How far does hard work get you versus talent

Talent is proportional to cleverness. You need to be clever to get past an associates degree, especially for a STEM degree.

Extremely far, every other answer is a meme. Great talent without hard work amounts to nothing, moderate talent and very hard work lead to great contributions

Not that user, but considering just the first post (and many others on this board) things like that need to be said.

>meaninglessly angry

There is not such a thing as a talent at all. There are some thing in your brain and body, that makes you mor suitable for some sort of work/sport/art, but actually the only way to git gud at something - is dedicade your life to it.

When you spent more time on some task, when you try to be more efficient and seccesfull, you will become "talented". At least that is what stupid people say, when see someone with great skill at something.

You never know how suitable for something until you do everything you can. In the end its just a combination of your genetics, luck and ammount of work. Guess the only thing of that three that you can control.
Even if you are not too suitable but you work a lot, you will become good, maybe even great. Its hard to be greatest (sometimes impossible), but you can work to become the best you could probably be. And thats the only thing that matters.

Talent is stupid word.

Evidence?

Have you ever seen someone "talented" who didnt spend all their life on the thing they are talented at?

Yes.

Like someone popular, or just in your life? Care to give more deatailed answer? Couse i am really interested in all that "talent vs work" thing.

Too often

Is it like that really smart guy, who knows everything on the lesson, but you know that he just smokes weed and fucks girls all the time?

People commonly squander their talents because the opportunity is never available, they're too lazy, they're convinced they arent talented, they get crippling anxiety/depression, etc.

Hardwork surpasses genius.

So, I don't know what you try you are posting from, but consider the American College Football talent pool. They consist of hundreds (between D1, D2, and D3) of teams, thousands of players. Of those who play high school football only 4% play college football. Only 2 in 100 (of those who play college football) will be drafted into the NFL.

The rest, were either not talented enough, Or did not work hard enough.

Similar situations can happen to others. Someone who is considered intelligent in high school may have had it so easy they feel they do not have to study and fail out of college. These people are not famous, but it is a common story.

Every mathematician and scientist who has made historical contributions to the field

>"Waaaaah I'm not perfect! Why!!? Life sucks!"

Jesus Christ. It's like half of you autists have the maturity of a preschooler.

The exact opposite of this. You won't get anywhere without hard work even if you have the best of talents. The effects of hard work outweigh talent once you get advanced enough. Conversely, if you lack talent, you can compensate with a lot, lot of hard work in earlier phases.

The names this guy mentions are great examples, all of the talented but they also worked very hard to get where they ended up. One example of talent gone south is IM Daniel Rensch in chess. He was extremely talented, touted as a future super GM, but ended up as a shitty IM because he didn't work on his skills.

There are popular people as well as unpopular ones. Take the example of actors: Which famous talented actor dedicates his whole life to acting? I don't know a single one. You occasionally here about them doing drugs or whatever. Next example: Ramanujan. He did not need to put much effort in and he was not even able to do so because of India, he just saw things people who dedicated their lives to maths could not see dedpite living twice as long, no matter how hard they tried. Here is the thing: People who claim there are no big persons in a field that have not worked hard, may be right, but they disregard all the ones who put even more effort and work into it but were just not as talented and you of course never hear of those yet they exist in millions.

Well, these people were definetely not just "moderately talented" rather exceptionally talented and put a lot effort in. You disregard all the people who are in fact "moderately talented" and work their asses off even more than the great mathematicians and scientists but did not contribute jack shit because they were not as talented.

I didn't say moderate talent allows someone to be a leading expert in some major field, but it is enough to make original contributions to science. By moderate I don't mean slightly above average intelligence, of course, but maybe an IQ of 125 if you want some kind of measurement.

Talented and hard-working > Talented but not hard-working = Not talented but hard-working > """Smart but lazy""" > Not talented and not hard-working

-12

You cant get anywhere without some of both

>2016
>blaming genetics

Fucking lazy sheltered millenials these days.

