Sharp Brains: Brain Fitness and Cognitive Health News

Neuroplasticity, Brain Fitness and Cognitive Health News


Learning about Learning: an Interview with Joshua Waitzkin

In 1993, Para­mount Pic­tures released Search­ing for Bob­by Fis­ch­er, which depicts Joshua Wait­zk­in’s ear­ly chess suc­cess as he embarks on a jour­ney to win his first Nation­al chessJoshua Waitzkin cham­pi­onship. This movie had the effect of weak­en­ing his love for the game as well as the learn­ing process. His pas­sion for learn­ing was reju­ve­nat­ed, how­ev­er, after years of med­i­ta­tion, and read­ing phi­los­o­phy and psy­chol­o­gy. With this rekin­dling of the learn­ing process, Wait­zkin took up the mar­tial art Tai Chi Chuan at the age of 21 and made rapid progress, win­ning the 2004 push hands world cham­pi­onship at the age of 27.

After read­ing Joshua’s most recent book The Art of Learn­ing, I thought of a mil­lion top­ics The Art of LearningI want­ed to dis­cuss with him–topics such as being labelled a “child prodi­gy”, bloom­ing, cre­ativ­i­ty, and the learn­ing process. Thank­ful­ly, since I was pro­fil­ing Wait­zkin for an arti­cle I was for­tu­nate enough to get a chance to have such a con­ver­sa­tion with him. I hope you find this dis­cus­sion just as provoca­tive and illu­mi­nat­ing as I did.

The Child Prodi­gy

S. Why did you leave chess at the top of your game?

J. This is a com­pli­cat­ed ques­tion that I wrote about very open­ly in my book. In short, I had lost the love. My rela­tion­ship to the game had become exter­nal­ized-by pres­sures from the film about my life, by los­ing touch with my nat­ur­al voice as an artist, by mis­takes I made in the growth process. At the very core of my rela­tion­ship to learn­ing is the idea that we should be as organ­ic as pos­si­ble. We need to cul­ti­vate a deeply refined intro­spec­tive sense, and build our rela­tion­ship to learn­ing around our nuance of char­ac­ter. I stopped doing this and fell into cri­sis from a sense of alien­ation from an art I had loved so deeply. This is when I left chess behind, start­ed med­i­tat­ing, study­ing phi­los­o­phy and psy­chol­o­gy, and ulti­mate­ly moved towards Tai Chi Chuan.

S. Do you think being a child prodi­gy hurt your chess career in any way?

J. I have nev­er con­sid­ered myself a prodi­gy. Oth­ers have used that term, but I nev­er bought in to it. From a young age it was always about embrac­ing the bat­tle, lov­ing the game, and over­com­ing adver­si­ty. Grow­ing up as a com­peti­tor in Wash­ing­ton Square Park helped me avoid the per­ils of per­fec­tion­ism-it was a school of hard knocks, and those guys always kept me on my toes for com­pla­cen­cy. On this theme, I think los­ing my first Nation­al Chess Cham­pi­onship was the great­est thing that ever hap­pened to me, because it helped me avoid many of the psy­cho­log­i­cal traps you are hint­ing at. That year, between ages 8 and 9 was one of the most for­ma­tive peri­ods of my life. I had felt my mor­tal­i­ty, came back strong, and went on to dom­i­nate the scholas­tic chess scene over the next 8 years. On some fun­da­men­tal lev­el, the notion of suc­cess in my being was defined by over­com­ing adver­si­ty-and it still is.

The truth is that through­out my careers in both chess and the mar­tial arts, I often knew that my rivals were more nat­u­ral­ly gift­ed than me-either with their men­tal machines or their bod­ies. But I have believed in my train­ing, my approach to learn­ing, and my abil­i­ty to rise to the chal­lenge under pres­sure.

S. In gen­er­al, do you see any dis­ad­van­tages to being labeled a child prodi­gy?

J. Yes, there are huge dis­ad­van­tages if you buy into the label. The most per­ilous dan­ger, in the lan­guage of Car­ol Dweck, is that we inter­nal­ize an enti­ty the­o­ry of intel­li­gence. The moment we believe that suc­cess is deter­mined by an ingrained lev­el of abil­i­ty as opposed to resilience and hard work, we will be brit­tle in the face of adver­si­ty. For that rea­son, it is incred­i­bly impor­tant for par­ents to make their feed­back process relat­ed as opposed to prais­ing or crit­i­ciz­ing tal­ent. Think about it-if you tell a kid that she is a win­ner, which a lot of well-inten­tioned par­ents do, then she learns that her win­ning is because of some­thing ingrained in her. But if we win because we are a win­ner, then when we lose it must make us a los­er.

