Maffs, natural gift or developed skill?

[Ruairi]

If you have a look at all the great physicists and mathematicians of the past and present. You will start to notice that these individuals are portrayed as if they have a natural gift in math or physics or whatever they do. instead of hearing how much work they put in you only hear about the amount of work they didn't put in. (i.e Stephen Hawking averaging only about an hour a night of study for his physics Ph.D.)

 

I would like to hear your opinions on, whether you think arithmetical abilities are based on natural abilities or through many sleepless nights and empty coffee mugs.

[Sensei]

"Practice makes master"

 

If you train your body, your muscles will grow.

If you train your brain, new connections between neurons will be created.

But there is needed healthy compromise between training body and training brain.

Edited June 30, 2017 by Sensei

[imatfaal]

The popular press do like to lionize (or sometimes demonize) those that are extraordinary - this means you will very rarely get a balanced and honest view of those in the public eye. This combined with the fact that in the recent past people like to down play their own talents and work ("I was just lucky..." "It happend that I was the guy on the spot..." "Really it was a team victory" etc. ) means that both the natural ability and the hours of grind are hidden. I have spent time around world class track cyclists and they will talk about the amazing support and coaching, the team morale and camaraderie, and the expert sports nutritionists, psychologists, and physiotherapists; very rarely will they mention that multiple times a day they will be curled up in pain in a foetal position on the floor cramping up and vomiting from lactic acidosis nor that they were given this opportunity because of the exceptional talent and inherent physiology they displayed as an untrained child.

 

It is the modern day humility

[Phi for All]

Like most things, I think it varies between people. Some people can do maths like they're speaking a native language, and many science subjects become easier or more fully understood for people who are fluent in advanced mathematics. Affinity is a fantastic human trait, and we've developed a sort of mysticism about it.

 

For the most part though, study and hard work will get you to the same place. And if you've put in that kind of effort, it's likely you'll go far with it. We all know someone who has a seemingly natural ability they take for granted, something we'd all cut off a toe to be that good at, but they do nothing with it (Gah! I can't draw but have a friend who's amazing, but only doodles). Perhaps developed skills have more advantage over natural gifts than we commonly think.

[StringJunky]

Like most things, I think it varies between people. Some people can do maths like they're speaking a native language, and many science subjects become easier or more fully understood for people who are fluent in advanced mathematics. Affinity is a fantastic human trait, and we've developed a sort of mysticism about it.

 

For the most part though, study and hard work will get you to the same place. And if you've put in that kind of effort, it's likely you'll go far with it. We all know someone who has a seemingly natural ability they take for granted, something we'd all cut off a toe to be that good at, but they do nothing with it (Gah! I can't draw but have a friend who's amazing, but only doodles). Perhaps developed skills have more advantage over natural gifts than we commonly think.

I've noticed quite often that those purported to be gifted in a particular subject have parents similarly skilled or in the same ball park; genetics aside, such a background makes a person more likely to be good in that field. The main skill of the 'gifted', I think, is a single-minded tenacity, which means effort.

[dimreepr]

IIRC 10,000 hours of work will make one a master of <insert field>, but 20,000 hours won't make one exceptional in that field.

 

http://projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/gel/EricssonDeliberatePracticePR93.pdf

Edited June 30, 2017 by dimreepr

[StringJunky]

IIRC 10,000 hours of work will make one a master of <insert field>, but 20,000 hours won't make one exceptional in that field.

Yes, there needs to be a creative element to push the boundary.

[NimrodTheGoat]

Savants?

[Simpson17866]

I've always believed that somebody with natural talent and deliberate training will get further than somebody with only one or the other.