The above will be a controversial post because there are plenty of highly motivated people who work hard but never get rich. For example a day laborer construction worker has to get up very early, perform tiring physical labor all day, and then do it again the next day. Many work more than 5 days per week to make ends meet. I bet that not many web developers could make it as a day laborer for long!
That said, the question of "motivation" now has a deeper subtext thanks to recent research on early childhood development and the impact of family and community on each individual's development and achievement.
Rather than an inherent personal quality (which is easily corrupted into a proxy for "worth" or "deserving"), we are learning that motivation is heavily influenced by factors outside a child's control, like how much loving attention they receive, how many words they hear per hour, the level of violence they witness or experience, the number of books in their home, the professional success of their parent or parents, the average socio-economic level of success in their school district, etc.
So, to say that maybe the answer is motivation, is not as much of an answer as it used to be. Now we want to know where motivation comes from, and what we can do to improve that.
> So, to say that maybe the answer is motivation, is not as much of an answer as it used to be.
Definitely. It's sad that these outside factors influence something so important, but that doesn't change the fact that some people are motivated and some are not, does it?
I think the point is that there are systemic factors that affect motivation that far swamp out an individual's drive, especially in their formative years.
These can include, but are not limited to: violence and trauma in one's community and family, lack of reliable parents or positive role models in one's community, childhood economic pressure towards physical survival and meeting basic day-to-day needs.
These are all things that individuals born into poverty in the US face at disproportionate levels, and they can have a negative effect on motivation. We generally don't fault people for the very harsh circumstances they are born into.
Yes, I understand that the PC thing to do is to not fault people for such things.
But the fact remains, which sucks, but still.
Where do we draw the line? I was attacked by a dog when I was a child which was very violent and traumatic for me. I also grew up "are we going to eat tonight" poor. Do I qualify?
This isn't about you. It's about how we use scientific knowledge to make better policy decisions.
We learned that people need vitamin C to prevent scurvy; now we have government policies and cultural norms that make sure that every child gets enough vitamin C.
As our scientific understanding of brain development grows, we'll (hopefully) develop norms and policies to make sure kids get what they need there too. You can see today the early stages of that process with respect to exercise, and more recently, sleep.
That said, the question of "motivation" now has a deeper subtext thanks to recent research on early childhood development and the impact of family and community on each individual's development and achievement.
Rather than an inherent personal quality (which is easily corrupted into a proxy for "worth" or "deserving"), we are learning that motivation is heavily influenced by factors outside a child's control, like how much loving attention they receive, how many words they hear per hour, the level of violence they witness or experience, the number of books in their home, the professional success of their parent or parents, the average socio-economic level of success in their school district, etc.
So, to say that maybe the answer is motivation, is not as much of an answer as it used to be. Now we want to know where motivation comes from, and what we can do to improve that.