I think maybe I should define talent. Talent a natural effinity to a subject that is independant of physical advantage.
A talented writer, a talented musician, a talented artist. So a disadvantage such as dyslexcia for a writer, is not really negative talent or a talent inhibiter. You can of course become a great writer dispite dyslexcia, think Rowland Rivron. On 17 Sep, 05:24, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > " ... specific learning difficulty ... " > > This would amount to talent inhibitors or ' negative talent ?' > > On Sep 16, 8:10 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Ahhhh but Jim have you ever considered that may be due not to a lack > > of talent, but like myself, due instead to a specific learning > > difficulty? > > > I am dyslexic and my hand writting will never be any good, and my > > spelling, well admitedly that has gotten better over the years, > > slightly. Along with my dyslexcia comes a spat of dyspraxcia which > > affects my fine moter controls which in turn means that my guitar is > > coming along slowly, yet it is now better than it was two years ago. > > > Yes of course some of us may well have biological advantages or > > disadvantages in doing some things, but would you eqaute 'talent' to > > biological advantage? > > > Is the tall man a talented pole volture because he is tall? > > > On 16 Sep, 15:59, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks Lee, but I have been typing for over 60 years and I am still > > > not competent at it. And I have been spelling poorly for longer than > > > that. So it seems from what data I have that talent in these areas > > > lies with others, not me. Jim > > > > On Sep 16, 7:49 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > You may not be confidant Jim, but I'm willing to bet that if you put > > > > in the hours even now, in say 10 years you'd be a more than compitant > > > > pianist. > > > > > Do you doubt this? > > > > > Lets not doubt for a second that the more one performs an action, the > > > > easy that action becomes to perform. > > > > > Talent I say is no more than repitition of the action. Do we know of > > > > any 'talented' individual that has not put in the practie(repeatedly > > > > performed the action)? Do we know of any talented individual that no > > > > longer puts in the practice yet retains their level of skill? > > > > > If we could find some of these people then I would be willing to > > > > adujst my thouhts on this question, but I don't think we'll find any. > > > > > Honestly I belive that we (human beings) can do anything we want to, > > > > if we repeat the actions for long enough we become very good at it, > > > > and this is what people call talent, it is not it is practice. > > > > > Now show me how I am wrong. > > > > > On 16 Sep, 15:39, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I am confident no amount of practice, no matter how young I might have > > > > > begun, would turn my ten thumbs into the amazing hands of a concert > > > > > pianist, So I'd say that some have a talent, others less or none at > > > > > all. Jim > > > > > > On Sep 16, 4:22 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Well does it? > > > > > > > I say no, practice makes pefect, but what do you think?- Hide > > > > > > quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