S. If the movie of your life had­n’t been made, do you think you’d still be con­tin­u­ing on in chess?

J. That’s a great ques­tion. My moth­er would say no. I hope she is right but I’m not sure. I real­ly loved the game so deeply, and it was a wild­ly intense, excit­ing, and spir­i­tu­al­ly reward­ing process. The movie def­i­nite­ly had a large role in the exis­ten­tial cri­sis that locked me up and moved me away from chess. But that peri­od of tran­si­tion taught me some incred­i­bly valu­able life lessons that have defined my growth in oth­er are­nas-so just to be clear, although it caused me some pain, I would nev­er take back that expe­ri­ence. My hunch is that I would have stayed in chess for much longer and would have gone much fur­ther-but I think ulti­mate­ly I would have felt like a lion in a cage sit­ting at a chess­board my whole life.

S. Do you think if you took up chess at a lat­er age, you could have been a world cham­pi­on in chess?

J. I have no idea.

S. Do you think you will ever return to chess? And if you do, do you think you are still capa­ble of being the world cham­pi­on? Or have you missed your boat?

J. I don’t think I will ever go back to com­pet­i­tive chess. I’m on to new moun­tains. Since win­ning the 2004 Tai Chi Push Hands Worlds, which is where my book ends, I decid­ed to be a begin­ner again, and took up the mar­tial art Brazil­ian Jiu Jit­su, a fierce­ly com­pet­i­tive and phys­i­cal­ly bru­tal sport. I am train­ing full time and aim­ing for the 2010 and 11 World Cham­pi­onships-the biggest chal­lenge of my life. I’ve also recent­ly opened an edu­ca­tion­al non­prof­it-the JW Foun­da­tion, , and am devot­ed to help­ing kids dis­cov­er their shine in the learn­ing process. My plate is pret­ty full beyond chess.

S. Were you a good stu­dent in school?

J. I was a cut up in class­es that did­n’t excite me, and I was pas­sion­ate about what did.

S. Did you like learn­ing new sub­jects in school? Are there any sub­jects you had trou­ble with? Or that you just did­n’t like?

J. I nev­er liked math much although I was pret­ty good at it. And I hat­ed geog­ra­phy in 3rd grade.

On Bloom­ing

S. What does the term “late bloomer” mean to you?

J. To be hon­est, I haven’t thought much about the term, but in my mind it implies that some­one came into their own lat­er in their life or process than most would con­sid­er typ­i­cal for excep­tion­al achiev­ers. Of course this def­i­n­i­tion leaves a lot to be desired because I tend to con­sid­er the deep­er aspects of the learn­ing process to be most inter­est­ing, and they often take quite a bit of time, hard work, and suf­fer­ing to pen­e­trate.

S. Do you con­sid­er your­self a late bloomer in Tai Chi Chuan?

J. Well, I did­n’t start study­ing Tai Chi Chuan until I was 21, so from a com­pet­i­tive ath­let­ic per­spec­tive, I was cer­tain­ly a late starter-at a world-class lev­el most of my rivals in Asia had trained full time since ear­ly child­hood. I had a lot of ground to cov­er, and I did it essen­tial­ly by tak­ing my lessons learned in oth­er are­nas of life, chess to a large degree, and trans­fer­ring them over into this new art. As for bloom­ing, I’m still work­ing on that.

S. In read­ing your book, it seems as though your major strength in Tai Chi Chuan is the way you put your mind into the game. You were able to beat play­ers much stronger than you by “get­ting into their mind.” I find this fas­ci­nat­ing. Why do you think you were so good at psych­ing peo­ple out? Was it because of your ear­ly chess expe­ri­ences?

J. Sure, my chess expe­ri­ence taught me a lot about the psy­chol­o­gy of com­pe­ti­tion. World-class chess play­ers are incred­i­bly bril­liant peo­ple who have spent their lives fig­ur­ing out ways to get it your head, to break you down. Usu­al­ly every high lev­el chess error is accom­pa­nied by a psy­cho­log­i­cal break of sorts-to sur­vive, you have to under­stand the inner game. I am always look­ing for where the psy­cho­log­i­cal and the tech­ni­cal col­lide-that sure­ly comes from my chess study. But frankly, I think I real­ly got good at the psy­cho­log­i­cal game after chess. Chess taught me how to be relent­less­ly intro­spec­tive, how to unearth tells in myself and in oppo­nents, but then I real­ly took that foun­da­tion and put it into dynam­ic action in the mar­tial arts. I work on being a heat seek­ing mis­sile for dog­ma. If you unearth or instill a false assump­tion in an oppo­nent, they are in a lot of trou­ble unless they feel you get­ting into their head and kick you out fast. Of course this eye for false con­structs is an impor­tant tool in the learn­ing process as well.

