LUCK is an opportunity that offers itself to people who actually do something.
And HARD WORK is pointless if you're doing push-ups instead of chin-ups.
Therefore TALENT = understanding the material. It's realizing what kind of work and what kind of attitude is necessary to accomplish a certain goal (weather it's in art or sports).
I don't believe in luck. I believe in opportunities. You can sit and wait for an opportunity or create your own. Just look at: Walt Disney, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates etc.
All well and good, but if your opportunity involves other people (and most do) then conditions need to be right with those people as well, that is to say you can't do everything on your own and the chance of success becomes a more complicated equation with each new variable or person. Your cited examples are all good, but of the 5-6 billion people on the planet, there will only ever be one Walt Disney.
Luck, chance, fate. It`s all just a play on the numbers game.
@AsThe3rdEye Usually succes contains (at least) two persons. The person we get to know/The person with a(n) dream/idea/purpose/belief etc. For example Walt Disney, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Richard Branson etc. And the person we barely get to know/The person which looks from a realistic perspective and tries to make this dream come true. For example Roy Disney, Steve Wozniak, Paul Allen, Nik Powell etc. I don't say just two persons are enough, but usually all success stories start like that.
Also everyone is not talented in one way or another. It might sound good in some "Kumbaya we are all precious snow flakes" kind of way to say that, but nature is not so huggy feely
@CCRider100 Everyone is talented in one way or another. Just as certain people have physiological tendencies to gain weight, get cancer, be flexible, strong, etc. We have psychological and personality tendencies. These tendencies combined in a positive way = talent in my eyes.
Physiological tendencies are not controlled. They can be improved, but there is no "cure". The strength of the tendency dictates the effort required to control it, stronger tendencies mean more effort, which leaves less time for inspiration and development of talent.
Saying that a certain combination of inborn tendencies can result in talent is the same as saying "Someone in X group will eventually be talented in Y", which is just a law of averages.
you Are hurting peoples feelings that they are nt Talented all of us is talented i so many ways you Call that Luck i dont think so . Everyone practice for that many Hours everyone has lots of skill and Sharpining ttheir Skills so that can be talented and be Really great at what they do
Some people are born with talent or develop it in early childhood. Some develop it through rigorous practice consisting of approximately 10.000 hours. Then there are those who become talented accidentally through mental injuries or the likes :D see "My brilliant mind" series if you're curious :D
this guy is stupid, so what hes trying to say is that only a few people are talented, when in fact everybody is talented, sure if im talented in baseball then i still might not be more talented than an mlb player, but that doesnt mean im not talented.
This makes perfect sense to me. I always believed that anybody can be talented. I think luck simply makes you successful in that talent, but I believe that you must have the DESIRE to work. Does your passion for (insert passion here) consume you?
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need religion, hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important, qualitative differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption.
Homosexual activists, with complete support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims and martyrs; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
It's true that talent isn't the most important thing and it doesn't guarantee your success or failure in anything. But to say talent doesn't exist is a really absurd claim. Some skills come more naturally for certain people. We all see that on a daily basis. I won't claim that it's because of god or even that we're born with it. But whatever it is, there is something at play besides how much effort we put in and that's what talent is.
It's true that talent isn't the most important thing and it doesn't guarantee your success or failure in anything. But to say talent doesn't exist is a really absurd claim. Some skills come more naturally for certain people. We all see that on a daily basis. I won't claim that it's because of god or even that we're born with it. But whatever it is, there is something at play besides how much effort we put in and that's what talent is.
@pendla10 what if you were born good at football and never practise and your mate is born shit at football but could put in 14 hours a week of training till hes better than you. if hes now better at football doesnt that make him more talented than the person who was originally talented?? (sorry if that doesnt make sense)
@blivionzzMusic You're using the terms "talent" and "skill" as if they were synonymous and they're not. If a guy's naturally good at football, he is talented at football. Whether he chooses to foster his talents does not change the fact that he's talented. A talented person can be unskilled if he doesn't practice, and an untalented person can be very skilled, if he works hard.
You can be blessed with the ability or potential to be a genius at something… If you don't spend shitloads of time, like 10,000 hours doing it, the talent just goes to waste.
For instance, the most naturally talented athlete who never works probably has less of a chance of going pro than the vaguely less talented who works twice as hard.
The opposite can also be true… If you're tone deaf, no matter how much you work you can NEVER be an adequate musician.
@adamjohnson9870 He was deaf by the end of his life… He had perfect pitch, meaning even after he went deaf he could hear every part in his head and only needed a pencil to write down a masterpiece because by that time, he almost never made mistakes..
Either way though, no… To be tone deaf means you can't discern between two different pitches, not that you're actually deaf. it's veery different.
Not to be a smarmy know-it-all douche, but I think you should re-read Outliers:
His whole point with Outliers was not just the 10,000 hours but that the people in the book who were able to get to the 10,000 hours were able to do it BECAUSE of luck. The Beatles playing 15 hrs a day onstage in Hamburg is just weird, and a totally rare opportunity in the music biz. Bill Gates spending 10,000 hours with a Computer by the time he was 17, in 1970, is INSANELY lucky.
@trumpetplayer231 You're a pretty huge faggot man, blaming your confessionals on your parents and being a afraid to own up to your own lifestyle choices; that's shameful in the gay community, and if your parents did write that "for no apparent reason", I guess it says a lot about what type of parents you have. Your language exemplifies how they raised you.
I think you need to be more specific about how the circumstances of luck prevent you from finding your path in life. The opportunities are out there and it takes yet again work to find them. Luck is always a factor but its hardly a big one provided that you do enough work. So what is there to do other than work towards your dreams? Just sit about waiting to die because luck is a factor and you never know... you might get cancer? So what! I'll die trying thank you very much. lol
@warewareno you are a pretty huge dumbass man. i did not send that you fucker. I guess my parents did for no apparent reason. So keep your smart ass comments to yourself bitch.
Wonderful video, I just finished a book by Geoff Colvin and I do agree with a lot of his points, however I do think the right circumstances , timing, parents and luck are very important as well! Could be that I am just sad for being born to very very unsupportive parents!
There is nothing better that a good video ruined by someones inability to express themself without profanity, thinking that by using it they somehow more enlightened.
it is of course not completely true. Because a lot of talented people, enjoy these hours so much that they accomplish a lot more and faster, than 10 years.
@vanderhorstmusic Actually it turns out that this isn't true. 10 years is the average that 'prodigies' or people we equate to be the most 'talented' took to acquire such 'talent'. There's no indication of a fast track, only working more hours faster.
Talent is 3 hours a day for 10 years, yeah right..
Mozart composed his first symphony at the age of four, his first concerto at the age of 7 and a full scale opera at the age of 12.. minus 2 years being a baby..
@mavrickiii true, and they may not have even been very good. For instance, Micheal Angelo wasn't popular until around age 13; by then, he may have gained a large amount experience as an artist to be recognized, but he was nowhere as good as his older self. So, either his talent increased or his skill increased because of hard work and dedication.