Work smarter, not harder.

A base talent is important sure, but the overwhelming majority for success in any field is hard work (more than 90%)

The most important thing imo is having a drive. And so far I have yet to hear of a way to aquire it.

Sure you can force yourself to study every day but realistically how far will this take you without interest in the subject or a real belief in a goal you are working towards? I dont think you can get very far if you have to constantly fight the desire to do something else. I don't think that nobel prize winning scientists had to fight the desire to play video games or watch some movies or something instead of doing their research.

ez answer is that the best people in every field are those with the best genetics and the hardest working. gotta have both

what do you think autism is?

Or you could try to play to your talents. If math isn't your thing, then fuck it, try something else.

Why do people assume that everyone must have at least some talent?

It gets you your own lab. Some "idiot" who posts on here got a lab by applying to tons of grants.

In finance it gets you far

MOB KUN DESU

far enough

"science" is just for people who arent smart enough to realise what is truly important

how many science "geniuses" were rich?

just musk and nobel pretty much.

The Veeky Forums discord channel has a 16-year-old that is taking graduate level math and writing papers, already.

Hard work is a meme and for delusional brainlets.

Talent got me into a terminal MS

"Hard work" is the meme that you do something someone else tells you unless you're a fucking god like Elon Musk or Bill Gates and you'll get what you deserve. If I'd have worked harder I'd probably be in a phd instead of where I am. Might get there anyway but it's going to take a little longer than I had originally planned for. I wasted undergrad studying what I thought was interesting instead of trying to make it. Second chances right?

Just look at politics

I have to agree with this.

You aren't "naturally talented" to do anything, really. Maybe your body functions. If no one had ever taught you anything, you'd be useless. The things you get good at are the things you're drawn to practice by the preferences gained mostly in childhood. Practice is the only thing that makes any difference. I'm a really good conceptual artist, and people come to me all the time asking how I got so good at what I do - I always tell them the same thing: I practiced day and night, year after year, until eventually I got to the point where I am. Hard work is EVERYTHING.

>geniuses
>musk
Ha.
Also, is money really more important than happiness and fulfilment.

seriously, fuck me in the ass how retarded these people are. fucking Mendel ruined everything for us, now we gotta listen to these autists complain muh genetic lottery if they don't study and fail their exams

I think you should look up what the word talent means

Usain Bolt at 16 > average Joe at 16.

We mean by talent attributes, physique you were born with, and it is very real, believe or not.

Nice try, you're just too lazy to run.

lol, only if you knew who I was.

I haven't run at the top for a while now, but I do know what talent is in running.

When an Ethiophian kid runs 10km in 28min at age 17.
That is what we call "talent"

This.
Apart from that killing thing.
Mozart did not really work hard, yet he is easily among the top 5 composers ever. Ramanujan did not even have the opportunity to work hard in his field of interest, yet he was one of the top mathematical geniuses of his time. See where this is going? Yes hard work is important but don't act like a normie without significant talents could become a top figure in a field.

Isn't it more important that the stars align in a way that you start to work on your goals early and focus only on them? You can't go back in time and make yourself interested in something earlier and it's also hard to focus on one thing when life has so many things to offer.

You misunderstand what hard work means. Hard works means diligent/dedicated work.

Its not talent but interest that matters

Reminded me of this:

youtube.com/watch?v=lr8sVailoLw

Based Richard Feynman

>There is not such a thing as a talent at all
>There are some thing in your brain and body, that makes you mor suitable for some sort of work/sport/art
What do you think talent is you dumbass?

>but actually the only way to git gud at something - is dedicade your life to it
Literally false. The best in anything will always be people that have talent, AND work hard. That doesn't fucking mean the genius kid won't become pretty damn good at math just studying 2 hours a day, while you might be able to barely keep up with imstudying 8 hours a day.
Talent is huge and is definately more important than hard work. Only in the case of a talented person doing absolutely fuck all will some hardworking pleb prevail.

