This is a simple topic, but it's been something I've been thinking about. Is natural talent born in an individual? Is it learned? Is it inherited? Is it taught?

I honestly don't know. I begin to think it's one but the more I think about it the more I shift to another one.

I don't really know. I mean you hear stories about children that can play the Piano by age three (or something along those lines) and it really just has to be all natural on their parts. My parents can barely teach my sister to get up in the middle of the night to use the bathroom much less to play any sort of musical instrument.

Honestly I've never believed in inheriting skills, I think it's either something you can just do, or something you learn.

There's definitely something hereditary about certain natural inclinations. Being really good at musical instruments can be an inherited ability. Its not like you come out knowing how to play piano, but you are wired with the ability to find your way around a musical instrument much easier that someone who isn't from a musically talented family. There was this kid in my school, his parents were both amazing musicians, and his brother was godly at guitar, and he picked up Bass in like 9th grade, by 10th grade he was almost Les Claypool caliber (not just covers either, the guy could just whip out sick nasty slap and grind solos on command)

I think it's mostly attributed to malleability. when children are young, even two, they're absorbing all kinds of information from the world, and depending on how it's presented to them they'll learn to see certain things in it and learn certain things from it.

I think it's all certain kinds of intelligences. You might be born better at reading or reasoning than somebody, better at playing music, better at working with your hands, better at math, better at moving (body intelligence?), etc. Uhh, I was probably going somewhere with this, but I got bored. But I've already typed it up, so I'm posting the hell out of it.

I'd say it's a combination of heredity and environment. Athletes, for example, are born with the right body type. If their parents aren't loading them up with cheeseburgers and fries every night, and they have a chance to get out and be active, then you're going to have a "natural" in a certain sport from a young age.

Music is the same way. If your brain is able to comprehend certain things about music, and you're in a musical environment, you're going to have a talented musician. You'll naturally be able to hear what sounds "right" and that's really all it takes to start down the path of good musician. I know when I was younger there were the kids that stuck out as naturally talented musicians, but over time the prolonged exposure has brought me to higher levels of musical comprehension. Yet even at my level, there are the few "natural" talents that will always have a one-up on me as long as they stay musically active. People with perfect pitch, for example.

Natural is all mental. Unless you came out of the womb with a sixpack.

Genetics do play some role in sports. Everyone has a different composition of fast and slow muscle fiber which will favor one sport or another. To use your example, some people get six-pack abs at 12% bodyfat while others need to have less than 8%. But, yeah, I agree it's mostly learned

Natural ability is why the American concept of "Anyone can become president" is bullshit, and the Olympic Games aren't packed with 6 billion people.

Talent is a state of mind. If, for whatever situational reason, you are disposed to view certain skills with confidence... then you will be talented in that skill.

The only reason I am talented at certain things is because I expect to be.

American presidents are not qualified by ability. The Olympics aren't packed with six billion people because six billion people don't care to pack the Olympics with any amount of serious dedication.


Perception does not equal reality in competitive events.

We're talking about talent, nothing more.

Six billion was an overstatement: Everyone who wants to be in the Olympics is not in the olympics, not for lack of trying, but because some people are just better than others.

Everyone who wants to be president will not be president, not for lack of trying or effort or anything on thier end.

There are genetic precursors.

MASSIVE genetic precursors.

To what extent a little kid's "awesome abilities!" are ONLY due to the neurological structures that give him the edge (as prescribed by his DNA) or due to the exercise of those (and other) structures by practice or being pushed by overachiever parents isn't quite that concrete.

No one has a natural ability to play, say, the voilin. One may have the structure to be better at processing patterns, hand-eye coordination, sharp hearing, etc: that would give people the perception that, should the boy be taught the actual instrument, it would appear that he was born for it. Just the the same the kid might have ADD and not want to try to play it, so he never adapts his great neurological structures towards the goal of playing the voilin, so he doesn't.

Your latter paragraph is assumed when people say "natural talent". Someone who is naturally good at basketball will probably also be decent-good at other sports too, for example. Then you get people like Joe Nieuwendyk (hockey/lacrosse), Bo jackson (baseball/football), etc.

I think that natural talent is where someone just picks something up for the first time and is just good at it without any effort. To become great I imagine they will need to work at it, but it is the initial part that matters.