@mavrickiii About the Mozart myth. He didn't start on his masterpieces until he was in his mid twenties and the earlier pieces, the pieces that everyone and you speak of were heavily influenced, modified, helped, and edited by his father who was a master composer himself. And the 3 hours thing could be changed; if your full time job is what you are working on becoming a master at then you are putting in at least 8 hours a day. 40 hours times 52 is 2080. less than 5yrs to be at genius level.
I say talent is an incalculable blend of mentors, friends/networks, a genuine interest that cannot possibly be taught, the time and financial ability to invest in things, our disposition, our brain chemistry, the environment we grew up in, our self-confidence, inspiration, and yes--a bit of discipline has got to be in there somewhere.
The suggestion that talent does not exist is a falacious argument because it suggests that achievement is entirely dependent on skill. Arguably the ability to stick at 10,000 hours practise could be perceived as a motivational talent - something has to initiate and develop that skill and that is where apptitudes - or talents - come in. (IMO)
This is true, just look at Youtube... there's tons of people on here that are very talented, and have many videos... yet they don't get as much attention as others, (people that really only made a handful of videos as good as what others make continuously.)
school covers a broad range of subjects, it would be like learning piano, guitar, bass, drums (example). but if we pick one of those subjects (or instruments or anything) and do a 10,000 hour theory then we would be virtuosos at it. And also, think about a graduate standing next to someone who never went to school, they'd be a genius standing next to them
@Rhaabjorn that's my point when we do a university degree we should spend more than 10 000 hours on 1 subject and with the previous years of schooling in which you would be driven to studying your favourite subjects and logging those hours. And your point about a graduate being smarter than a non-schooled person I think that the natural intelligence of someone will shine more than just a bunch of artificial grades which don't have any real value in the real world will not make a non-schooled guy
@jmorello123 and opportunity is something that you have to keep watching or it just pass away. We always given a LOT of opportunities on our daily life, but most time we either not interested / not prepared / not dare enough / not fit with our current vision / make mistakes on engaging them and so on. So well, there is no luck excuse.
The aspect of this discussion that everyone seems to miss is that a person cannot "practice" something for thousands of hours if it is not something that REALLY connects with you....drives you....intrigues you. Your personality has to be "wired" for it....so, in a way....the hand of God still plays a big part in the equation. Also, what was the point of this video? I'm not sure what Kirby was trying to say...I guess all the sarcasm got in the way of his point.
I like it. Thanks for the video, three cheers for spreading the message. And I hear people bitching that it might not be '10,000' hours, but the point is its practice, and when you are 4,000 hours into the 10,000 - you will be verging on relatively adept at it compared to all the people sitting on their hands anyway.
Viva la mental and physical revolution - we are all divine and connected creatures, so lets work on ourselves and enjoy the journey.
Its useless (& waste of time) to think about luck,
Living your life is all really about doing the BEST you can do, during your lifetime, despite all your circumstances!
The world is, fortunately, full of great, inspirative stories of those who are in positions of bad, bad luck, yet can also arise & do something GOOD/positive creating changes in this world! (even from the handicapped, crippled, blind persons!).
I also have to agree that sometimes, its humans nature to wanting to feel that theyve known the secret to success, and thus, ascribe to many different factors (& hence, theories & books!) , while in Reality,
we are really just a comparably weak-and-still-evolving creature in this blue planet in this unexplainably vast, mysterious universe.
The key word here is "Aptitude". 10,000 hours practice does not confer genius on anyone if they are not already in possession of either physical or mental aptitude for the task in hand. For example, you could play the 'cello for ten years with so-called "deep" practice and you might end up competent, but not neccessarily a world class virtuoso. What matters is not how brilliant you are but what you GAIN from the experience in ways that cannot be reduced to banal statements about ambition.
I love when Singers or athletes win something and thank god for giving them the talent and destiny to do soo. It sends such a bullshit message to all our children yet these celebs are never chastised for that.
Good for you for exposing this you-too-can-be-a-genius crap that sells millions of shitty books like the abysmal Talent Code. Countless athletes and musicians put in their 10,000 hours and never become anything more than really skilled, which is not the same thing as genius or greatness. BTW, the 10,000 hours myth is something that someone pulled out of their ass. No studies back it and there's nothing to prove it. It's an arbitrary number that helps sell shitty books. like The Talent Code.
It's also crap comments like yours that ruin what this video is teaching. To say that the 10,000 hour rule was pulled out of an ass is ridiculous! Have you ever read Outliers? Take the time, Malcolm Gladwell backs everything he says with tests or studies. I'm pretty sure Kirby got that luck part completely from Gladwell.
I've read Outlliers and Talent Code which also brings up the 10,000 hour "rule".
The 10,000 hour "rule" is based on a single study by 1 psychologist in 1 situation.Even Gladwell admits that 10,000 is an arbitrary number. This doesn't make it a rule. If you want to believe everything you read and be a good little unquestioning consumer, thats your business. BTW, Gladwell is a journalist, not a scientist or psychologist. He creates spin to sell books, nothing more. ..
It's just that some people when they're young catch the MAIN part later, so their singing doesn't sound that great at first. I suppose if "talent" is being able to do something decently on the first few tries, that's true. But talent on the larger scale, being able to be a true professional and do well, you need 10,000 hours to get every single component right. The "non-talented" at first, begin to learn faster and improve in performance... Hopefully that clarifies...
Yah.. Okay since it wasn't that specific in the video a quick explanation... Everyone says that oh, some kids for instance are great singers, but haven't put in 10,000 hours, so this is bs. No... To become a true-fledged professional you still need 10,000 hours. It's just some people catch the MAIN part (like hitting the right notes in a song), while other people know how to sing with emotion first. But with 10,000, u get everything, the notes AND emotion.
isn't luck the hand of God?? Besides there are shit load of people who are hard workers but amount to zero talent... I for example consider myself a very good illustrator, damn right I did close 10,000 hours but not because it's hard work but because it came SO easy to me so I kept at it cause I knew that some day it would feed me. I could have worked hard at being an architect like my dad but that meant hard work, my point is Talent = lazy because its what came natural...
bullshit intelligence is more than 90% hereditary and less than 10% environmental...hard work brings success not intelligence...talent does not come solely from hard work a 4 year old virtuoso pianist didnt acquire the musical talent from years of hardwork but from a gift that created motivation passion and ultimatley further nurture and growth of that talent
Hey, fuck you. If intelligence were more than 90% hereditary, then my parents would be a lot fucking smarter, lol. Hard work doesn't guarantee success, it justs wastes time you could be putting fourth to learn how to do something else. Granted the 10,000 hours thing is a load of shit in some cases, because people learn different things at different rates, but even that's only partially hereditary, also having to do with the way one was raised.
Concerning nature vs. nurture, early environmental influences are extremely important for proper development. On the other hand, "about three-quarters of I.Q. differences between individuals are attributable to heredity." (David Kirp in the New York Times) The hard work myth is a politically correct invention of the self-esteem movement. None of these people have ever encountered or known a prodigy. Today, people labor under many delusions.
