Tipping point. Read Chapter Two “The Law of the Few”

Tipping Point
Name
Institution
Tipping Point
Argument essay Gladwell (2000) argued there is a “tipping point” in an epidemic where in a moment – everything changes (pg.9). Do you agree with him? Write a 2-3-page argument where you either agree or disagree with Gladwell, depending on your perspective. Is his theory strong? Or do you find holes in his argument? Use your double entry notes along with your in-class board work notes to help you defend/argue your stance. Be sure to use quotations from the reading to explain your thinking.
Gladwell’s explanation of how the world works always gets the attention of people around the world. Some people agree with him and his views while others seem to disagree and hold counter—stances. In his 2000 book known as The Tipping Point, Gladwell dwells heavily on a phenomenon called The Law of the Few which is in chapter 2. Here, Gladwell talks of how a few people with enough power and influence can easily cause a big change in the world. The names given to these people include connectors (people with big social networks), the mavens (experts in a particular field or area), and the salesmen (those who specialize in the art of persuasion). Gladwell does seem to present a solid argument, but upon close observation, one can notice some issues which he either ignores or never occurred to him at the time the book was being published. This article seeks to explore Gladwell’s arguments but only those which appear in chapter 2 and seem to focus more on the influential(s).
In one instance, Gladwell disputes word-of-mouth as a spark which can ignite or alert people or cause change. He states that “people pass on all kinds of information to each other all the time. But it’s only in the rare instance that such an exchange ignites a word-of-mouth epidemic.” He goes on to provide an example where he notes that despite his insistence that a particular restaurant is good, his friends never seem to visit it. Well, there is some truth in what Gladwell says here because, at times, people just do not seem to care enough to want to change their routines. His friends, for example, could be ignoring his idea about visiting the restaurant simply because they are rigid and therefore, need to be motivated some more. In his explanation, however, Gladwell uses another example where he notes that “the answer to the success of any kind of social epidemic is heavily dependent on the involvement of people with a particular and rare set of social gifts.” Here, he is talking about his diminished set of social gifts which he seems to believe to be the main reason why the restaurant is still half-full. How...