Agency

A concept that denotes volition (as in “self-determination”), that is, the ability to shape one’s destiny—but of course within limits imposed by history and circumstance—as a constitutive characteristic of a thinking being. Agency may operate at a group level as well (as in the idea of social agency or historical agency.) Note that social change, from the perspective of this course, should be considered as an outcome of a dialectic in the agency/structure binary.[1] The dialectic between the agency/structure binary is one of the fundamental divides in the ideological thinking of the Left and the Right where both the Left and the Right fail to recognize this binary and instead overemphasize the one (structure, in the case of the left) in opposition to the other (agency, in the case of the right). To explain further: in this course our discussion of such social structural factors as class, race, ethnicity, gender, etc. have emphasized society-level, that is institutional, structures that create impediments for people who are marginalized in accessing opportunities (that would fulfill the promise of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”) in a capitalist democracy, such as the United States. The reason for this approach is that the ideology of meritocracy that the bourgeoisie so religiously espouse, perfidiously neglects to consider structural impediments given their exclusive emphasis on factors of personal agency as the determinant of marginality. In their view, institutional impediments that are driven by such social structural factors as race, class, gender, disability, and the like, are a thing of the past. So, for example, if people are poor and homeless, it is because they have chosen to be so by their personal actions. Such views may appear bizarre, but not so, for example, to at least one U.S. president, Ronald Reagan—an arch conservative whose deleterious socio-economic policies and programs, undergirded by the anti-working class ideology of neoliberalism, in the areas of employment, taxation, the social safety net, etc. helped to deepen socio-economic inequality to unprecedented levels in United States and elsewhere (and the legacy of which continues to negatively affect the lives of the working classes in general and the marginalized in particular to the present day, not just in United States but across the world). This once B-grade film actor and two-term president would repeat to David Brinkley of ABC News, in a farewell interview, his firm belief that for many, homelessness was a matter of choice: “There are shelters in virtually every city, and shelters here, and those people still prefer out there on the grates or the lawn to going into one of those shelters.” Similarly, he suggested that unemployment too was a matter of choice because there were hundreds of want ads in newspapers every week and they go unanswered. (See news report on the interview in

the New York Times, dated December 23, 1988.) Yet, I want to suggest to you that, in one sense, conservatives are not entirely wrong in their view that the poor and the marginalized are to blame for their predicament, especially in capitalist democracies like the United States. Leaving aside the fact that they do not often participate in avenues of procedural democracy at all levels—local, state, and national—thereby taking themselves out of the decision-making processes (because when you don’t vote, for example, you are not represented), they also engage in a variety of negative behaviors that are not necessarily driven by ignorance (perhaps a forgivable trait) but by choice. Consider, for example, the findings of that well-known self-help guru, Tom Corley. He claims that he spent five years studying the daily habits of 233 self-made millionaires and 128 poor people in United States and as a result he came up with 300 habits that “separate the rich from the poor.” He concludes: “The fact is, the poor are poor because they have too many Poor Habits and too few Rich Habits. Poor parents teach their children the Poor Habits and wealthy parents teach their children the Rich Habits. We don’t have a wealth gap in this country we have a parent gap. We don’t have income inequality, we have parent inequality.” [2] So, what are some of these habits he is talking about? Here is a selection from his website (which you will notice are worth pursuing even if you don’t stand a chance of becoming a member of the bourgeoisie):

• Gambling Habits – 6% of self-made millionaires played the lottery vs. 77% of the poor. 16% of self-made millionaires gambled at least once a week on sports vs. 52% of the poor.

• Health Habits -21% of self-made millionaires were overweight by 30 pounds or more vs. 66% of the poor. 76% of these millionaires exercised aerobically 30 minutes or more each day vs. 23% of the poor. 25% of these millionaires ate less than 300 junk food calories each day vs. 5% of the poor. 25% of these millionaires ate at fast food restaurants each week vs. 69% of the poor. 13% of these millionaires got drunk at least once a month vs. 60% of the poor.

