Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Talent is a combination of both innate and acquired qualities. In fact, chance plays a significant role here – a person, for example, decided to learn to play the violin and suddenly it turned out that he literally has a predisposition to this instrument – he learns and remembers the parts quickly, with a twinkle and passion, composes his own melodies and has the courage to experiment with sound.
In addition to genetics and hard training, PERSONAL INTEREST is also important – you should be thrilled to do what you do. In music, for example, there are a lot of excellent guitarists from the point of view of technique, but they can't come up with a single riff on their own – they play stupidly what others have come up with for them. And another option is a person who can only play two chords, but genuinely gets high from it, trains and writes songs for hours on end. Which of these two is more talented – a skilled vegetable or an inept writer? There is a very fine line here and the answer will largely depend on your personal subjective taste.�
Talent is nothing if you don't train and develop it. In the end, it all comes down to the fact that the shield turns out to be someone who believes in what he is doing and pays a lot of time, effort and attention to training, exercises, rehearsals and so on. �And a slacker and lazy person always ends up on the shield, even if he is at least three times talented. The world knows of cases when people with no arms drive better than those with hands, when blind people shoot accurately from a bow, and autistic people are smarter than their doctors.�
Just for fun, ask the biography of any talented person in your opinion – you will see that nothing was given to him just like that. That behind all the fame, success, money, and fans, there are hours of hard work, nervous breakdowns, and overcoming. Just one way and no other.
I disagree with the author of the previous answer. Talent is innate, but you can acquire a skill. And not everyone who acquires a skill, such as playing the violin, is talented, and it is not at all a fact that a person who has a predisposition to music will receive a musical education. There are people who are persistent, and they can devote their whole life to playing the violin, even if they do not have an innate talent, and they will become excellent professionals in their field and will play better than an infinitely talented person whose development stopped at the 7th grade of a music school. However, we consider geniuses to be exactly those people who have developed these two components. That is, when a talented person develops long and hard in the field of their talent.
Purchased items. All my teachers say: talent is 1% aptitude for business and 99% hard work.
In general, for me, this word is wrong for some reason. It is socialized and generalized. Just like the word “mind”.
Who do we call talented? Those who are out of a certain field. Why, for example, is it said about a young man performing at a competition that he is talented? Probably because they bought him an instrument as a child, he went to a music school and studied diligently there. For me, it is wrong to label all this experience and work with the word “talent” and attach the meaning of “giftedness” to this word.