# Why is it wrong to only bring natural gifted intellectualism to the table?



## Bnova (Feb 10, 2015)

I dont get it....I've lived my entire life on my talents now that I meet these hardworkers I'm losing ground, losing to people whos I.Qs are lower than mine


what rules and lawsdid I miss about my giftedness

who were gifted and talented success story Icons I can read up on(success stories)

please give me some links to pdf files and the such to overcome this

and please spread your wings on the sub ject as to why its wrong to only bring natural gifted intellectualism to the table


Bits of backround: I usually win everything just with pure talented and natural giftedness , I have had hardworking sessions to reach this point but I'm still losing against these guys, what is different?


----------



## xForgottenOne (Mar 7, 2015)

Natural gifted intellectuism isn't the only important thing. One must be hard-working and disciplined to reach the top. I see this a lot. I have a lot of people in my year who have IQ's above 130, but don't do anything, and therefore fail at school, and also some with IQ's below 115, who are really hard-working and do better than those with above 130.


----------



## ArBell (Feb 10, 2014)

As Albert Einstein once said: "Genius is 1% talent and 99% percent hard work"


----------



## PoisonPill (Mar 8, 2015)

It depends on where you're trying to excel. If it's something like business, you have to add hard work and some creativity and intuitiveness in with the intelligence. As others have said, intelligence has to be aided by hard work, the same way hard work has to be aided by intelligence. Either one on its own will get you nowhere.


----------



## Blue Soul (Mar 14, 2015)

Why is it wrong? Because bragging about results shows more results than bragging about ability to achieve results. Also, bragging is kind of meh anyway.

Don't be a genius, be a hard working genius.


----------



## Royolis (Feb 22, 2015)

Natural talent is only a head start. Without training or teaching, you'll fall behind the rest. 

I was superior to my brother in violin when I was 9 years old, my brother being 11 at the time. It was all because of natural talent, and our violin teacher knew that. However, I was lazy and didn't really practice, meanwhile, my brother always practiced diligently. In high school, he was first chair of our highest orchestra, did several solos, got gold at state, etc. I never did that well in high school with violin and only got into the highest orchestra because I switched to viola. 

Natural talent is a powerful thing. Never let it go to waste if it's a passion and train in it everyday.


----------



## Pifanjr (Aug 19, 2014)

Losing in what?


----------



## Cheeta (Apr 7, 2013)

If you stand still in your development you're actually going backwards... 'cause the rest of the world is moving forward.

Identify your weaknesses, work on them and fix them. Identify your strengths, work on them and improve them -> wash, rinse, repeat until the day you die.


----------



## starscream430 (Jan 14, 2014)

Not to be rude, but you sound a bit cocksure - a bit like a stereotype INTJ. 

As others have said though, hard work and intelligence are the two ingredients to make it through the workforce. