Talent!
Out of context: Reply #80
- Started
- Last post
- 81 Responses
- ********0
See again Mmio, you are making nonsensical non-sequiturs. You also keep changing what you're saying (yet again) making your argument hard to follow
Talent IS ability. Saying that talent is a different ability from the ACT of dedication and motivation is nonsensical. It's like saying tangerines are different satsumas to apples. Our arguyment here is that Talent (or ability) derives from these so-called "acts" (motivation, dedication, insight etc.)
For example
1. She has the ability to draw
2. She has the ability to take photographsis the same as
1. She has the talent to draw
2. She has the talent to take photographs.And also, no one is saying talent is an "act" as such. It's an expression to describe a quality we find in someone (usually it is outsiders that say - she is talented). What the consensus seems to be, and what you seem to be arguing against, is that this quality is nurtured through motivation and dedication - and it certainly does NOT exist a priori to it's realisation. (as in someone has lots of talent "within" them, undiscovered until someone comes along and says - look!talent!).
Of course it is more complex than simple "dedication" and "motivation". It is the whole life experience. But the important point to note is that the subject has to experience before talent can be noted. That may include the "experience" of genetics on the individual (i.e having a brain more capable of processing maths - it is still an experience of the subject).