The most educated posts in this thread

>Mozart did not really work hard
Sauce?

>How far does hard work get you versus talent

By hard work, do you mean cheating on tests?

Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard

We have defined intelligence.. it is a word created by humans.. We have also defined talent.

Do you even English, bro?

Back to

>Says we have them defined
>doesn't post definitions
You must be an English teacher because you're useless.

Oh it's okay, I don't usually talk with people that are too retarded to open the dictionary and see the definitions of English words for themselves.

Not the user you're responding to, but in serious discussions like we're trying to have here, people can be talking about different things using the same words, so it's important to define explicitly what is being talked about to avoid confusion.

Besides, even the dictionary gives multiple meanings to the same word, so your argument is really, really crappy and you should learn how to engage better in a debate.

The ability to work hard is a talent. Success is wholly determined by genetics and circumstances of birth.

There is only one agreed definition for the word intelligence in the dictionary. If you want it to be something else, it's not intelligence as we know it.

It's very simple really, I bet you understand.

Like, if you take out the definitions of the sentence this anonymous wrote, it is false.

Genetics and circumstances of birth is not wholly, as entirely determined how successful a person will be in life, by definition, even though genetics plays a big part how fast you will be for example, but you still can be a very successful runner in smaller leagues.

It all comes down to definitions, but these monkeys just don't understand it, so they vomit their thoughts like pigeons playing chess.

neither of these things get you far.

bob ross said Talent is something it something you have when you put hard work into it

what you think of "talent" comes from people who are run into the circumstances with the ability to believe in a better ideology earlier in life than you are.

The Atomic make up of a person is similar to the atomic make up of the universe on a % scale.

With einsteins theory of relativity, the unvierse is put at a mixture of about 4% physical matter, and 96% dark matter/dark energy.

so essentially the human body must also be 4% physical matter, and 96% darkmatter/darkenergy. (i realize this is a huge leap but fuck you this is logical) an ideology that you can live by that will give you a rewarding amount of talent from your hard work comes from mastering this spiritual aspect of the human body.

Again, no need to re define the word "Talent", open up the dictionary, you are just confusing people here.

mind gives ultimate form to matter, were you so dense you ignored this concept just to have a passive aggressive excuse to nitpick?. talent is a useless word, the fact you need a textbook definition makes you an idiot.

if i'm confusing you I'll make it a little simpler

U R DUMB

talent is a requirement that you can't alter to any significant degree, while hard work is highly alterable

you have to be talented, but you don't have to be hard working. that can come later with conditioning if you have sufficient motivation.

Fuck off with your dictionary argument.

Like your words you used there, every single one of them can be defined using the dictionary.

You are not capable of bringing any new information on the table using words we have already defined, you are just re-arranging them to your liking, like you did there.

But you already know this, and you are just trolling, awfully, get better at it.

The thing with talent is that it really only shows after hard work. Everything before that is luck, not really talent. How good you can be at something isn't really determined at your initial attempt.
Also a combination of skills that noone else has can make you valuable simple because noone else has your combination.
Don't focus on a single thing. Try many different things and find your peaks.
You don't need to be the best at everything to be the best at what you do.

>Mozart didn't worl hard
>played the piano since childhood

Really?

Never focus "only" on your goals. That's what successful people tell you because they like to forget all their failed attempts and felt like if they had started with the thing they're successful at at a younger age they'd be even more successful. However trial and errors shape who you are and everything you do adds to your toolset of experience that might unexpectedly become handy.
Follow your passions. Don't give up after your first failures. Always expand to new things.

genetics > external aid(steroids, nootropics, stimulants) > hard work

Don't forget luck, ladies and gentlemen. Like it or not, luck matters. If you work hard you can kind of "create" luck, by being in a position to take advantage of an opportunity (versus being lazy and not knowing what's going on around you), but sometimes luck happens. It's often tied to the willingness to take risks as well.