S. Do you think part of your abil­i­ty to psych peo­ple out may have to do with your extra­or­di­nary intel­li­gence com­pared to oth­er play­ers? You said some­thing inter­est­ing in your book regard­ing your match with Buf­fa­lo. You say: “He was sure­ly the greater ath­lete. But maybe I was the bet­ter thinker.” Is it pos­si­ble that you were just smarter than Buf­fa­lo (even though he was stronger)?

J. I don’t think I have an extra­or­di­nary intel­li­gence. Buf­fa­lo had cul­ti­vat­ed his body his whole life, and he had that edge. I had cul­ti­vat­ed my mind. My chance lay in mak­ing the men­tal game dom­i­nate a phys­i­cal bat­tle. At a high lev­el of com­pe­ti­tion, suc­cess often hinges on who deter­mines the field and tone of bat­tle.

S. In your book you dis­cuss Car­ol Dweck­’s work on how per­cep­tions of the fixed nature of abil­i­ty can affect abil­i­ty itself. I do think that Car­ol’s work is impor­tant and I appre­ci­ate you cit­ing it in your book. I was won­der­ing though: to what extent do you think so-called inborn abil­i­ty deter­mines suc­cess in learn­ing a new craft like chess or Tai Chi Chuan?

J. I am a nur­ture over nature guy. While I would tend to dis­agree, some might argue that I was an extreme­ly gift­ed chess play­er. Fair enough. But there is no way you could argue that I am an ath­lete of world-class tal­ent. I am able to com­pete at the high­est lev­els because I have cul­ti­vat­ed an approach to learn­ing and per­for­mance that max­i­mizes my strengths, tack­les my weak­ness­es through the prism of my strengths, dis­solves crip­pling false con­structs and divi­sive men­tal bar­ri­ers, and allows me to express myself through my art in as unhin­dered a man­ner as pos­si­ble.

S. How much do you think peo­ple can com­pen­sate for weak nat­ur­al abil­i­ty? It seems like a major com­po­nent of your learn­ing tech­nique is learn­ing how to play up your strengths, and exploit the weak­ness­es of oth­ers. Could you per­haps elab­o­rate on this idea?

J. I tend to feel that there is some­thing a bit self-destruc­tive in believ­ing you have to com­pen­sate for weak nat­ur­al abil­i­ty, because it implies that there is one ide­al way to learn some­thing and because of nat­ur­al defi­cien­cies we are forced to take a dif­fer­ent, much longer road. On the con­trary, I have found that peo­ple at the high­est lev­els of Qual­i­ty in vir­tu­al­ly all pur­suits are some­what unusu­al minds-and their “bril­liance” has usu­al­ly evolved from work­ing with their nat­ur­al strengths. There is this ter­ri­ble ten­den­cy in edu­ca­tion to box all kids into the same mold-this is one of many prob­lems with all these stan­dard­ized tests. The paved road is often the dog­mat­ic one (of course we can­not believe this dog­mat­i­cal­ly) and there is some­thing won­der­ful about build­ing a learn­ing process around the unique­ness of your own inspi­ra­tions.

On Learn­ing

S. I read your book and thought to myself, “Wow, Joshua gets it. He real­ly mas­tered the art of learn­ing.” Your writ­ing is so good and your points are so well made that it seems by read­ing your book that what you’ve dis­cov­ered can be taught to any­one (although, as you men­tion, cus­tomized to each indi­vid­u­al’s unique style). I can’t help but notice though how fast you learn things, even in com­par­i­son to oth­ers who are attempt­ing to learn (and I assume with equal deter­mi­na­tion). To what extent do you think raw IQ con­tributes to your fast learn­ing abil­i­ty? Research does show that those with a high IQ can learn near­ly any­thing at a faster rate than oth­ers.

J. Thank you for the com­pli­ment, but my guess is that I would­n’t have a ter­ri­bly impres­sive IQ. And I don’t learn so fast, I just have a lot of pas­sion and throw my heart and soul into things that move me. Learn­ing hap­pens to have been an art that moves me and that I have worked very hard to under­stand.

