Thread replies: 8
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
File: Caroline2.jpg (443KB, 576x346px) Image search:
[Google]
443KB, 576x346px
So I've deliberated on this for several days now because of how permeated this discussion is among boards. This is my conclusion. To complete an objective (create a product of some kind of art) is to travel towards a destination. In terms of physical capacities, talent (in this case genetics) has the upper hand. It is possible to make up for your shortcomings in sports through absolute mastery of everything you lack in but no matter how much you exercise and develop, there are somethings you cannot achieve. For example, only select men will be capable of benching 400 pounds, it's a physical disposition that can't be attained. For many men, that feat is impossible. Now in the realm of art, there is no objective standard. The objective is subjective. It is possible for every man to think and understand the same thoughts. What differs between however is how long it would take them to get to that position. All information can be distilled so a person can eventually understand. Some may need countless reminders however. Talent in this case is perhaps thinking capacity, which on its own is useless in art, exposed to life experience, and the most crucial ingredient, passion (high stimulated interest). It is not IMPOSSIBLE for an untalented man to work hard and create outstanding, compelling art, but it may be most likely a longer travel than for the man of talent.
>>
File: bogues.jpg (598KB, 663x995px) Image search:
[Google]
598KB, 663x995px
A good example is Muggsy Bogues. Therotically, he should not be in the NBA. Howeever, he worked his ass off to perfect his execution in things he could control which made up for his physical insufficiency. BUT no matter how hard Bogues works at weight lifting he will never bench 400 pounds, that's reality of genetics. Genetics doesn't limit your capacity to understand thought, it may however affect your ability to STAY IN thought. Thus making your journey to create MUCH further.
>>
>>9848097
>Genetics doesn't limit your capacity to understand thought
Bait
>>
>>9848109
I've solved the conundrum. I've silenced the bickering.
>>9848111
I said it does affect your arrival to the thought. But it's not impossible for any mind to understand any thought. All intelligence is, is memory. Memory which holds knowledge which is then applied. In art this doesn't necessarily matter. Maybe a person with no talent or talent is unlikely to invent something or create a new trend but they could easily nail an artistic venture by mimicking and changing certain features of their Work to be original. This happens all the time in art. Imitation is considered flattery.
>>
>>9848111
Again this is in the context of art which is subjective. Relax.
>>
All I know is that hard work was never stressed to me enough as a child. Growing up, I was a very very smart kid and everybody always told me I'd "go far" and I barely had to try to be best in the class. Even when I skipped a grade. I just grew up with this idea that I was smarter than everybody so I'd never really have to work hard at anything. But real life doesn't work that way and hard work is always more highly valued.
Of course I can't really blame my own lack of work ethic and discipline on anyone but myself, but I can't help but feel that the way I was raised has something to do with it.
>>
>>9848143
Here is an analogy. Two cars. One's a Prius, the other a Ferrari. Prius owner hops in his car, starts it, and heads off to his destination. Ferrari owner, slowly enters into his vehicle. Goes to grab his key from his pocket. No key. Has no idea where it is. Decides he'll take the plane...once he finishes his nap...and packs his luggage.
Thread posts: 8
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2