@mateo3470 Apparently you haven't read either of these books or the research behind them. IQ turns out to be a non-factor in terms of success over the long term, only in the immediate short term. There's no indication of prodigies having innate 'gifts'.
"Gladwell’s writing is a kind of populism, which seeks to undermine the ideals of talent, intelligence and analytical prowess in favor of luck, opportunity, experience and intuition. . . .Unfortunately he wildly overstates his empirical case. ...The reasoning in “Outliers,” which consists of cherry-picked anecdotes, post-hoc sophistry and false dichotomies, had me gnawing on my Kindle.“ ~Steven Pinker in NYT Book Review
Murray has data on the correlation. I should mention that the enormous amount of criticism leveled at him has come from an academic community that makes a living convincing us that they can fix stupid. Lynn and Vanhanen, after reviewing the literature, found in the United States and Britain that the correlation between IQ and earnings for individuals is approximately 0.35. Low IQ essentially precludes success. Remember that these results are true for narrow tests of intelligence.
@mateo3470 Who mentioned anything about earnings? I think we're defining success differently. IQ, in the short term effects success shortly. I've seen it time and time again teaching musicians.
I'm always weary of anyone that uses the word certainly. I don't believe in an innate ability; as in, they were born knowing how to do something as specific as playing music. There's too many other factors to consider. As a musician, I can definitely say, I have no innate ability to play multiple instruments like I do.
The complications usually have nothing to do with traditional learning, although such learning is needed to bring out talents. Stop being silly. No one has any innate ability to play a piano. It's CERTAINLY more complicated than that. Your understanding is too literal.
To clarify: can you reach the abilities of Derek Paravicini with practice? It's a simple question.
@mateo3470 So you're using a George Carlin comedic license do explain what you mean? lol Colvin doesn't say talent doesn't exist, and he doesn't say no one is 'special' or that everyone is 'special', but that any talent weighs less than hard work. Hell, Carlin is one of the best comedians, but he wasn't born with inherently funny ideas. I'm yet to be shown evidence that shows someone with exceptional ability that was preordained and where hard work or hours of study was absent.
@mateo3470 I didn't see you ask me a question. Sorry, if I missed it. Also, he stated in the comments he's using the argument 'talent doesn't exist' in terms of comedic license. But anyway, I'm not arguing about the video, i'm making a response to comments written. I don't believe you 'need to have the talent first' and that's opposite of what personal experience has shown me as well as various research unless you're saying talent = physical traits which in my definition it doesn't.
@mateo3470 I don't need to watch the video again, he wrote 'comedic license' in the comments. Maybe you should 'read' again? I'm still trying to figure out what question you're talking about lol. What question do you want me to answer? Ask it again. My definition is not self serving. I used 'my' because it's clear we don't have a meeting of the minds in terms of the definition of talent. If we can't agree on the definition, how could we agree on whether it exists? Take care!
You can find his comments from a year ago, but you can't find my question from a day ago? The video description: "Combine endless toil with dumb luck and you've got talent."
I have already indicated what was talent. It is the genetic or physical makeup of an individual that enables them to achieve certain outcomes. Brain structures are included. Research in cognitive science has completely killed the Lockean tabula rasa. Freak cases are particularly revealing.
@mateo3470 I love how worked up your getting. Take a breath. No need berate me for not finding a question you refuse to restate. Like I said, our definitions are different, thus I'll agree to disagree. Golvin's definition of talent is the same as yours, and I'm referring to his when I write.
@mateo3470 BTW, using Golvin's rationale, you could argue that one cannot reach the abilities of 'Derek Paravicini' since he is in constant deliberate practice. So no, unless I started when he did, was surrounded by the same environment and had same amount of deliberate practice, then no. However, that doesn't prove a point of talent IMO. We'll agree to disagree on this one, but mostly because we're speaking apples/oranges in terms of the definition of 'talent'.
"you could argue that one cannot reach the abilities of 'Derek Paravicini' "
The guy can remembers ever piece he has heard! He can reproduce complex classical pieces with one hearing! Obviously he has perfect and relative pitch and a whole host of other things we call musical talent. The cognitive sciences find out a great deal about normal people by studying the weird cases. It's completely relevant to differences among us.
"We found that brain architecture was under strong genetic control. White matter integrity was linked with intellectual performance, especially with performance IQ"
Genetics of Brain Fiber Architecture and Intellectual Performance. The Journal of Neuroscience, February 18, 2009 • 29(7):2212–2224
In non-AP subjects activation in the right inferior frontal cortex was present whereas AP possessors showed no such activity. This finding suggests that musicians with AP do not need access to working memory devices for such tasks.
Zatorre, R.J., Perry, D.W., Beckett, C.A., Westbury, C.F., & Evans, A.C. (1998). Functional anatomy of musical processing in listeners with absolute pitch and relative pitch. Neurobiology, 95, 3172-3177.
Of course, your position would have to deny all of the cases and research on musical disorders like Auditory Arrhythmia, Music Agnosia, Congenital Amusia, Dystonia etc...
Ayotte J, Peretz I, Hyde K (2002) Congenital Amusia: A group study of adults afflicted with a music specific disorder. Brain 125: 238-251
Neuroimaging Helps to Predict Which Dyslexics Will Learn to Read
ScienceDaily (Dec. 22, 2010) — Researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have used sophisticated brain imaging to predict with 90 percent accuracy which teenagers with dyslexia would improve their reading skills over time.
Affected children's ability to improve their reading skills varies greatly, with about one-fifth able to benefit from interventions and develop adequate reading skills by adulthood.
"If these structural differences are innate, individuals exhibiting such differences in brain anatomy might be drawn to becoming musicians and, therefore, face fewer obstacles in mastering a musical instrument because they are equipped with the necessary brain anatomy."
"A unique morphological feature is visible in the lateral surface of each hemisphere... the posterior ascending branch of the Sylvian fissure is confluent with the postcentral sulcus. Consequently, there is no parietal operculum (the anterior part of the supramarginal gyrus). ...This morphology found in each of Einstein’s hemispheres was not seen in any... specimen documented in the published collections of post-mortem brains." Witelson, Harvey
@nidaroon858 Yes, but a four year old virtuoso is just that ... a virtuoso ... they won't be a master until they get older. Anyone can train their fingers to move in a certain way, and having a good ear for music is a natural gift, but it takes years of practise to truly master a skill.
luck is made. it doesn't just float around the universe, indiscriminately crashing into people at undetermined times. except when i'm playing online poker!
There is something called DNA. Wich makes every individual unique. We are not like animals where our potential is restricted by limitations.
Working for specific goals to reach is not equally efficient for everybody. Don't try to be a footballer when you're build like a sissy girl. Its that simple.
Well if you draw a line of, oo if this person is 5 out of 10 good hes not talented. and this guy is 6 out of 10 so hes talented. don't look at it like that. people are all good at different things. why is there this category of things thats considered talent. if my friend can walk faster then me, do i say hes a talented walker? or just that hes a faster walker than me? whats the difference with music, sports etc. don't use the word talent, people are just better and worse at everything.
This video just hit me... Till now I worked a bit in designing and thought that one day I'd be good.
