<p>i'm talking about those at the top of what they do--a field of academia, sports, games, etc. i ask because i feel that sometimes i feel my natural ability will get me by because i've seen so many at the top do what they effortlessly, as if they aren't trying. for the overwhelming majority of skilled people, do you think it's a matter of consistent hard work? i think i need to rid myself of the mindset i've held before if i truly want to be good at i do instead of slightly above-average with a regular but lasy effort.</p>
<p>definitely. it really makes me angry when people randomly go “oh, you’re so smart” (not to me) when in fact, those are just people who are mindlessly working their butts off to get an “A” in a class even though they have learned nothing, and knows nothing.</p>
<p>Most people are too blind to see the difference between natural talents and hardwork. IMO natural talents are worth MUCH more, BUT hardwork will get you by a lot further. Best is to have both, though.</p>
<p>Sure. But I’m not quite sure which side I respect more; the ‘natural side’ or the ‘working hard side’. I know numerous people who are above average in terms of intelligence, but top 5% in terms of GPA and class schedule.</p>
<p>That said, it’s impossible to define “smart”. Some people are better at certain things, so they’re smart at that. The best physicist probably couldn’t write a literary masterpiece.</p>
<p>Unless you’re da Vinci, of course.</p>
<p>Well, everyone at the top got there with a combination of natural talent and hard work. Whether they be master pianists, mathematicians, artists, or authors, they all have one thing in common: they do a ridiculous amount of practicing.</p>
<p>Although they may exist, I can’t off the top of my head think of anyone who is at the top of his field who did not make it there with a tremendous amount of work (often with a good dose of natural talent as well).</p>
<p>For example, if you look at the famous physicists and mathematicians, many of them are naturally brilliant, but even they spent their lives working to get to where they are.</p>
<p>Perhaps a few hundred years ago it was possible to become a renowned mathematician (for example) without a lot of work but a ton of natural genius because the field wasn’t very developed so the entry barrier was low. Today, though, no matter how smart you might be, there’s tons and tons of “basic” material that didn’t even exist 200 years ago that you must master before reaching a research-capable level, let alone being a renowned researcher.</p>
<p>It reminds me of the movie August Rush. I enjoyed it but also found it a bit ridiculous because no matter how much natural genius one may have in music, there’s still a ton of concrete knowledge that you must acquire from other people about how to conduct an orchestra. I’m talking about the final scene here.</p>
<p>No. It may seem “not very developed” to you, however at that time it would have been just as sofisticated as it is now.</p>
<p>Without hard work it’s pretty much impossible to achieve too much, but without natural talents, it’s also hard to achieve much.</p>
<p>I think, to some extent, genius is bred from hard work. However, the practice is not a mindless trudging on but rather is driven by an insightful drive to truly learn, develop, and create. Therein, I believe lies the difference between those who work hard and those who become genii. True, some people will progress at a faster rate than others, but is that to say a rose late in bloom is any less beautiful or fragrant?</p>
<p>I always think ambition is a big part. It seems to me that the people who end up on top are the ambitious ones. Sometimes the super smart just don’t care about the same things as the others.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>and that is why I value intelligence much more than hardwork; most people who work hard is to succeed, but that is all vanity.</p>
<p>Sooo true!</p>
<p>So some sort of occult, evanescent, will-o-the-wisp “intelligence” is a more desirable trait than the ability to work hard to achieve your goals and attain verifiable, positive results.</p>
<p>It’s a brave new world.</p>
<p>I think the point is that some people who “work hard” have the wrong reasons for doing so; money, power, etc. Many intelligent people realize what is and isn’t important, and thus might not “work hard” in terms of making more money.</p>
<p>I admire people who work hard more than people who are naturally “gifted”. Of course, naturally gifted people can work hard too, and I admire them in the same way I admire all hard working people.</p>
<p>Intelligence means nothing if you don’t do anything with it. The “doing” part is where hard work comes in.</p>
<p>natural talent is a prerequisite. No matter how much you polish and chip away at a lump of coal, it won’t turn into a diamond.</p>
<p>That said, one also needs motivation to work hard. Take Lang Lang as an example; if he grew up comfortably in middle class america instead of abject poverty in Shenyang, I doubt he would have been so obsessed with being number one and practicing 10 hours a day to reach his goals.</p>
<p>Seriously, I’m tired of people assuming that only the people who are located at the top are the smartest. A 5.0 GPA means nothing until you realize the meaning of it. I mean for example, what’s the point in all that hard work if it is for is to show off and try to be better then everyone else. A truly gifted person knows themselves well enough to realize that numbers are just numbers, the only person they need to prove to is against themselves. Yeah hard work is a great deal to become rich and what not, but who cares about that? Well at least I don’t. Money is useless, it’s what makes people poor and rich. There are hundreds of Gifted/Genius people in the world that choose to remain under just because they want a decent normal life. If everyone tried in the world with the exception of a few then basically everyone would be equal. Everyone can get a very high GPA it’s just a matter of how far they are willing to work for it. I myself have realized this and hmmm… didn’t care much in high school for that reason. I’m a gifted person, biological science and mathematical wise, but I choose not to excel because of that same reason. I don’t try enough. All I want to do is become a doctor and serve other people. I was ranked 103/420 students are my high school and had a 3.9 weighted GPA. No where near the top but I’ve been tested and found that I have a 140 I.Q. oh and I can solve a Rubik’s cube. XP Well go figure. And BTW I don’t consider myself to be anywhere near as smart/intelligent are some people in the world. I’m faaaaaar from that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>i’m really not trying to be mean, here, but: you tried to justify saying you’re smart by bringing up a 140 IQ score. accuracy of that score aside, most IQ scores [valid ones] are based on bell curves, so only people at the top get a score like 140 and are “the smartest”, so -</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This sounds like the typical ******** justification from an above-average intelligence kid about why he’s not on top. A lot of what you say is true, but the idea that money is something you shouldn’t care about is naive and immature at best and transparently not what you believe at worst. People who are “genius/gifted” and “choose” to stay below average are idiots. They may be good at solving puzzles (which is what having a high IQ means) but I don’t think any reasonable definition would call them smart. By the way, having a high IQ doesn’t translate directly into being successful in life. Interpersonal skills are extremely important in just about any real field, and most people with high IQs are totally incapable of interacting normally.</p>
<p>(And solving a rubiks cube is algorithmic. Don’t think you’re so smart because you memorized some steps.)</p>
<p>if you’re really smart enough the world will beat a path to your door</p>
<p>no guarantee that you’ll be “successful” though</p>
<p>well, at least the world would back in like the 17th century. isaac newton had the interpersonal skills of…someone who would invent calculus for ha-has. and he still managed to become one of the most influential men in science within his lifetime</p>
<p>Sorry, money does matter, but only so you could live a comfortable living. There really is no difference between 10,000,000 and 100,000,000 and 1,000,000,000. </p>
<p>Successful is a relative term. Some people what to be rich, others want to seek for the truth, and find something that’s meaningful. When you die, your money is useless. However, the work you’ve done may not be.</p>
<p>Username, I think you’ll have a more mature attitude as you grow older and the money you earn starts to have a direct impact on your life.</p>