Swimmer963 comments on Examples of growth mindset or practice in fiction - Less Wrong

12 Post author: Swimmer963 28 September 2015 09:47PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (32)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: shminux 28 September 2015 11:27:03PM *  2 points [-]

A few notes.

  • Writing leveling up in an engaging way is hard. Groundhog Day is one classic example where it's done well, and is pure growing mindset and determination, no extra talent.

  • I think in the Hunger Games it is implicitly assumed that she both has a gift for archery and had worked hard to develop it. I agree that her wins look mostly like luck or some behind-the-screen force.

  • Indeed in the Honor Harrington series the brutal training schedule, while not often explicitly shown, is alluded to multiple times, and the explanation for the original villain remaining largely technically incompetent is rather contrived and hand-waved. I chalk that one to David Weber being completely incapable of writing non-cartoonish villains, ever.

  • A big offender in the "all talent, little work" department is Ender's Game: Ender manages to beat a more experienced player 2 out of 3 without ever touching the game controls prior to the contest. Later on, he trains his troops, but he is already magically there himself. Though there is the bit where he levels up properly under Mazer Rackham.

  • Brandon Sanderson's writings tend to be quite decent. The characters tend to put a lot of work into achieving their potential, but there is never a "growing mindset is all you need" premise, one always needs a healthy measure of talent to excel. Even geniuses with an obvious talent at least have to work hard at learning how to control it.

Comment author: Swimmer963 29 September 2015 12:26:05AM 1 point [-]

Brandon Sanderson's writings tend to be quite decent.

I'd thought about putting the Mistborn series in the "things that are close to what I'm talking about", but I've only read 2/3 of the first book.

the explanation for the original villain remaining largely technically incompetent is rather contrived and hand-waved.

I'd forgotten about that. I think maybe I assumed the incompetent-villain characters were finding ways to skimp on the training that was supposed to be required?

Comment author: shminux 29 September 2015 05:47:38AM 0 points [-]

I think nepotism was mentioned as the reason, but it is hard to see how it would help to wiggle out of training.