People may conclude that we control our destiny, while other think that our success is foredestined by our natural talents. Which is more reasonable? David Epstein and Malcolm Gladwell take two different approaches on this subject. David Epstein, the author of The Sports Gene, a non-fiction article, believes that innate talent has more effect than athletic practice. On the other hand, Malcolm Gladwell, the writer of the Outliers: The Story of Success, also a non-fiction article, disagrees and concluded that practice is more important than innate talent. Accompanied by evidence and rationalization, Gladwell structures a more reasonable argument that humans control their own destinies with hard work and practice than Epstein supports the opposing …show more content…
Donald Thomas, a student at Lindenwood University in Saint Charles, Missouri, beat Lindenwood's University record for high jump with little to no practice (Epstein 5). Thomas began competing against the best professional jumpers in the world (Epstein 6). Thomas versed Stefan Holm, the reigning Olympic champion, with many hours of practice (Epstein 6). In the end, Thomas "was crowned the 2007 world champion," and was very close in breaking the world record (Epstein 7). Epstein later stating, that in 2008 Thomas was examined by Ishikawa, a researcher from the Neuromuscular Research Center (Epstein 7). Ishikawa noted that Thomas was born with a giant Achilles tendon (Epstein 7). Epstein then citing, Gary Hunter, exercise physiologist, stated that the longer Achilles tendon gives Thomas more compression, causing him to jumper higher (Epstein 7). Epstein finally writing, one can increase the Achilles tendon stiffness by training, which totally seems to contradict his idea (Epstein 8). Although Epstein supports his ideas, he only focuses on only one sport, high jumping, and goes against his own claim. This doesn’t provide satisfactory support that our destiny is already determined based on our