3 ms·

Well, the analogy "I started talking at 2" is silly, because everyone starts talking around that time (assuming normal circumstances), it's built in, while star

by Jun8 15y ago

Well, the analogy "I started talking at 2" is silly, because everyone starts talking around that time (assuming normal circumstances), it's built in, while starting to learn other skills at a very young age would sound impressive. Consider someone who says "I started to play the piano when I was 4", wouldn't you be impressed? I think we all agree that the earlier you start somethings the better you get at them, e.g. by age eight they say you are too late to start learning the violin, if you want to become extremely good with it. Learning a language is like this, too. Is programming, or for that matter math one of these skills? I think early exposure definitely helps, but is by no means a determining factor for later success.

shadowsun7 15y ago
I have two responses: (both in agreement) 1) We don't see such comparisons in some fields, which I find curious - tennis, for instance, is one where all its stars started playing at a young age. Nobody really comments on the age these players started playing anymore, since it's taken for granted that to be good you have to start really young. 2) G. H. Hardy makes a somewhat related observation in A Mathematician's Apology: To take a simple illustration at a comparatively humble level, the average age of election to the Royal Society is lowest in mathematics. We can naturally find much more striking illustrations. We may consider, for example, the career of a man who was certainly one of the world's three greatest mathematicians. Newton gave up mathematics at fifty, and had lost his enthusiasm long before; he had recognized no doubt by the time he was forty that his greatest creative days were over. http://amathematiciansapology.pandamian.com/4/#p[IhbHmb],h[IhbHmb,3,4,5,6,7,8] http://amathematiciansapology.pandamian.com/4/#p[IhbHmb],h[I... In fact, I would think that chess and math and perhaps programming(?) are more similar, and starting young seems almost to be a constant amongst its greats. So I'm really curious if anyone here on HN can point to a counter-example.
- joshhart 15y ago
  I think you have to start very young in most sports now, not just tennis. I know swimming is that way, and Michael Phelps is a bit of an exception because he started training at the late age of 7!

by Jun8 15y ago

shadowsun7 15y ago

I have two responses: (both in agreement) 1) We don't see such comparisons in some fields, which I find curious - tennis, for instance, is one where all its stars started playing at a young age. Nobody really comments on the age these players started playing anymore, since it's taken for granted that to be good you have to start really young. 2) G. H. Hardy makes a somewhat related observation in A Mathematician's Apology: To take a simple illustration at a comparatively humble level, the average age of election to the Royal Society is lowest in mathematics. We can naturally find much more striking illustrations. We may consider, for example, the career of a man who was certainly one of the world's three greatest mathematicians. Newton gave up mathematics at fifty, and had lost his enthusiasm long before; he had recognized no doubt by the time he was forty that his greatest creative days were over. http://amathematiciansapology.pandamian.com/4/#p[IhbHmb],h[IhbHmb,3,4,5,6,7,8] http://amathematiciansapology.pandamian.com/4/#p[IhbHmb],h[I... In fact, I would think that chess and math and perhaps programming(?) are more similar, and starting young seems almost to be a constant amongst its greats. So I'm really curious if anyone here on HN can point to a counter-example.

joshhart 15y ago
I think you have to start very young in most sports now, not just tennis. I know swimming is that way, and Michael Phelps is a bit of an exception because he started training at the late age of 7!