Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Being born with better hand-eye coordination is certainly a thing, of course, but that doesn't comment on its application. Just to use your example, a person born with that hand-eye coordination may not understand darts or find them appealing, but may love music instead -- so the potential "talent" is subjective to their preferences. After all, talent doesn't exist until it's observed, so the skilled young musician may have equal potential in dart throwing that never comes to light simply because of their disinterest, in which case their superior hand-eye coordination is never observed in a more diverse context.
Okay, now I don't know what you're trying to say. It's like talent is socially constructed, because you define it as something that is socially constructed. If that person tried darts, for example talked into it by friends after a long round of nagging, the results would be better on average than they would if no inborn quality was in play. To me, that inborn quality could be called a talent, although an undeveloped and unappreciated one, whereas to you, if I understand it right, it's only talent if it is developed and appreciated. Semantics, I guess.
I pretty much agree with Nova about talent making it both easier to pick something up and setting a higher ceiling on how skilled you can be. That description seems particularly apt for sports, since it seems like a good bit of that really can come down to genes and such. At least, that is my impression.
Kraken,
I have heard folks who self-described themselves as talented, but in the same breath also say that while talent allowed them to breeze through things for a time, they eventually hit walls and had to actually start working for it.
I think you are onto something with this. I had heard of that type of situation happening a lot for people who are particularly smart when they get to college/graduate school, especially if they happen to have a bunch of similarly intelligent classmates when they reach that higher level. I guess for some people the competition spurs them to work hard, but it sounds like others get stuck in the "brilliant but lazy" trap. I hope that was not too off point by the way.
As for the topic title, I definitely can get behind the idea that plenty of things in life come down to hard work. Still, I also feel like a lot of success is being placed in a favorable situation and running with it. In those types of scenarios, I believe that it is more honest and considerate to credit the factors that helped give you that opportunity than to be proud of being a talented person.
That is not to say that some people do not have to overcome tons of adversity to claim success. I think that is certainly true and I do not want to discount those people's struggles. I just feel like it is really important to give thanks to those who played a crucial role in your ultimate success.
This I will not discount, but I also think a lot more success is seeing a goal and working towards it. It's really impossible for us to tell: this is, after all, a situational thing.
I think it's O.K to be proud of being a talented person, so everything you've done doesn't seem like a waste. I think it's fine to be proud of your achievements.
I don't know whether I'm talented -- in fact to be fair I think everybody is -- but I know when I was younger I was told that I was talented, and when I started asking myself what this meant, that was right around the same time I felt like I actually had no talent.
And I've pretty consistently felt that way since.
^I think having something along those lines happening to me may have contributed to my two year depression when I didn't see the point in anything I did.
One of the oddest phenomena was that I didn't have performance anxiety until I learned what performance anxiety was.
This. So much this. The problem is if you're just good things and then don't learn how to learn, and eventually it all comes crashing down...
My biggest issue with the concept of talent is that it could easily discourage people who aren't already good at something they'd like to do. Sometimes they're less likely to practice and work because they've been deluded into thinking it's something you have to be born with and they could never excel at it on their own.
Well, actually this wasn't supposed to be about talent. It was about to be how claiming that God or an outside force was responsible for their success disregards any work they themselves might have done to do what they did.
Instead of praising the target, it actually takes meaning away from whatever hard work he (or she, gosh!) might have done.
Buzzword is just a buzzword
and it isn't shitposting if its ironic
and fcuk you donte