alt Hacker NewsIndeed, speed is often read as "smarts" whereas I would maintain it's much more often "preparation". We can't on one hand believe in the plasticity and retrainability of the mind, while simultaneously believing that speed is something only a few are born with. On the nature/nurture scale, I think it's 20/80 or so - but prodigies and geniuses have an interest that keeps them thinking and learning 10x or 100x more than other kids, and a little bump that lets them get started easier and therefore much earlier.
This sets them up for fantastic success very quickly. [1] shows a great example of this.
I'm fond of saying "You can do anything you want, but wanting is the hard part", because to truly be a grandmaster, genius-level mathematician, olympic athlete, etc, requires a dedication and amount of preparation that almost nobody can manage. Starting late, with emotional baggage, kids, and having to spend 5 years relearning how to learn? Forget it.
1. https://danielkarim.com/how-to-become-a-genius-the-polgar-ex...
Replies
Bobby Fisher won his first US Championships at 14 against people who had been playing chess longer than he had been alive. Suggesting they didn't want it more, or practice more than some kid is silly.
"We can't on one hand believe in the plasticity and retrainability of the mind, while simultaneously believing that speed is something only a few are born with."
Sure we can, the initial orientation of neurons differs between people, so some people need less "plasticity and retrainability" to be good at a task. Plasticity is physical characteristic like height and varies between people.
Initial speed usually isn't that important, but speed of learning is important and makes the difference between possible and impossible within a human lifetime.
> I'm fond of saying "You can do anything you want, but wanting is the hard part", because to truly be a grandmaster, genius-level mathematician, olympic athlete, etc, requires a dedication and
I was having a problem agreeing with this subthread, and I have you to thank for putting it into words that I can finally formulate my disagreement against.
Have you never met one of those people for whom they did not need to "want"? They could literally phone it in and still do better than anyone else, no matter how dedicated they were. Even should practice/study be necessary for them, they benefited from it to some absurd proportion that I couldn't even guess to quantify. I've known more than one of these people.
I think most believe they don't exist for two reasons. The first is the ridiculous number of television shows and movies that depict motivation as being the key to success. We're just inundated with the (unsupported by evidence) that this is the means to extraordinary genius. Second, I would say that this is the most comforting theory. "Why yes, I could have been a gifted whatever or a talented something-or-other if I had put the time in, but I chose this other thing instead."
Maybe some would say we all need to believe this, that a society that doesn't believe in it is harsher or more unkind.