I voted you up because I agree that the terminology being used is silly and that dividing people (especially children!) into one of two categories is "reduction

I voted you up because I agree that the terminology being used is silly and that dividing people (especially children!) into one of two categories is "reductionist" in a bad way. However, the less silly version of the point is valid and non-trivial, even if not in need of new technical categories. People who think that talent or ability is basically innate are wrong and hindered by this fact. People who think that it's basically acquired by effort and time are right and are helped by this fact. I also think it's valid to point out that smarter people often suffer more from having the wrong view on this issue. This isn't necessarily their fault, I think there are institutional causes for this. For example, American public schools seem to be structured to make it likely that smart students absorb lazy habits. Smart kids observe that they can get top marks pretty much effortlessly and never develop a work ethic.