After I saw this video yesterday and slept a night on it I have this intense feeling of wasting my time on unimportant stuff rather than really trying to become better. I'll change that from today on.
LUCK is an opportunity that offers itself to people who actually do something.
And HARD WORK is pointless if you're doing push-ups instead of chin-ups.
Therefore TALENT = understanding the material. It's realizing what kind of work and what kind of attitude is necessary to accomplish a certain goal (weather it's in art or sports).
Herc0gs 1 week ago
ummm don't judged me but is 6hours a day since 2006 on COD make me talented?
SpringWaterMassives 3 weeks ago
Winners make their own luck.
Williamsfan 1 month ago
I don't believe in luck. I believe in opportunities. You can sit and wait for an opportunity or create your own. Just look at: Walt Disney, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates etc.
onee 2 months ago
@onee
All well and good, but if your opportunity involves other people (and most do) then conditions need to be right with those people as well, that is to say you can't do everything on your own and the chance of success becomes a more complicated equation with each new variable or person. Your cited examples are all good, but of the 5-6 billion people on the planet, there will only ever be one Walt Disney.
Luck, chance, fate. It`s all just a play on the numbers game.
AsThe3rdEye 3 weeks ago
@AsThe3rdEye Usually succes contains (at least) two persons. The person we get to know/The person with a(n) dream/idea/purpose/belief etc. For example Walt Disney, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Richard Branson etc. And the person we barely get to know/The person which looks from a realistic perspective and tries to make this dream come true. For example Roy Disney, Steve Wozniak, Paul Allen, Nik Powell etc. I don't say just two persons are enough, but usually all success stories start like that.
onee 2 weeks ago
I think it's kind of a problem today, when everyone is told that they can do everything they won't bother untill it's to late.
mesterlinkx 2 months ago
QFT!
chaos61988 2 months ago in playlist Liked
Genius = 99% perspiration + 1% Inspiration
Luck = Opportunity + Preparation
Also everyone is not talented in one way or another. It might sound good in some "Kumbaya we are all precious snow flakes" kind of way to say that, but nature is not so huggy feely
CCRider100 3 months ago 2
@CCRider100 Everyone is talented in one way or another. Just as certain people have physiological tendencies to gain weight, get cancer, be flexible, strong, etc. We have psychological and personality tendencies. These tendencies combined in a positive way = talent in my eyes.
quitejaded 2 months ago
@quitejaded
Physiological tendencies are not controlled. They can be improved, but there is no "cure". The strength of the tendency dictates the effort required to control it, stronger tendencies mean more effort, which leaves less time for inspiration and development of talent.
Saying that a certain combination of inborn tendencies can result in talent is the same as saying "Someone in X group will eventually be talented in Y", which is just a law of averages.
AsThe3rdEye 3 weeks ago
song at the end?
1990EAM 3 months ago in playlist boludeces
Everyone is talented in a way or another.
jodelleferlandfan1 3 months ago
you Are hurting peoples feelings that they are nt Talented all of us is talented i so many ways you Call that Luck i dont think so . Everyone practice for that many Hours everyone has lots of skill and Sharpining ttheir Skills so that can be talented and be Really great at what they do
Levi29ful 3 months ago
Some people are born with talent or develop it in early childhood. Some develop it through rigorous practice consisting of approximately 10.000 hours. Then there are those who become talented accidentally through mental injuries or the likes :D see "My brilliant mind" series if you're curious :D
DmitriSochlioukov 3 months ago
oh lol, I have that outliers book right beside me.
drunkenlight 3 months ago
this guy is stupid, so what hes trying to say is that only a few people are talented, when in fact everybody is talented, sure if im talented in baseball then i still might not be more talented than an mlb player, but that doesnt mean im not talented.
freakman707 4 months ago
This makes perfect sense to me. I always believed that anybody can be talented. I think luck simply makes you successful in that talent, but I believe that you must have the DESIRE to work. Does your passion for (insert passion here) consume you?
Musicmonk84 4 months ago
hmmm, in some way, I believe that we make our own luck.
CodeMinister 4 months ago
Yoo Whats The Song That Plays For The 1st Two Seconds?
jyoungswag 4 months ago
you are as depressing as woody allen but with out style. if you are an unsuccessful filmaker, blame yourself.
eldolorcosmico 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need religion, hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important, qualitative differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption.
Homosexual activists, with complete support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims and martyrs; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's true that talent isn't the most important thing and it doesn't guarantee your success or failure in anything. But to say talent doesn't exist is a really absurd claim. Some skills come more naturally for certain people. We all see that on a daily basis. I won't claim that it's because of god or even that we're born with it. But whatever it is, there is something at play besides how much effort we put in and that's what talent is.
pendla10 4 months ago
It's true that talent isn't the most important thing and it doesn't guarantee your success or failure in anything. But to say talent doesn't exist is a really absurd claim. Some skills come more naturally for certain people. We all see that on a daily basis. I won't claim that it's because of god or even that we're born with it. But whatever it is, there is something at play besides how much effort we put in and that's what talent is.
pendla10 4 months ago
@pendla10 what if you were born good at football and never practise and your mate is born shit at football but could put in 14 hours a week of training till hes better than you. if hes now better at football doesnt that make him more talented than the person who was originally talented?? (sorry if that doesnt make sense)
blivionzzMusic 4 months ago
@blivionzzMusic You're using the terms "talent" and "skill" as if they were synonymous and they're not. If a guy's naturally good at football, he is talented at football. Whether he chooses to foster his talents does not change the fact that he's talented. A talented person can be unskilled if he doesn't practice, and an untalented person can be very skilled, if he works hard.
pendla10 4 months ago
@pendla10 ok that makes sense thanks :D
blivionzzMusic 4 months ago
practice does make perfect haha..
csccdog 4 months ago
I'M BEING AN ASSHOLE
libertys69 4 months ago
You can be blessed with the ability or potential to be a genius at something… If you don't spend shitloads of time, like 10,000 hours doing it, the talent just goes to waste.
For instance, the most naturally talented athlete who never works probably has less of a chance of going pro than the vaguely less talented who works twice as hard.
The opposite can also be true… If you're tone deaf, no matter how much you work you can NEVER be an adequate musician.
Redsox07rbeast 4 months ago
@Redsox07rbeast You mean kinda like how Beethoven was deaf...?
adamjohnson9870 3 months ago
@adamjohnson9870 He was deaf by the end of his life… He had perfect pitch, meaning even after he went deaf he could hear every part in his head and only needed a pencil to write down a masterpiece because by that time, he almost never made mistakes..
Either way though, no… To be tone deaf means you can't discern between two different pitches, not that you're actually deaf. it's veery different.
Redsox07rbeast 3 months ago
What a fat lier.... Of course there are things as talent.... what a noob
cheapsheep4sale 4 months ago
I think I've heard this before...."Practice makes perfect"
68LedZeppelin80 4 months ago
get this guy a job
showcase0525 4 months ago
luck fuck
CariagaXIII 4 months ago
dammit... i had everything but the right kind of facial hair...
