In sociology and psychology, a term was given by Robert Merton to describe how credit for the work of many scientists were being given to other, more known, yet undeserving scientists. But as this example was studied, it was found to be a much bigger problem than could be imagined.
The theory comes from Matthew 25:29, which states “For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him”(NIV). In science, the problem arose when Nobel prizes were being given to undeserving recipients. Hard working men would study a field and discover new areas, such as the quantum optics controversy in physics in 2005, and the prize would be given to less deserving men. It occurred many times in the field of science and mathematics, so the question arose: Where else in society does this occur?
Take a hockey player. When looking at a data base of current NHL players, you find that players who were born in the first 3 months of the year were far more common than players born in the latter 9 months. This has nothing to do with astrology, but rather with the childhood of the player. The cutoff date for little league hockey is January 1st. This means growing up the player born at the beginning of the year had an age advantage towards other players. As a child, this can be a huge difference in physical physique. When players are older and more advanced, naturally their coaches give them extra practice and training. This evolves into them becoming better players and ending up on the ice.
It also occurs academically. Suppose a boy is born in a wealthy family and is sent to a private school. At the same time a boy is born to a single parent in a poor neighborhood and attending a failing school system. Who do you think will go on to higher levels of education? It has little to do with their natural intellect, and more to do with the setting they were raised in. Take reading for example. If a child is a better reader than another child, he will read more because it will be easier and more enjoyable. Through years of more reading, his education will be enhanced and will be much more likely to succeed academically, all because the way he started as a child.
Talent is usually defined by someone’s natural ability. But suppose this is not the case. Examine how many Ivy League students were born into wealthy families and how many were born with nothing. Coincidence? Malcolm Gladwell in his remarkable New York Times best selling book “Outliers” describes talent as work ethic and personal drive to succeed. That makes much more sense. Forget a child’s “talent” as a child and work on molding their esteem towards achieving their goals. When the correct motivational drive, a child is much more likely to become successful than on their childhood abilities.
This is a great concern when we look at poor neighborhoods in America. There is a clear reason to why the citizens in these areas are much more likely to live there generations to come, and the areas are much more likely to be areas of high crime. When people fall victim to the Matthew Effect, it is almost impossible to “be all they can be.” Society literally doesn’t give them the chance. I suppose for our economy to be efficient there must be people not as successful as others, but if we could provide them with the chance, perhaps we could provide them with less crime, thus making the American Dream AMERICAN, not the Wealthy Person’s Dream.
Daily Drew 