This New
York Times article is a compilation of interviews about famous tennis stars and
how they began playing when they were younger. The newspaper interviewed their
close family and friends to find out how they started out, what the conditions
of the courts were like, and the challenges they experienced as they started
playing. For some, the conditions were much better than others. Roger Federer
grew up playing on well-made courts that have barely needed repairs today,
while Sania Mirza played on courts made with cow dung when she was younger.
The article
reminded me of our discussions in class on Tuesday and Friday as well as
certain elements from Aristotle's Politics. Aristotle wrote that some people
are naturally born to fill certain roles in society, and that the most
fulfilling life they can live is directly related to how well they perform
these roles. Since many of the social roles Aristotle discussed are now
obsolete, such as master vs. slave, we can apply his words to other scenarios that
are more relevant today such as rich vs. poor. In class we discussed whether or
not being born into a certain socioeconomic status dictates how the rest of
your life will play out. In the case of this article, it seems that these
athletes fulfilled the role of professional tennis player regardless of the
challenges they faced and were able to realize their full potential no matter
what their background was.
I like the topic you chose, and how it relates to what we talked about in class. Many tennis players, such as Venus and Serena Williams, and Sania Mirza, were not born into higher class families, and they had to work very hard in order to reach the top! In class I said something about how what you deserve is about what effort and work you put into the situation. People who come from Lower class families, are automatically given an obstacle and they must be persistent and focused in order to succeed. I think that effort is what classifies someone as deserving or not. Even though Roger Federer grew up playing on good courts, he still worked hard to get to his position. We see the case of the lower class player who works hard to reach the top, in all sports.I agree with you when you say that this article seems to show that the athletes were able to accomplish their goals and get to their full potential regardless of their socioeconomic status!
ReplyDeleteI did a little more research on Sania and it turns out her socioeconomic status was not that low and she even attended a very prestigious private school in her hometown in India. So I would have to say her court conditions do not correlate to her socioeconomic status. Even if it did, I still think Aristotle's argument is is valid in this case. Sania and even Venus and Serena succeeded because they was meant to be professional tennis players, that is their given role in society. Even though the conditions they started playing in at a young age were not great they became so good because they were meant to play tennis. I do also think their hard work and determination make them deserving of the success they accumulated throughout their careers.
ReplyDeleteSammy, I found your connection from this article to our discussion about Aristotle super interesting! I believe that our socioeconomic environment does have a major influence in how we end up in our life. If you are born into a high socioeconomic class, research shows that you are likely to stay in the socioeconomic class the rest of your life. The same is for if you were born into a lower socioeconomic class. For example, I know the socioeconomic class I was born into has allowed me to get the education I receive now at Dickinson. If you are born into a lower socioeconomic class it us much harder to attend a private college, or college at all. Going off of this, I somewhat agree with Aristotle's views that some people are naturally born to fulfill roles in society. There are some families that own their own companies for example. Their children are born, and the raised/expected to take over this business. Sometimes people from birth are shaped to fulfill a certain role. However, I believe for most people they are not born to naturally fulfill a certain role in society. Instead your role in society is often based upon your socioeconomic status, educational opportunities, and a bit of luck.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the latter part of your conclusions Hyla. I believe that people's role in society is often based upon their "socioeconomic status, educational opportunities, and a bit of luck." I question whether this luck is natural or fairly circumstantial. Actually, a huge part of me believes that these things are circumstantial simply because they are based on status. I think that better circumstances allows for easier opportunities to be granted for those within them but great opportunities can also come to those from less than great circumstances who work hard and somehow come across these great opportunities. However, I also recognize that people of lesser circumstances aren't always granted great opportunities or the equal opportunity that they deserve.
DeleteI agree with the latter part of your conclusions Hyla. I believe that people's role in society is often based upon their "socioeconomic status, educational opportunities, and a bit of luck." I question whether this luck is natural or fairly circumstantial. Actually, a huge part of me believes that these things are circumstantial simply because they are based on status. I think that better circumstances allows for easier opportunities to be granted for those within them but great opportunities can also come to those from less than great circumstances who work hard and somehow come across these great opportunities. However, I also recognize that people of lesser circumstances aren't always granted great opportunities or the equal opportunity that they deserve.
DeleteSammy I like your point about how even in adverse conditions Sania still became a professional tennis player. I think this does point to Aristotle's views on everyone fulfilling a specific role in society. I also believe, however, that socioeconomic status does play a part in many cases just due the ability to access more opportunities. These opportunities include going to college or having the funds to buy a new suit for an interview or in Roger's case the money to play on pristine tennis courts. Also, many times having more money allows you to have more free time because you do not need to fill all of it with work so you can put food on the table. The free time allows for you to go find and seize opportunities that are going to help you get to be where you want. I think that people are not born to do a specific thing, I personally believe that anyone can do anything and that they are not limited to one specific thing.
ReplyDelete