What is talent?

[kluss]

I thought I couldn't draw at all, Then I took an art class and really tried. By the end I came up with a drawing that astounded me. It was all about learning the method. (I have no idea if I retained the ability or not, it's been years since I tried).

i think you can get 40 iq point more if you get stimuleted when you growh up but humans have still born that difrenet IQs normal iq 100 iq 130 are bright and iq 160 are genius but some say that if you have more then iq 30 points more then your empolyers/boss/aduionce they dont undertsand what you talk abut so how many % of those more then iq 140 are wrong said have attuism ? and spend ther iq on linux anf forums and not on work maybe ;)

Talent is obviously not inborn because what people refer to by "talent" is always man-made. There is no natural selection in play for drawing or playing basket ball.

What nature does give us are physical and mental capacities. Although we can measure these crudely (such as the height of a basketball player), for the most part the only way to discover your true capacity is give it your all. Lance Armstrong had no idea of his capacity for winning the Tour de France until he tried to become the best bike racer he could be. It turned out that his personal best was a best in class, but he couldn't have known that at the beginning, there's just no way to measure it.

Mental capacities are even harder to measure than physical capacities. IQ tests are mainly a measure of acquired skill, not innate capacity. I think that most people who are called "genius" probably had ordinary capacities but just developed them to their utmost. The idea of "inborn talent" stifles development of talent, it makes people stick with what they are already comfortable with instead of growing, on the premise that it's not possible to grow since they don't have the talent for it; a vicious cycle.

Shayne

[kluss]

I thought I couldn't draw at all, Then I took an art class and really tried. By the end I came up with a drawing that astounded me. It was all about learning the method. (I have no idea if I retained the ability or not, it's been years since I tried).

i think you can get 40 iq point more if you get stimuleted when you growh up but humans have still born that difrenet IQs normal iq 100 iq 130 are bright and iq 160 are genius but some say that if you have more then iq 30 points more then your empolyers/boss/aduionce they dont undertsand what you talk abut so how many % of those more then iq 140 are wrong said have attuism ? and spend ther iq on linux and forums and not on work maybe ;)

Talent is obviously not inborn because what people refer to by "talent" is always man-made. There is no natural selection in play for drawing or playing basket ball.

What nature does give us are physical and mental capacities. Although we can measure these crudely (such as the height of a basketball player), for the most part the only way to discover your true capacity is give it your all. Lance Armstrong had no idea of his capacity for winning the Tour de France until he tried to become the best bike racer he could be. It turned out that his personal best was a best in class, but he couldn't have known that at the beginning, there's just no way to measure it.

Mental capacities are even harder to measure than physical capacities. IQ tests are mainly a measure of acquired skill, not innate capacity. I think that most people who are called "genius" probably had ordinary capacities but just developed them to their utmost. The idea of "inborn talent" stifles development of talent, it makes people stick with what they are already comfortable with instead of growing, on the premise that it's not possible to grow since they don't have the talent for it; a vicious cycle.

Shayne

[Brant Gaede]

I thought I couldn't draw at all, Then I took an art class and really tried. By the end I came up with a drawing that astounded me. It was all about learning the method. (I have no idea if I retained the ability or not, it's been years since I tried).

i think you can get 40 iq point more if you get stimuleted when you growh up but humans have still born that difrenet IQs normal iq 100 iq 130 are bright and iq 160 are genius but some say that if you have more then iq 30 points more then your empolyers/boss/aduionce they dont undertsand what you talk abut so how many % of those more then iq 140 are wrong said have attuism ? and spend ther iq on linux and forums and not on work maybe ;)

Talent is obviously not inborn because what people refer to by "talent" is always man-made. There is no natural selection in play for drawing or playing basket ball.

What nature does give us are physical and mental capacities. Although we can measure these crudely (such as the height of a basketball player), for the most part the only way to discover your true capacity is give it your all. Lance Armstrong had no idea of his capacity for winning the Tour de France until he tried to become the best bike racer he could be. It turned out that his personal best was a best in class, but he couldn't have known that at the beginning, there's just no way to measure it.

Mental capacities are even harder to measure than physical capacities. IQ tests are mainly a measure of acquired skill, not innate capacity. I think that most people who are called "genius" probably had ordinary capacities but just developed them to their utmost. The idea of "inborn talent" stifles development of talent, it makes people stick with what they are already comfortable with instead of growing, on the premise that it's not possible to grow since they don't have the talent for it; a vicious cycle.

Shayne

You guys really need to study this subject a little more.

--Brant