Athletes, mathletes, musicians, and scientists. No matter how different they may appear on the outside, they all share one common goal: to become better.
We all know that in order to be successful, we have to put in hard work and dedication to get the results we want. This is why day after day, we push ourselves to run extra miles, put in more practice hours, and study harder. We’re always told that if we work harder and are more dedicated than others, then we will also become more successful. But what if this isn’t true?
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2ZiRZrYo5tA/maxresdefault.jpg)
In the video “Talent vs. Training” by AsapScience, an interesting question is taken up; “which is more important - genetics or hard work?” To test this question, scientists recruited a group of individuals who had never been previously athletically trained, and had all of the participants follow the same exercise plan. At the end of the experiment, individuals all improved in varying amounts. However, scientists found that those who were blood-related shared similar improvement results. This led the researchers to conclude that genetics do indeed play a large role in determining how much potential you have. They determined that the participants who had high responses to the exercise program had a particular set of genes which enabled them to experience rapid improvements. They also found that another set of genes are responsible for establishing a person’s baseline endurance level, and although the person may not have had any prior experience, he or she could naturally have a higher pain tolerance. Therefore, it could be possible for someone to excel in an area simply because they have the right genetics to do so. 
(http://sportsscientists.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/featured_talent_vs_training.png)
(http://sportsscientists.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/featured_talent_vs_training.png)
Another article,” Can 10,000 hours of practice make you an expert?”, by BBC news shows a contrasting viewpoint. A group of psychologists studied the practice patterns of violinists from childhood into adulthood. They all began around the same age, and originally practiced for about the same amount of time each day. Psychologists did not observe any naturally talented players until around when players reached the age of 20. By that time, the practice times of the individuals had begun to differ greatly, and the top players were those who had accumulated an average of about 10,000 hours of practice, while the less able players had played for under 4,000 hours. It was then concluded that "many characteristics once believed to reflect innate talent are actually the result of intense practice extended for a minimum of 10 years". However, it should be noted that 10,000 hours is not an exact number, and the quality of the practice should be taken into account as well. Some others also believe that “In the sporting world innate ability is mandatory”, and it may be different than from practicing musical instruments. Although this may be a popular opinion, I believe that innate ability or talent is not mandatory in order to become successful, no matter what you’re doing.
During cross country practices after school, our coach always tells us inspirational stories and teaches us important life lessons. One of the most important lessons he has taught us is to never congratulate someone for being “talented.” While genetics may indeed play a role in determining your athletic potential, it is certainly not the key factor. For example, when someone finishes a 5K race with a time of 17 minutes, it’s definitely not just their “talent” that allowed them to achieve that. Successful people have all gotten to where they are now because of the hours and hours of hard work and dedication they put in, not because they were just lucky to have been born with great genetics. After all, “hard work beats talent when talent doesn’t work hard!”
I agree with this article and believe that the best scientists, mathematicians, and other scholars have a mix of raw talent and hard work. However, I believe that people who do not put in effort but have talent will not be successful in the field that they choose. When a person who has talent but does not put in effort is compared to an average person who is hard working, then I believe that the hard working person will be the person who make the most amount of accomplishments.
ReplyDeleteI find this article very intriguing. While it is true that it requires a person's own effort and dedication to excel in that they do, it is interesting to see that genetics play a fair part in determining the amount of potential you have in a certain area.
ReplyDeleteI find that this blog post, which provides two viewpoints, is very interesting. While one side values talent, or genes, over hard work in terms of future success, the other believes the opposite: that without hard work these genes are useless, and that hard work ultimately amounts to success. For myself, I am in stronger support of the second argument- after all, just because an individual is born without possession of certain beneficial genes does that mean they will not rise above others as a result of hard work.
ReplyDeleteI believe that simply because of the fact that someone does not possess the talented genes, it doesn't mean that they will not be successful. Because they don't possess the innate ability they must work even harder than someone who is naturally talented. This will teach them important principles such as determination and persistence, which will contribute to their success not only in the ability in question but to overcoming any obstacles they face in life, regardless of the subject matter.