TheOfficialWoover 4 months ago 24
defiantly defiantly very true words,,,
big thump for you
bahjt 4 months ago
This is something I think a lot of people don't think about in everyday situations. Glad to see a video done on it.
cattabrie38 4 months ago
I make my own luck...
Laboring
Under
Correct
Knowledge
jordanjiz 5 months ago 2
Do me a favor would ya Kirby, warn a guy when you're going to drop the f-bomb so he doesn't watch the video when his kids are around.
sacoimultimedia 5 months ago
Thanks for the perfect example and confirmation of the truth.
BowenDesignWorks 7 months ago
Not to be a smarmy know-it-all douche, but I think you should re-read Outliers:
His whole point with Outliers was not just the 10,000 hours but that the people in the book who were able to get to the 10,000 hours were able to do it BECAUSE of luck. The Beatles playing 15 hrs a day onstage in Hamburg is just weird, and a totally rare opportunity in the music biz. Bill Gates spending 10,000 hours with a Computer by the time he was 17, in 1970, is INSANELY lucky.
In sum, you agree with Gladwell.
wesscoast 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@trumpetplayer231 You're a pretty huge faggot man, blaming your confessionals on your parents and being a afraid to own up to your own lifestyle choices; that's shameful in the gay community, and if your parents did write that "for no apparent reason", I guess it says a lot about what type of parents you have. Your language exemplifies how they raised you.
warewareno 7 months ago
I think you need to be more specific about how the circumstances of luck prevent you from finding your path in life. The opportunities are out there and it takes yet again work to find them. Luck is always a factor but its hardly a big one provided that you do enough work. So what is there to do other than work towards your dreams? Just sit about waiting to die because luck is a factor and you never know... you might get cancer? So what! I'll die trying thank you very much. lol
Dolphidood 8 months ago
im a fag
trumpetplayer231 10 months ago
@trumpetplayer231 Haha~!! Fag!
warewareno 7 months ago
@warewareno you are a pretty huge dumbass man. i did not send that you fucker. I guess my parents did for no apparent reason. So keep your smart ass comments to yourself bitch.
trumpetplayer231 7 months ago
That was great :-)) Thank you!!
leher000 10 months ago
Wonderful video, I just finished a book by Geoff Colvin and I do agree with a lot of his points, however I do think the right circumstances , timing, parents and luck are very important as well! Could be that I am just sad for being born to very very unsupportive parents!
MargaritaShamrakov 10 months ago
well i think i logged in over 10,000 hours of procrastinating. i think i'm screwed.
LucentTwinkle 11 months ago 60
@LucentTwinkle That's why we're geniuses at it ;)
Dolphidood 8 months ago
@LucentTwinkle Too bad they don't have use of us, professional procrastinators. We're just too underrated.
DivinePonies 6 months ago
@LucentTwinkle That means you are a world class procrastinator. LOL!!! :P
onee 2 months ago
Luck, "fuck." LOL! 1:18
Zenome 11 months ago
There is nothing better that a good video ruined by someones inability to express themself without profanity, thinking that by using it they somehow more enlightened.
BowenDesignWorks 1 year ago
@BowenDesignWorks There's nothing worse than comments saying that a brilliant video is "ruined" by the use of one or two certain words.
They're just words. Get over it.
artvandelay13 11 months ago
@BowenDesignWorks I think many people mistakenly believe they will appear more genuine to "everyday people" by using profanity.
ambro24 11 months ago
@BowenDesignWorks Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck!
element1988 7 months ago
A Lesson In Cognitive Dissonance
watch?v=korGK0yGIDo
mateo3470 1 year ago
Oh shoot I'm too tired after 9999 hours and 59 minutes
BlateroStulidum 1 year ago
it is of course not completely true. Because a lot of talented people, enjoy these hours so much that they accomplish a lot more and faster, than 10 years.
vanderhorstmusic 1 year ago
@vanderhorstmusic Actually it turns out that this isn't true. 10 years is the average that 'prodigies' or people we equate to be the most 'talented' took to acquire such 'talent'. There's no indication of a fast track, only working more hours faster.
cerupcat 1 year ago
God gave everyone talent, some 1, some 3 and some 100. it for you to use what you have and multiply it. read the parable of the talents (Bible)
stewarthewitson 1 year ago 2
@stewarthewitson You're A holy FAG
statixboi 1 year ago
@stewarthewitson I would love to see the science behind that one.
KingHenryXI 10 months ago
i got pocked
amtheriver 1 year ago
Talent is 3 hours a day for 10 years, yeah right..
Mozart composed his first symphony at the age of four, his first concerto at the age of 7 and a full scale opera at the age of 12.. minus 2 years being a baby..
Stupid sarcastic ignorant joke..
mavrickiii 1 year ago
@mavrickiii true, and they may not have even been very good. For instance, Micheal Angelo wasn't popular until around age 13; by then, he may have gained a large amount experience as an artist to be recognized, but he was nowhere as good as his older self. So, either his talent increased or his skill increased because of hard work and dedication.
InternetLawman 1 year ago
@mavrickiii About the Mozart myth. He didn't start on his masterpieces until he was in his mid twenties and the earlier pieces, the pieces that everyone and you speak of were heavily influenced, modified, helped, and edited by his father who was a master composer himself. And the 3 hours thing could be changed; if your full time job is what you are working on becoming a master at then you are putting in at least 8 hours a day. 40 hours times 52 is 2080. less than 5yrs to be at genius level.
oyaboy1978 1 year ago
Luck....FUCK
pmccallig18 1 year ago
lmao nice video!! so true :)
Demolasha 1 year ago
I say talent is an incalculable blend of mentors, friends/networks, a genuine interest that cannot possibly be taught, the time and financial ability to invest in things, our disposition, our brain chemistry, the environment we grew up in, our self-confidence, inspiration, and yes--a bit of discipline has got to be in there somewhere.
PinkAndGreenTogether 1 year ago
Comment removed
lordinfamous15234 1 year ago
The suggestion that talent does not exist is a falacious argument because it suggests that achievement is entirely dependent on skill. Arguably the ability to stick at 10,000 hours practise could be perceived as a motivational talent - something has to initiate and develop that skill and that is where apptitudes - or talents - come in. (IMO)
Uberloinvongenchler 1 year ago
i liked reading outliers, i thought it was funny because i found that book in the self help section, makes no sense, totally the opposite of help
HeadbangingGlory 1 year ago
This is true, just look at Youtube... there's tons of people on here that are very talented, and have many videos... yet they don't get as much attention as others, (people that really only made a handful of videos as good as what others make continuously.)
Kinda sad, and irritating.
MestizoFilipino 1 year ago
look like you are determinist
0101040848rfcpr 1 year ago
great !!!! ...(outliers was really good too i thought)
joran420 1 year ago
if we went to school for 6 hours a day for 12-20 years we should all be geniuses?!