S. Have you ever had your IQ test­ed? Would you be open to me test­ing you some­time?

J. I haven’t. I guess I might be open to it, but I tend to find these stan­dard­ized tests to be some­what lim­it­ing. My great­est strength lies in find­ing hid­den har­monies-dis­cov­er­ing con­nec­tions where oth­ers might see chaos or dis­con­nect. That is a way of think­ing that I have cul­ti­vat­ed for many years. It is one that was not ingrained, and that most peo­ple could devel­op if they want­ed to.

S. To what extent do you think your fast learn­ing rate is due to your dis­ci­plined tech­nique to learn­ing?

J. I would say that the depth of my learn­ing (and it has a long way to go) is a result of pas­sion, hard work, an intro­spec­tive hon­esty, and beyond all else, a love for the search.

S. How much do you think pas­sion and devo­tion to learn­ing con­tributed to your suc­cess?

J. It would be hard for me to over­state it.

S. In what ways did your chess skills help you with Tai Chi Chuan? What skills were trans­fer­able?

J. This is a deep ques­tion that was at the core of my inspi­ra­tion for writ­ing The Art of Learn­ing. It will be hard to answer this quick­ly, but, in short, all of the skills were trans­fer­able. The two arts became one in my mind and it felt like I was trans­fer­ring my sense of Qual­i­ty from chess over into Tai Chi Chuan. And this had noth­ing to do with these par­tic­u­lar dis­ci­plines-they could­n’t real­ly be more dif­fer­ent-the trans­la­tion process can be applied to any­thing. At the core of my rela­tion­ship to learn­ing is break­ing down the bar­ri­ers in our minds that divide our dis­parate pur­suits. These walls are false con­structs. If we cul­ti­vate a the­mat­ic eye, then growth in one area of life will imme­di­ate­ly inform our oth­er pur­suits.

In truth, this is a big rea­son I took up Brazil­ian Jiu Jitsu‑I am cur­rent­ly tak­ing the essence of my chess and Tai Chi under­stand­ing, and trans­fer­ring it over to a third art. This recep­tiv­i­ty to the­mat­ic inter­con­nect­ed­ness is a mus­cle I hope to cul­ti­vate for the rest of my life.

S. In read­ing your book, I won­dered if you could become world-class at any­thing. You dis­cov­ered that there are many sim­i­lar­i­ties between Chess and Tai Chi Chuan. And it’s clear that your abil­i­ties are well suit­ed to what­ev­er is com­mon across these two domains. But to what extent do you think you could take your insights into learn­ing and use them to become an expert in any field?

J. This is an inter­est­ing ques­tion. I think my ideas could be applied to just about any field, and I would have a lot of con­fi­dence tak­ing on most arts. I think there are obvi­ous­ly some things that we are weak­est at, and it would be absurd to spend a life­time in those are­nas-in my case, any­thing relat­ed to neatness–that said, our strengths can be applied to dis­ci­plines that might seem as unre­lat­ed as pos­si­ble. Just to be clear, I don’t think my approach has any­thing to do with what hap­pens to be com­mon ground between chess and Tai Chi Chuan. The con­nec­tions were in my process, and that process, or any­one’s per­son­al­ized vari­a­tion of it, could be applied across the board.

S. In your book you describe a moment in your match with Buf­fa­lo where you say: “I reached deep­er than I knew I had and won the most dra­mat­ic point of my life.” You then say: “I saw parts of myself I did­n’t know about.” Could you please elab­o­rate? In oth­er words, can you demys­ti­fy “reach­ing deep­er” for me? Do you think most of us are capa­ble of more than we real­ize?

J. Yes, I do-no ques­tion about it. Growth only real­ly comes at the point of resis­tance, but that is the moment that we tend to stop. Because it hurts. Whether we are con­fronting our psy­cho­log­i­cal foibles or our phys­i­o­log­i­cal lim­its, it is much eas­i­er to turn back from the chal­lenge than to push through the dis­com­fort. I think dig­ging deeply into our­selves, push­ing our lim­its, is a mus­cle that can be cul­ti­vat­ed like any other–incrementally. If we embrace these out­er lim­its of our abil­i­ty as some­thing mal­leable that can expand with train­ing, and if we embrace the dis­com­fort of these moments of growth, then we start to love the rich­ness of the self-dis­cov­ery. The dis­com­fort becomes exquis­ite. Learn­ing becomes life.As for that moment against Buf­fa­lo, I had lived as a com­peti­tor for over 20 years and had no idea what I could real­ly do when pushed so far past my “lim­it.” For­tu­nate­ly I had trained to be able to meet the chal­lenge, even if I had no idea how big the chal­lenge would real­ly be. We have remark­able reser­voirs.

