101–110 of 144 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, but he has little talent, and his success is almost purely a combination genetics and hard work (eating + training).
You don't think that there is significant technique to be mastered in world-class athletics like that?
Just because this guy doesn't think he has a talent doesn't mean that nobody does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_curve_effects#The_ex...
Formulas don't make for good blogging though.
As for the talent angle: I'd rather phrase it as "talent exists, but its useless unless applied in conjunction with effort & passion".
You will look around and find other people at your age who are way better than you at playing guitar... in reality, all they did was starting earlier than you or have been spending more time doing it. I don't want to disagree with this essay... to first order. But it's important not to take the emphasis on passion too far. Because this hypothesis doesn't explain the existence of passionate but untalented people. Such…
If we could live for a million years, then talent probably doesn't matter compared to deliberate practice even in fields such as pure mathematics. But life is short and that in many fields, success is relative (ie good is irrelevant, you need to be top 1 %). In those cases, once you are behind, the probability of catching up to other people in your field is slim.
There are people who have absolutely no passion for a task, yet perform it expertly, without practice. One would have to conclude after reading this essay that these people are, in fact, talented [i.e. possess some innate ability].
For one thing, it's obvious that certain sports favor certain body types. This was discussed when Michael Phelps won all those swimming medals - his body structure was particularly well suited for swimming.
You will look around and find other people at your age who are way better than you at playing guitar... in reality, all they did was starting earlier than you or have been spending more time doing it. I don't want to disagree with this essay... to first order. But it's important not to take the emphasis on passion too far. Because this hypothesis doesn't explain the existence of passionate but untalented people. Such…
> There are people who play a hell of a lot of guitar and are > nevertheless not very good. They just repeat the same mistakes, i.e. they don't try to identify the areas they are weak in and improve on those. Mindless repetition does not bring much benefits, mindful practice does.
If by 'mindful practice' you mean deliberately practicing things we do poorly at (because we don't have natural talent for them), then I agree that proficiency can be developed. But of course given equal effort the one with the greater natural talent will perform better. And in the ordinary course of life, they will also tend to practice their talents more (since they get more gratification from it) and magnify their superiority still further.
The statement 'there is no talent' is nonsense.
She set out to learn how. Over the span of about two years with a lot of work she got to be amazing at it, and painting as well. She now all the time hears how she has such an amazing (previously undeveloped) talent.