TheNicholasflamel 1 year ago
school covers a broad range of subjects, it would be like learning piano, guitar, bass, drums (example). but if we pick one of those subjects (or instruments or anything) and do a 10,000 hour theory then we would be virtuosos at it. And also, think about a graduate standing next to someone who never went to school, they'd be a genius standing next to them
Rhaabjorn 1 year ago
@Rhaabjorn that's my point when we do a university degree we should spend more than 10 000 hours on 1 subject and with the previous years of schooling in which you would be driven to studying your favourite subjects and logging those hours. And your point about a graduate being smarter than a non-schooled person I think that the natural intelligence of someone will shine more than just a bunch of artificial grades which don't have any real value in the real world will not make a non-schooled guy
TheNicholasflamel 1 year ago
@TheNicholasflamel dumb or to a schooled guy a genius
TheNicholasflamel 1 year ago
@TheNicholasflamel rofl
uk318 1 year ago
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity, : )
jmorello123 2 years ago 35
@jmorello123 totally agree
sabrinabb1211 1 year ago
@jmorello123 let's say random ;)
musicjunk1000 8 months ago
@jmorello123 and opportunity is something that you have to keep watching or it just pass away. We always given a LOT of opportunities on our daily life, but most time we either not interested / not prepared / not dare enough / not fit with our current vision / make mistakes on engaging them and so on. So well, there is no luck excuse.
rozedragon 4 months ago
@jmorello123 Opportunity is another word for luck so you are just playing semantics.
PktMma 4 months ago
@PktMma haha, good call
xxxlife187xxx 4 months ago
@jmorello123 cliche is what happens when bumper sticker wisdom meets ignorance
dirtmerchant1980 4 months ago
luck is not what it seems, it comes like radio waves my friend
Outboundz 2 years ago
The aspect of this discussion that everyone seems to miss is that a person cannot "practice" something for thousands of hours if it is not something that REALLY connects with you....drives you....intrigues you. Your personality has to be "wired" for it....so, in a way....the hand of God still plays a big part in the equation. Also, what was the point of this video? I'm not sure what Kirby was trying to say...I guess all the sarcasm got in the way of his point.
ryanswain 2 years ago
I like it. Thanks for the video, three cheers for spreading the message. And I hear people bitching that it might not be '10,000' hours, but the point is its practice, and when you are 4,000 hours into the 10,000 - you will be verging on relatively adept at it compared to all the people sitting on their hands anyway.
Viva la mental and physical revolution - we are all divine and connected creatures, so lets work on ourselves and enjoy the journey.
BravoCharlieComAU 2 years ago
so in conclusion: lets do OUR BEST in our given lifetime,
for ourselves, & to make the world a better place!
nikiwonoto 2 years ago
Its useless (& waste of time) to think about luck,
Living your life is all really about doing the BEST you can do, during your lifetime, despite all your circumstances!
The world is, fortunately, full of great, inspirative stories of those who are in positions of bad, bad luck, yet can also arise & do something GOOD/positive creating changes in this world! (even from the handicapped, crippled, blind persons!).
nikiwonoto 2 years ago
very interesting thought/post!
I also have to agree that sometimes, its humans nature to wanting to feel that theyve known the secret to success, and thus, ascribe to many different factors (& hence, theories & books!) , while in Reality,
we are really just a comparably weak-and-still-evolving creature in this blue planet in this unexplainably vast, mysterious universe.
nikiwonoto 2 years ago
The key word here is "Aptitude". 10,000 hours practice does not confer genius on anyone if they are not already in possession of either physical or mental aptitude for the task in hand. For example, you could play the 'cello for ten years with so-called "deep" practice and you might end up competent, but not neccessarily a world class virtuoso. What matters is not how brilliant you are but what you GAIN from the experience in ways that cannot be reduced to banal statements about ambition.
fingerhorn4 2 years ago
I love when Singers or athletes win something and thank god for giving them the talent and destiny to do soo. It sends such a bullshit message to all our children yet these celebs are never chastised for that.
BruiserDrop 2 years ago
i REALLY liked this vid!!
swissdedicated 2 years ago
Me Too!
BrokenAero1 2 years ago
Good for you for exposing this you-too-can-be-a-genius crap that sells millions of shitty books like the abysmal Talent Code. Countless athletes and musicians put in their 10,000 hours and never become anything more than really skilled, which is not the same thing as genius or greatness. BTW, the 10,000 hours myth is something that someone pulled out of their ass. No studies back it and there's nothing to prove it. It's an arbitrary number that helps sell shitty books. like The Talent Code.
BrokenAero1 2 years ago
It's also crap comments like yours that ruin what this video is teaching. To say that the 10,000 hour rule was pulled out of an ass is ridiculous! Have you ever read Outliers? Take the time, Malcolm Gladwell backs everything he says with tests or studies. I'm pretty sure Kirby got that luck part completely from Gladwell.
MapleIt 2 years ago
I've read Outlliers and Talent Code which also brings up the 10,000 hour "rule".
The 10,000 hour "rule" is based on a single study by 1 psychologist in 1 situation.Even Gladwell admits that 10,000 is an arbitrary number. This doesn't make it a rule. If you want to believe everything you read and be a good little unquestioning consumer, thats your business. BTW, Gladwell is a journalist, not a scientist or psychologist. He creates spin to sell books, nothing more. ..
BrokenAero1 2 years ago
Yes, we are scared of that SHITLOAD of hard work... Dare poke me God, and I'll BRAKE YOUR ARM OFF!!!
FTW
TheRAMisking 2 years ago
Well Played Sir.
Luck....Fuck....LOL
Epic win
TheSantangeloo 2 years ago
luck....fuck. LOL
Ecite 2 years ago
lol your a funny dude kirby
erdnaxela261189 2 years ago
Poke-ees LOL that was funny
egdapo 2 years ago
i'm polish, there goes my luck
SwietnyLew 2 years ago 2
Lol i love your vids and the little sketchy people that you make :D
kaikahitonari 2 years ago
omg i just got a boner
shadus125 2 years ago
(continuation to below)
It's just that some people when they're young catch the MAIN part later, so their singing doesn't sound that great at first. I suppose if "talent" is being able to do something decently on the first few tries, that's true. But talent on the larger scale, being able to be a true professional and do well, you need 10,000 hours to get every single component right. The "non-talented" at first, begin to learn faster and improve in performance... Hopefully that clarifies...
sas911 2 years ago
Yah.. Okay since it wasn't that specific in the video a quick explanation... Everyone says that oh, some kids for instance are great singers, but haven't put in 10,000 hours, so this is bs. No... To become a true-fledged professional you still need 10,000 hours. It's just some people catch the MAIN part (like hitting the right notes in a song), while other people know how to sing with emotion first. But with 10,000, u get everything, the notes AND emotion.
sas911 2 years ago
just as everyone differs physically everyones' attributes differ.
whether or not one finds the activity which best suits their abillities is where luck could play a role.
blackcatsmith 2 years ago
Of course theirs also the little kids who are genius's
I dont remember but their was a little kid awhile back that was probably 8 and creating masterpiece paintings
He didn't practice 10,000 hours it came naturally in the form of talent
WiseJ123 2 years ago
I have to agree.
bottom-line is: this world is too vast (with multitudes of factors) to be predictable!
