same amount of frustration if not more than 'fixed' mindsets, I personally don't get pissed off because of any belief that I'm better than my opponent, on the contrary I work hard to get good at the game and get annoyed when players who seem to have not worked as hard manage to beat me. I am frustrated because I spent so much time trying to get good at the game, for if it were all about talent then how could I be upset about something that is beyond my control?
|
Are the "1 million" players from 1v1 or just overall ladder? Because indeed alot of players stopped with 1v1/never got into it because it is hard. And if alot of people was new to RTS when SC2 was superhyped I can understand if they were uncomfortable with 1v1 and had this ladder fear.
However, alot of these people didn't stop playing for that. I play around in 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 with a friend of mine who don't like to play 1v1 that much and we get to play alot of people who have far more than 500+ wins in teamgames but aint even ranked in 1v1.
|
Good read, but how does one simply `get a growth mindset`? :o
|
On September 11 2011 19:44 bmn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2011 19:08 RedDragon571 wrote:On September 11 2011 18:43 CheeseMeNot wrote:On September 11 2011 18:25 RedDragon571 wrote:On September 11 2011 16:12 CheeseMeNot wrote:On September 11 2011 16:04 Nevermoar wrote:
This really resonated with me. Not just for SC2 but for life in general. I'm quite a fixed mindset individual mainly because I really AM very gifted at learning, but lack a lot of motivation and I am quite lazy. Thank you for this. That just means you're pretty smart (high IQ) but lazy. There are plenty of people that are not smart that are lazy as well. It has nothing to do with what they were told as children. It's easy to say things that resonate with people. I could ask you if you sometimes put off important things to a later time such as the next monday and instead do things now that require less effort. Typical fixed mindset!!! This is the epitomy of a fixed mindset. You can 1. Increase your IQ, IQ was never meant to be a FIXED measurement of intelligence, because intelligence in itself is not fixed. 2. People are not inherently lazy but they choose to do some things over others based upon their perceptions of that particular task. 3. People definitely develop their mindset based upon their upbringing. People can definitely change their mindset, and their mindset changes over time, clearly indicating environmental factors as the biggest influence, NOT genetics. I see this post bothered you enough to create a response or two. You have clearly tried to put together some semblance of an analysis on this post. However, It highly doubt you've used a fraction of the effort you spent trying to refute these ideas, to actually analyze yourself. The main point of my post was not to reflect on these ideas as much as to truly reflect on yourself. 1. You cannot increase your IQ past a very low age. If you have proof of anything else, you need to submit it to the scientific community as soon as possible, because it would be a huge breakthrough. 2. People can be inherently lazy, yes. Some people need to work harder to overcome their laziness than others. 3. In part, that's true, but the correlation is likely below .50 and thus has more to do with genetics. People cannot change their mindset, or at least there exist no such proof. Wishing it so does not make it so. Yes we live in an unfair world. Yes it bothers me. You know nothing of science, you just deal with wishful thinking. Your talk about analyzing myself and blah blah blah is irrelevant. You have all the traits of a charlatan. edit: You never answered why your theory only works in SC2 for a few countries that you have no proof teaches a more open mindset. Care to? If you'd put half the effort into creating credible points than you did into bashing me to sooth your own ego, I might have given this a real reply. "Never argue with a fool - they will drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience." aka don't feed the trolls What? He makes three completely reasonable points that actually point to scientific findings, and your only answer is to label him as a troll? You have absolutely no substance in your reply, you just argue ad hominem. I see you've done this several times throughout this thread, if someone agrees, you pride yourself of making a great thread, if people disagree and post specific replies about the content of your post, you dismiss them as trolls. "If you'd put half the effort into creating plausible posts as you did into bashing any attempt to correct you, you might have created a useful thread." See how easy it is to spout ad hominem replies without actually responding to content? I'd like to see you address the actual three points pointed out in that reply, as I was going to make pretty much the same reply. I was surprised nobody had brought those issues up yet, but turns out you just don't answer them. Edit: Also, as to 1., I believe training the double n-back test was shown to have a lasting transferrable effect on intelligence, but indeed this is an extremely rare property. There is very little known about how to increase your IQ, and that is the whole reason why IQ tests are paid so much attention to: The scores are pretty stable. I find it rather telling that you would write so much about mindset and then display such a stubborn unwillingness to engage in a conversation involving opinions that don't agree with your own. Also, as to people's general discussions about talent vs hard work, this is a great write-up on the topic: http://www.amazon.com/Talent-Overrated-Separates-World-Class-Performers/dp/1591842247 -- but the essence of it comes from a Harvard Business Review study and can be found there. (This was already discussed at length in another thread a while back.)
I agree, the OP has made at least three ad hominem attacks in this thread and so far appears to be incapable of refuting specific criticism of his post. In one post the OP actually accused another poster of making an ad hominem attack when he blatantly hadn't, and then proceeded to make an obvious ad hominem attack against that poster lol. My post in which I said that he doesn't even attempt to explain the connection between Korean/Scandinavian cultures and growth mindsets got no response. His response to CheeseMeNot's post there was actually pretty laughable.
