4 ms·
I can get behind that, if we defined genius to be pursued passion. Not everyone has a passion for mathematics, that is true. I just thought what the root post
by Jillboy 10y ago
I can get behind that, if we defined genius to be pursued passion. Not everyone has a passion for mathematics, that is true.
I just thought what the root post was implying is that even if you're passionate, you might not have the potential to achieve genius-level skill because that would somehow be genetically predetermined. If that was what he was implying, I'd love to see some evidence to support the claim.
- jacoblambda 10y agoI feel as if it is also somewhat true in that regard. I have been extremely passionate about music for more than half my life yet I am still horrible. I believe the same applies with many other skills in life.
- RangerScience 10y agoIt's more like a correlation than a definition. But more - it's the only reasonable-sounding argument for that part of the "Myth of a Meritocracy". The caveat for the real argument is: People are more complicated than animals, and there's way more to it than genetics. The real argument is: If everyone was capable of everything, evolution wouldn't work as a process. The addendum of: of course this is inaccurate, poorly phrase, etc etc - the idea is still "new" enough to be unpolished. Thoughts?