nikiwonoto 2 years ago
hahaha. I like your facial hair. would be lucky for me ;)
dolafbrown 2 years ago
isn't luck the hand of God?? Besides there are shit load of people who are hard workers but amount to zero talent... I for example consider myself a very good illustrator, damn right I did close 10,000 hours but not because it's hard work but because it came SO easy to me so I kept at it cause I knew that some day it would feed me. I could have worked hard at being an architect like my dad but that meant hard work, my point is Talent = lazy because its what came natural...
clanghead 2 years ago 2
bullshit intelligence is more than 90% hereditary and less than 10% environmental...hard work brings success not intelligence...talent does not come solely from hard work a 4 year old virtuoso pianist didnt acquire the musical talent from years of hardwork but from a gift that created motivation passion and ultimatley further nurture and growth of that talent
nidaroon858 2 years ago 3
if your born with aids you cant do lots of thing, and if you want to be the presedent and you weren't born in the US your fucked
22971002644918 2 years ago
@nidaroon858
Hey, fuck you. If intelligence were more than 90% hereditary, then my parents would be a lot fucking smarter, lol. Hard work doesn't guarantee success, it justs wastes time you could be putting fourth to learn how to do something else. Granted the 10,000 hours thing is a load of shit in some cases, because people learn different things at different rates, but even that's only partially hereditary, also having to do with the way one was raised.
mussman717word 1 year ago
@nidaroon858 true but with a four year old the parents playsa big role!
without supporting parents the four year old wouldn't develope his talents so that's a big point to!
CrabY42 1 year ago
@nidaroon858
Concerning nature vs. nurture, early environmental influences are extremely important for proper development. On the other hand, "about three-quarters of I.Q. differences between individuals are attributable to heredity." (David Kirp in the New York Times) The hard work myth is a politically correct invention of the self-esteem movement. None of these people have ever encountered or known a prodigy. Today, people labor under many delusions.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 Apparently you haven't read either of these books or the research behind them. IQ turns out to be a non-factor in terms of success over the long term, only in the immediate short term. There's no indication of prodigies having innate 'gifts'.
cerupcat 1 year ago
@cerupcat
"Gladwell’s writing is a kind of populism, which seeks to undermine the ideals of talent, intelligence and analytical prowess in favor of luck, opportunity, experience and intuition. . . .Unfortunately he wildly overstates his empirical case. ...The reasoning in “Outliers,” which consists of cherry-picked anecdotes, post-hoc sophistry and false dichotomies, had me gnawing on my Kindle.“ ~Steven Pinker in NYT Book Review
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Murray has data on the correlation. I should mention that the enormous amount of criticism leveled at him has come from an academic community that makes a living convincing us that they can fix stupid. Lynn and Vanhanen, after reviewing the literature, found in the United States and Britain that the correlation between IQ and earnings for individuals is approximately 0.35. Low IQ essentially precludes success. Remember that these results are true for narrow tests of intelligence.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 Who mentioned anything about earnings? I think we're defining success differently. IQ, in the short term effects success shortly. I've seen it time and time again teaching musicians.
cerupcat 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Who WOULDN'T mention earnings? Some subjective definition that is never given allows one for self-serving ones.
Your intelligence level stays the same through life.
Musical talent seems to be less correlated with IQ, but still certainly innate:
watch?v=1kwjDLHX92w
mateo3470 1 year ago
I'm always weary of anyone that uses the word certainly. I don't believe in an innate ability; as in, they were born knowing how to do something as specific as playing music. There's too many other factors to consider. As a musician, I can definitely say, I have no innate ability to play multiple instruments like I do.
cerupcat 1 year ago
Comment removed
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
"There's too many other factors to consider."
The complications usually have nothing to do with traditional learning, although such learning is needed to bring out talents. Stop being silly. No one has any innate ability to play a piano. It's CERTAINLY more complicated than that. Your understanding is too literal.
To clarify: can you reach the abilities of Derek Paravicini with practice? It's a simple question.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
watch?v=ALf2HZsGtGQ
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 So you're using a George Carlin comedic license do explain what you mean? lol Colvin doesn't say talent doesn't exist, and he doesn't say no one is 'special' or that everyone is 'special', but that any talent weighs less than hard work. Hell, Carlin is one of the best comedians, but he wasn't born with inherently funny ideas. I'm yet to be shown evidence that shows someone with exceptional ability that was preordained and where hard work or hours of study was absent.
cerupcat 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Of course, you refused to answer my simply question.
I will remind you that the existence of a different argument is not a response to the main point of this video, which denies talent.
"any talent weighs less than hard work."
You need to have the talent first. That is the point. Geeze!
"Carlin is one of the best comedians, but he wasn't born with inherently funny ideas"
Stop restating what I just said and be careful about who you speak for:
watch?v=XxhjoV1ep6Q
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 I didn't see you ask me a question. Sorry, if I missed it. Also, he stated in the comments he's using the argument 'talent doesn't exist' in terms of comedic license. But anyway, I'm not arguing about the video, i'm making a response to comments written. I don't believe you 'need to have the talent first' and that's opposite of what personal experience has shown me as well as various research unless you're saying talent = physical traits which in my definition it doesn't.
cerupcat 1 year ago
@cerupcat
You don't want to answer the question because it compromises your whole belief system.
"comedic license"
I suggest you watch the video again.
"unless you're saying talent = physical traits"
Brain structures are physical traits.
"my definition"
You mean a self-serving one?
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 I don't need to watch the video again, he wrote 'comedic license' in the comments. Maybe you should 'read' again? I'm still trying to figure out what question you're talking about lol. What question do you want me to answer? Ask it again. My definition is not self serving. I used 'my' because it's clear we don't have a meeting of the minds in terms of the definition of talent. If we can't agree on the definition, how could we agree on whether it exists? Take care!
cerupcat 1 year ago
@cerupcat
You can find his comments from a year ago, but you can't find my question from a day ago? The video description: "Combine endless toil with dumb luck and you've got talent."
I have already indicated what was talent. It is the genetic or physical makeup of an individual that enables them to achieve certain outcomes. Brain structures are included. Research in cognitive science has completely killed the Lockean tabula rasa. Freak cases are particularly revealing.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 I love how worked up your getting. Take a breath. No need berate me for not finding a question you refuse to restate. Like I said, our definitions are different, thus I'll agree to disagree. Golvin's definition of talent is the same as yours, and I'm referring to his when I write.
cerupcat 1 year ago
@mateo3470 BTW, using Golvin's rationale, you could argue that one cannot reach the abilities of 'Derek Paravicini' since he is in constant deliberate practice. So no, unless I started when he did, was surrounded by the same environment and had same amount of deliberate practice, then no. However, that doesn't prove a point of talent IMO. We'll agree to disagree on this one, but mostly because we're speaking apples/oranges in terms of the definition of 'talent'.