• Time Habits – 63% of self-made millionaires spent less than 1 hour per day on recreational Internet use vs. 26% of the poor. 67% of self-made millionaires watched 1 hour or less of T.V. per day vs 23% of the parents of the poor. 67% of these millionaires maintained a daily “to-do” list vs. 6% of the poor. 44% of these millionaires got up 3 hours or more before they actually started their work day vs. 3% of the poor.

• Living Below Your Means Habits – 73% of self-made millionaires were taught the 80/20 rule vs. 5% of the poor (live off 80% save 20%).

• Relationship Management Habits – 6% of self-made millionaires gossip vs. 79% of the poor. 75% of these millionaires were taught to send thank you cards vs. 13% of the poor. 6% of these millionaires say what’s on their mind vs. 69% of the poor. 68% of these millionaires pursue relationships with success-minded people vs. 11% of the poor.

• Learning Habits – 88% of self-made millionaires read for learning every day vs. 2% of the poor. 86% of these millionaires love to read vs. 26% of the poor. 11% of these millionaires read for entertainment vs. 79% of the poor.

Let us take another, example, one that is very close to home: meaning yourselves and your performance in this course (and other courses you are taking in this school). While it is true that because most of you come from working-class backgrounds (or “middle-class” if that will make you feel better--but remember, class categories in this course is about which class has the power to make society-level decisions and not things like income, which in capitalist societies like this one is the bourgeoisie), you are burdened by the need to have a part-time paid employment, for financial reasons—which, of course, is a burdensome structural impediment that kids from bourgeois backgrounds do not face. However, this fact does not excuse you from engaging in a variety of behaviors that can enhance your ability to succeed in your educational endeavors generally, and in your courses, such as this one, particularly. To those of you who are not doing well, have you tried to observe what your more successful peers are doing behaviorally to enhance their chances of success (which I define as getting a 4.0 grade point average or coming as close to it as possible)? They engage in a set of structural behaviors that I label as “professional” behaviors. Folks, after talking to students who have received A’s in most of their courses, over the years, I have found, not surprisingly, that a common strategy pursued by all of them is to build for themselves a “behavioral structure” designed to put them on a grade path toward a 4.0. (Reminder: success in college is not just about "intelligence" but it is also about how you deploy that intelligence in terms of things like self-discipline, deferred gratification, professionalism, and so on.) This structure comprises a package of key elements, listed below in no particular order. (You may also notice that one or two elements of this structural package are specifically meant to positively influence teachers, by indicating to them their seriousness and professionalism in approaching their courses.)

Before you study the list below, let me emphasize something else that may never have crossed your minds: to a considerable extent, new re

search in neurosciences is telling us that the ability to permanently change your brain physically so as to enhance its intellectual abilities as well as its executive functions are within your control—it is not just a matter of genetics and nutrition. This is a revolutionary, revolutionary finding. However, there is one big catch: it requires exercising personal agency by engaging in persistent and appropriate learning behaviors (such as those listed below) over the entire duration of the period up to the point when this second window of opportunity given to humans by nature closes, which is from the teen years to around the mid-twenties (by the way, the first window is during infancy—roughly the first six years or so). Here is an appropriate quote from an article on this matter, by Sharon Begley: “Until now, studies of the brains of children and adolescents have shown that their gray matter decreases with age. The rule seems to be “use it or lose it”: connections among neurons that are not used wither away, a process called pruning…. [While] Toddlers are pretty much at the mercy of their parents when it comes to the kind and amount of environmental stimulation they get, and thus which connections remain. Teenagers, however, create their own world.” Begley then quotes a neuroscientist: “Teens thus have the power to determine their own brain development, to determine which connections survive and which don’t. Whether they do art, or music, or sports, or videogames, the brain is figuring out what it needs to survive and adapting accordingly.” In other words, to quote her again: the teen brain reprises one of its most momentous acts of infancy, the overproduction and then pruning of neuronal branches… Think of it as nature’s way of giving us a second chance.”[3] Now you know. Laziness coupled with foolishness has a very heavy price: missing the opportunity to build a better brain (in much the same way that athletes build muscles through training). Here is a list of good academic habits that will put you onto the path of success with lifelong benefits.