The article is interesting in its own right, but what struck me in the context of our Love 2.0 class was that it was the practice of learning how to form letters that seemed to make the difference. The analogy here is with our practices of being more aware of the possibility for micro-moments of connectivity with others and the world. The New York Times article makes a point of saying that the variability in outcome during practice actually aids in learning. Lack of perfection helps. In the process of learning that an "a" is still an "a" even when written very messily, multiple neural pathways are created. The ability to recognize something in spite of its messiness is a real world skill. Perhaps this is the basis for the correlation researchers have found with increased capacity for learning and creativity.
It is our practice of the awareness of the possibility of micro-moments of connection that are our enrichment. Some of our practices may reverberate and ripple out, splash up and come back to get us wet. Others may intersect with other waves and make beautiful patterns that continue through generations. Neither of these is the point. The practice itself is the reward.