I would love to see him make an actual argument.
|
Definitely interesting, perhaps I should try and embrace a growth mindset and overcome my fear of only laddering 1-2 games a day and make that 20-30
|
Great post. I used to fall squarely in the "fixed mindset" category before I started playing starcraft, but seeing the insane dedication of the Korean progamers coupled with the fact that I was D- on iccup, then slowing climbed a few ranks after putting in a lot of practice really changed my outlook. I would now say I have a growth mindset or at least more of one.
|
It's funny. When I started reading this post, I had the thoughts "Oh I'm for sure a growth mindset". As I read on, I quickly realized I was a fixed mindset. Interesting read and I hope to gosh I can change my mindset over time.
Ladder fear is an interesting thing. Over the course of the past 1.5 years, I've played maybe 150 1v1 ladder games. This includes beta where I played 33% or more of my 1v1s. I am currently a diamond level player. For some reason, in my fixed mindset, I tell myself I should be masters even though I don't play nearly enough to reach it. Over the past week, I have played 30ish ladder games, and am constantly trying to improve. It's astounding how mechanics, game sense, and general skill increases rapidly when you have a very high base skill level with RTS.
I hope that I can keep up my practice schedule (minimum 5 games every 2 days) and convert my mindset to a growth type, and see if that improves my overall skill.
Thanks for the writeup!
|
Seems like all the arguments being presented against or critical to OP have gone completely ignored by most readers (and the OP). People are reading the OP's text then replying to how awesome it is when there are plenty of arguments providing why it is contrary to so.
I don't agree with the OP, so this will seem biased, but the arguments given by several posters much better impart the impression that this fixed/growth mindset is mumbo jumbo.
|
@CheeseMeNot
Thank you for bringing some sense to this thread. I was getting madder by the page. It's sad when people take on the pretense of credible science and then build a totally specious argument, as is the case here.
As for that video of some idiot advocating no sleep as a means of achieving success... what a healthy message that is. It's not like sleep is important to learning or memory or cognitive performance or anything.
|
On September 12 2011 01:26 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Seems like all the arguments being presented against or critical to OP have gone completely ignored by most readers (and the OP). People are reading the OP's text then replying to how awesome it is when there are plenty of arguments providing why it is contrary to so.
I don't agree with the OP, so this will seem biased, but the arguments given by several posters much better impart the impression that this fixed/growth mindset is mumbo jumbo.
Most of the people posting and "ignoring" the critical posts are people who only read the OP and nothing else. That is why.
|
I remember having some ladder fear when I first started out in the beta. I would just squeeze out 5 games and take a breather and rewatch the replays before calling it quits for the night. As time went on and I started playing more and more, it became far more likely for me to run into horrible losing streaks. Thats when the ladder fear really hit home and I began to avoid the game subconsciously and used school as an excuse (I mean I had SOME time to play).
I think for some people you really just have to get used to losing in order to get over it. That's when you can just hit the queue button without a second thought, or have any uneasy feelings about it as you play.
|
On September 11 2011 21:40 TheUltimate wrote:
The whole fixed and growth mindsets thing looks very true from a certain perspective, but I think largely misses the real cultural difference that makes Korean players better. I've noticed foreign players still seem to have an adolescent perspective on what is required to make great achievements in life. This is unrelated to a growth/fixed mindset, but rather, how much players perceive is required to become great. Perhaps this is unsurprising, as one might expect that making a living from a computer game should be pure fun.
But to be blunt, to achieve world greatness in anything, you have to put in a world-class effort, whether or not talent is innate, in order to develop that talent. When I look at posts declaring that 40 hour weeks are not enough, and player should be aspiring to a Korean player's 60 hours of practice, I want to laugh. 60 hours? 60 hours is still very relaxed. In the working world, some people will invest over 80 hours of work a week simply to achieve the requirements of their job - never mind to excel to a world-class level. For short durations of time, people are even capable of 100-120 hours a week. That means almost NO time for leisure on ANY day of the week, as they are working for over 14 hours a day including the weekend. If you don't believe me, go read about how hospital doctors (obviously very smart people, but in very demanding jobs) tend to live in the US. The human limits for hard work are far and beyond anything I've seen discussed on TL, even when the Koreans are concerned.
Things maybe different for Starcraft, sure - at a certain point, you may become too fatigued to achieve the APM required to win, so yeah, perhaps you can't be playing matches for 100 hours a week. But that doesn't mean foreign players should spend 40, or even 60 hours a week playing, then spend the rest of the time relaxing. Even if they don't have the mental capacity at that time to play a game, if a player wants to become truly great, they should be strategising, drilling on
micro/macro aspects of the game, and generally making the most efficient possible use of their time. After time, by consistently pushing your endurance limits to the max, you will develop them and be able to practice more effectively for longer.
Have you noticed how fatigue often plays a significant role for foreign players coming from the open brackets of tournaments? Have you noticed how little difference it seems to make for Korean players? That's because a full 3 days of Starcraft for them is nothing different from their ordinary lives.
Truth is, foreign players aren't willing to make the huge sacrifices to be the best, whereas such sacrifices are culturally accepted and honoured in Korea (and in Asia in general). Until more players adopt HuK's attitude, there will be no real competition between Koreans and foreigners.
I completey agree, I think you touched on the general differences between foreign players and koreans and pretty well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