ReplyDeleteI found this blog very fascinating as it consider both viewpoints of a often discussed topic. I always believed that certain athletes were better than other athletes completely base off their hard work, but it is interesting to now know that genes play a role on how well a athlete may perform. Also I now realized that certain sports players may be considered injury prone due to their genes, not always based off how they play a sport.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that this article points the fact that some people are just naturally better at things then others. In society the general philosophy is " If I work harder then I will get better". While this is true in some ways it is not completely accurate. We believe that everyone has the same potential and the only difference is how hard we work. A good example is a good swimmer versus a bad swimmer. The bad swimmer tries twice as hard but is not as good because he is not as talented. The good swimmer is talented and thus not needing that much effort. That is why it is important to pursue what you are good at.
ReplyDeleteThis post was really interesting! I never really considered how talent and training affected human performance in aspects of science. I agree that putting effort into work will definitely pay off more than talent will - talent will never pay off if it is not nurtured and allowed to grow into fruition. Great job!
ReplyDeleteThis blog was definitely very interesting in the sense that I had never actually thought about this myself. My parents always told me that if people put in enough work (oven if they aren't the smartest in the bunch) they can definitely end up becoming one of the smartest if not the smartest. I always took this statement for granted and I also thought that people who were naturally better at something stayed better at it than those who consistently try too hard. As Eric explains, we all have the same potential, however, we do not have the same rate of work and the amount of work people have to put in to master something is definitely different than another person's work ethic.
ReplyDeleteIt really interesting how our genes and blood type play a role in our performance, and how well we improve. It also fascinating that similar blood types resulted similar improvement in skills.
ReplyDeleteThis post was very interesting! Its's something that I think about often- I wondered whether people can be naturally good at something or if it requires hard work and persistence. I wonder if it works the other way, like if people can have a tendency to not be good at something due to genetics.
ReplyDeleteThis post is very thought provoking. The term hard work isn't used sparingly. The number one answer people give to how to succeed is hard work but that doesn't necessarily mean they work hard. The idea of hard work vs. talent is used so nonchalantly that people tend to not realize the magnitude of "hard work." Hard work isn't just working hard its investing yourself no matter the circumstance to achieve the goal. Genes do play a role but ,ultimately, as the article argues, talent cannot beat hard work if it doesn't work at all. Its great that science can actually prove genetics can effect talent but this shouldn't be used as an excuse to not try.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you say that you don't believe that talent makes you better than someone with no natural ability in that area. However, I do believe that talent does improve your ability. But, it merely means that one less talented would have to put in more work to be on the same level, which many are willing to do. I only wonder, so do you believe that talent is not related at all or that you shouldn't depend on talent to be the greatest?
ReplyDeleteThis relates to myself because I see that some people practice very hard, but they still aren't that good at those sports. However in some people, they do not practice at all, but they are still amazing at certain sports because they natural talent. So, if people have talent and hard work ethic combined, it will make them into a great athlete, or an exceptional performer in their desirable profession.
ReplyDeleteThis article is one of great interest to me because it deals with the age-old conflict between talent and hard work. Although both factors play a role in determining success, hard work is more influential. Hard work can nurture talent whereas talent can be lost when not put to use. A combination of both talent and hard work will lead to being highly successful in a field, whether it be in academics or athletics. That being said, I do not think that a person can rely just on one or the other to be the best of the best. Do you believe that genetics doesn't play any role in success?
ReplyDeleteI agree, if someone is talented, for that talent to show, hard work and devotion is necessary. However, even if someone doesn't have "born talent", by years of practice and devotion, they can become just as good or even better.
ReplyDeleteI was fascinated by this blog and found the article quite intriguing. I have actually watched the video from asap talent vs training before. Before reading this article I had always taught that hard work outweighed raw talent but after reading this article I realized that raw talent plays a huge part in whatever activity you do.
ReplyDeleteThis was a good choice of article as it relates to almost everyone. For sure, genetics play key roles in determining athletic and other abilities, but ultimately I agree with you that putting in the work is the determining factor.
ReplyDeleteI found this post very insightful. We've always heard the inspirational sayings of how hard work always beats talent, but I've always wondered if it was true. From this article I learned that genetics and effort both affect one's capabilities.
ReplyDeleteI believe that it takes both talent and hard work to become successful. An example of this is Michael Jordan. Without his motivation and effort, he would not as known as he is today. Likewise, without his natural physical gifts, his drive and motivation would have gone to waste.
ReplyDeleteI have to point out that genetics only sets the limitations for how good an athlete can be. The 10,000 hours makes the person either really good or a master depending how far his/her limits can take them. In the end, I believe both are important. With out favorable genetics, your trainings could be useless, but without training, your genes are useless.
ReplyDelete