Really this. Most success is really just "luck". Though there is a differenxd between winning a 1 and 20 chance and winning a 1 in a million chance. Most people just don't try their luck hard enough

As long as you aren't a brainlet you can be successful in any field you set your mind to.

Most "geniuses" were just sheltered kids with helicopter parents who got a headstart in studying.

If I'd been studying math for 10 hours a day since I was 3 years old I'd probably be pretty good at it. Sure there's the occasional genuine child prodigy but they're neurological outsiders.

God dammit you best be trolling nigger. Mozart's dad made him work day and night for fucking years. Ask someone who knows something about music and they will tell you that his masterworks came after decades of hard work. Do you listen to any of the shit he wrote when he was 9? Faggot. Fucking TRIGGERED.

high IQ > being interested in the topic > hard work > talent

This guy gets it. I think the discussion gets skewed by even considering the true outliers. You can get really really really fucking good at shit by doing it a lot with focused practice (not just going through the motions). It is another question altogether as to how one becomes a legend in their field.

Many powerlifters for example come from very humble physical beginnings. Then they lift heavy fucking weights 4 times a week for 25 years. Those are the guys lifting the holy-fucking-shit weights. They are great at what they do. Now, as far as being say the best bench presser? Well, you better have amazing tendons and it will help you immensely if you have short arms and a deep chest. A world-class legend deadlifter will probably have long arms shortish legs and fucking meat hooks for mitts.

>This is spot on.
Geniuses that end up noticed are few and far in between.
People may ask what is the greatest barrier to mankind, and that question can be awnsered with yet another question and that's this; What's the most universal human characteristic, fear, or laziness?

How haven't we defined intelligence?

I know this is not what you meant but this is what google says

noun
1.
the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.

What's wrong with that?

And how can we not know? We have plenty of evidence for this kind of thing. Schools, IQ tests, people who have done great things. I'm sure there are psychological studies. There is that book outliers that malcolm gladwell wrote. Dude says something like almost all great achievements are a always a mix of 45% hard work and 45% being in the right place at the right time in the world/luck and 10% help from other people

>Gauss, Mozart, and Muhammad Ali all made their achievements purely by genetics

Yes, we're all familiar with the astounding musical talents of Wolfgang Mozart's mother and the fighting prowess of Muhammad Ali's father.

>Most "geniuses" were just sheltered kids with helicopter parents who got a headstart in studying.

This.

>when people don't get how genetics work

Something I have that makes me much more smarter than most people including you.

>be schrödinger
>be sitting around doing nothing
>about to get fired if you don't produce something soon
>hmm, pull wave equation out of your ass
>make giant development in undeveloped field
>can only succeed with hard work
Sure whatever you say brainlet (;

uh, infinity? :/

Itt: brainlets who haven't come to terms with their genetic limitations

Further, supposing now that all were wholly open and candid,
and never thrust upon us doubtful opinions as true, but expounded
every matter in good faith, yet since scarce anything has been
asserted by any one man the contrary of which has not been alleged
by another, we should be eternally uncertain which of the two to
believe. It would be no use to total up the testimonies in favour
of each, meaning to follow that opinion which was supported by the
greater number of authors ; for if it is a question of difficulty that
is in dispute, it is more likely that the truth would have been
discovered by few than by many. But even though all these men
agreed among themselves, what they teach us would not suffice for
us. For we shall not, e.g. all turn out to be mathematicians though
we know by heart all the proofs that others have elaborated, unless
we have an intellectual talent that fits us to resolve difficulties of
any kind. Neither, though we have mastered all the arguments of
Plato and Aristotle, if yet we have not the capacity for passing a
solid judgment on these matters, shall we become Philosophers ; we
should have acquired the knowledge not of a science, but of history.

Mozart was actually some madman who worked day and night for several decades and only started composing for real after decades of work.