S. What does it mean to “feel space left behind”? You use that phrase a lot in your book, but I’m hon­est­ly not 100% clear on what it real­ly means.

J. This is an idea that applies to most dis­ci­plines. Every move­ment, be it men­tal or phys­i­cal, tends to both take space and leave some­thing behind. We are con­di­tioned to see what some­thing does more than what it does­n’t do. This ten­den­cy is a con­struct. Dog­ma. Train­ing your­self to see new­ly cre­at­ed empti­ness can be quite pow­er­ful.

S. In your book you say: “The only thing we can real­ly count on is get­ting sur­prised.” Can you please elab­o­rate a bit on this?

J. Sure. I wrote those words reflect­ing back on the ups and downs of my com­pet­i­tive careers thus far and more specif­i­cal­ly on the 2004 World Cham­pi­onships, the most bru­tal expe­ri­ence of my life. I have learned that in those rare moments of truth in our lives, we have to be will­ing to let go of the com­fort of our knowl­edge, our prepa­ra­tion, our sense of con­trol, and we have to flow with an impro­vi­sa­tion­al spir­it that embraces chaos, turns adver­si­ty to our advan­tage, and digs into our deep­est reser­voirs of ener­gy and cre­ativ­i­ty. Our rela­tion­ship to the learn­ing process, in my opin­ion, should be one that pre­pares us for that free­dom under pres­sure-or more tru­ly, that lib­er­ates us to live every moment with that open­ness to unex­pect­ed beau­ty. Learn­ing and peak per­for­mance aren’t about con­trol or mem­o­riza­tion or per­fec­tion-they are about some­thing much deep­er, some­thing more essen­tial­ly human.

S. What role do you think intu­ition and the uncon­scious plays in the learn­ing process?

J. A tremen­dous­ly impor­tant one. A huge part of my process involves break­ing down the walls between the con­scious and uncon­scious minds, so tech­ni­cal growth sparks cre­ative leaps, and per­haps more impor­tant­ly, cre­ative leaps can inform the direc­tion of tech­ni­cal growth. The chap­ter enti­tled Slow­ing Down Time and the sec­ond to last chap­ter of my book in which I was train­ing for the 2004 World Cham­pi­onships real­ly go into my sys­tem for cul­ti­vat­ing the intu­ition. Open­ing up com­mu­ni­ca­tion between these dif­fer­ent com­po­nents of our minds is anoth­er mus­cle that we can all devel­op if we under­stand how.

S. What role do you think flow plays in the learn­ing process?

J. It plays a crit­i­cal role. Peo­ple often make the mis­take of divid­ing the learn­ing process from per­for­mance psy­chol­o­gy in their minds-as if they can learn for a life­time and then per­form at their lev­el of abil­i­ty when­ev­er nec­es­sary. I believe this is short-sight­ed from two per­spec­tives. One, the abil­i­ty to per­form under pres­sure is an art of its own that must be cul­ti­vat­ed as a way of life. And per­haps more impor­tant­ly, if we are not deeply present in the day to day learn­ing process, then we will not be learn­ing at a high lev­el. The abil­i­ty to enter a state of flow is one that should be inte­gral to every aspect of our life in learn­ing. And again, it is not so hard as long as we take it on sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly.

S. Do you think you’d ever con­sid­er tak­ing up break­danc­ing? I have enjoyed learn­ing how to break­dance and think you’d be quite good at it!

J. Thanks man. No break­danc­ing for me yet. One thing at a time.

Scott Barry KaufmanScott Bar­ry Kauf­man has pub­lished mul­ti­ple jour­nal arti­cles and book chap­ters relat­ing to intel­li­gence and cre­ativ­i­ty and is the edi­tor of two forth­com­ing books. Inter­view © 2008 by Scott Bar­ry Kauf­man.



Relat­ed arti­cles:

- Inter­view with James Zull: An ape can do this. Can we not?

- Learn­ing & The Brain: Inter­view with Robert Syl­west­er

- Teach­ing is the art of chang­ing the brain

Leave a Reply...

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Leave a Reply

Categories: Education & Lifelong Learning, Peak Performance, Professional Development

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About SharpBrains

As seen in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, BBC News, CNN, Reuters,  SharpBrains is an independent market research firm tracking how brain science can improve our health and our lives.

Search in our archives

Follow us and Engage via…

RSS Feed

Watch All Recordings Now (40+ Speakers, 12+ Hours)