cerupcat 1 year ago
@cerupcat
"you could argue that one cannot reach the abilities of 'Derek Paravicini' "
The guy can remembers ever piece he has heard! He can reproduce complex classical pieces with one hearing! Obviously he has perfect and relative pitch and a whole host of other things we call musical talent. The cognitive sciences find out a great deal about normal people by studying the weird cases. It's completely relevant to differences among us.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470
Take a look at this in the New York Times:
Effort to Restore Children’s Play Gains Momentum
By Hilary Stout
watch?v=h6wOt2iXdc4
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470
"We found that brain architecture was under strong genetic control. White matter integrity was linked with intellectual performance, especially with performance IQ"
Genetics of Brain Fiber Architecture and Intellectual Performance. The Journal of Neuroscience, February 18, 2009 • 29(7):2212–2224
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
See: Scans Show Different Growth for Intelligent Brains
By Nicholas Wade (NYT)
Two Genes Influence Social Behavior, Visual-Spatial Performance In People With Williams Syndrome
ScienceDaily (Feb. 13, 2009)
Gaser, C., & Schlaug, G.(2003). Brain structures differ between musicians and non-musicians. The Journal of Neuroscience, 23(27), 9240-9245.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Lefthanded and ambidextrous people perform better than righthanders on short term memory for the pitch.
Deutsch, D. (1978). "Pitch memory: An advantage for the lefthanded.". Science 199: 559-560.
Deutsch, D. (1980). "Handedness and Memory for Tonal Pitch. In J. Herron (Ed.)". Neuropsychology of Lefthandedness: 263-271.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Check out the Octave and Scale illusion.
Deutsch, D. (1974). "An auditory illusion". Nature 251: 307-309.
Deutsch, D. (1983). "The octave illusion in relation to handedness and familial handedness background.". Neuropsychologia 21: 289-293.
Deutsch, D. (1975). "Two-channel listening to musical scales". Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 57: 1156-1160.
Deutsch, D. (1999). "Grouping mechanisms in music. In D. Deutsch (Ed.)". The psychology of music, 2nd Edition: 299-348.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
In non-AP subjects activation in the right inferior frontal cortex was present whereas AP possessors showed no such activity. This finding suggests that musicians with AP do not need access to working memory devices for such tasks.
Zatorre, R.J., Perry, D.W., Beckett, C.A., Westbury, C.F., & Evans, A.C. (1998). Functional anatomy of musical processing in listeners with absolute pitch and relative pitch. Neurobiology, 95, 3172-3177.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Of course, your position would have to deny all of the cases and research on musical disorders like Auditory Arrhythmia, Music Agnosia, Congenital Amusia, Dystonia etc...
Ayotte J, Peretz I, Hyde K (2002) Congenital Amusia: A group study of adults afflicted with a music specific disorder. Brain 125: 238-251
Oliver Sacks - Musicophilia - Amusia
watch?v=tPRW0wZ9NOM
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Neuroimaging Helps to Predict Which Dyslexics Will Learn to Read
ScienceDaily (Dec. 22, 2010) — Researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have used sophisticated brain imaging to predict with 90 percent accuracy which teenagers with dyslexia would improve their reading skills over time.
Affected children's ability to improve their reading skills varies greatly, with about one-fifth able to benefit from interventions and develop adequate reading skills by adulthood.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
"If these structural differences are innate, individuals exhibiting such differences in brain anatomy might be drawn to becoming musicians and, therefore, face fewer obstacles in mastering a musical instrument because they are equipped with the necessary brain anatomy."
Schlaug and Gaser
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Some rebuttals to Howe and gang:
The Rage to Master: The Decisive Role of Talent in the Visual Arts
By Ellen Winner1 and Jennifer E. Drak2 (1 Boston College 2 Harvard Project Zero)
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
Einstein mostly had no Sylvian Fissure:
"A unique morphological feature is visible in the lateral surface of each hemisphere... the posterior ascending branch of the Sylvian fissure is confluent with the postcentral sulcus. Consequently, there is no parietal operculum (the anterior part of the supramarginal gyrus). ...This morphology found in each of Einstein’s hemispheres was not seen in any... specimen documented in the published collections of post-mortem brains." Witelson, Harvey
mateo3470 1 year ago
@cerupcat
And don't let me forget Esref Armagan:
watch?v=8QUOy83po60
It's pretty hard to explaining this away.
mateo3470 1 year ago
@mateo3470 I don't understand the correlation between the amount someone earns and how exceptional they are at something.
cerupcat 1 year ago
@nidaroon858 Yes, but a four year old virtuoso is just that ... a virtuoso ... they won't be a master until they get older. Anyone can train their fingers to move in a certain way, and having a good ear for music is a natural gift, but it takes years of practise to truly master a skill.
puffingpod 1 year ago
luck is made. it doesn't just float around the universe, indiscriminately crashing into people at undetermined times. except when i'm playing online poker!
peacefulb0 2 years ago
Question??? What does god have to do with anything
56sarge 2 years ago
That is the real truth, although god gives us the passion for choosing in what we´ll work those hours :)
777MeanMachine777 2 years ago
naturals do exist, this is bullshit
1080portal 2 years ago
So, I'm not talented because God fisted my mother when she was pregnant? Huh. That's just a coincidence, then.
avatarmn 2 years ago
You Make a good point. Lets face it - you need some basics but then you have to develop them through hard work and long hours.
WOFFICE 2 years ago
There is something called DNA. Wich makes every individual unique. We are not like animals where our potential is restricted by limitations.
Working for specific goals to reach is not equally efficient for everybody. Don't try to be a footballer when you're build like a sissy girl. Its that simple.
PullTheTricker 2 years ago 2
Yeah... and You forgot about good teachers, regularity of work, attitude. Its not luck, but also determination... and this is main factor.
janxbmxrace 2 years ago
Yes determination, dedication and especially interest wich drives both those :)
PullTheTricker 2 years ago
what talent dont exists? that sounds,,,, wierd and untrue :/
drakgrotta 2 years ago
Cute.... and ill admit Talent Is Overrated was just Grim about the whole subject and the luck bit really was a relief.
I prefer The Talent Code, Outliers, and The Art of Learning(not directly on the subject but it can be applied).
Bored0ne 2 years ago 2
Well if you draw a line of, oo if this person is 5 out of 10 good hes not talented. and this guy is 6 out of 10 so hes talented. don't look at it like that. people are all good at different things. why is there this category of things thats considered talent. if my friend can walk faster then me, do i say hes a talented walker? or just that hes a faster walker than me? whats the difference with music, sports etc. don't use the word talent, people are just better and worse at everything.
JonnyWedel 2 years ago 3
And being talented, such as really smart helps too
Stban11 2 years ago
hardwork beats talent
slavman4000 2 years ago
This video just hit me... Till now I worked a bit in designing and thought that one day I'd be good.
After I saw this video yesterday and slept a night on it I have this intense feeling of wasting my time on unimportant stuff rather than really trying to become better. I'll change that from today on.
Thank you. Maybe you changed my life. Honestly.
yelloweye08 2 years ago
I'm seriously happy for you even though I don't know you, best of luck
AwwSnap13 2 years ago
I like it! THX
TheRealThilo 2 years ago
Your great man.
ndiggy76 2 years ago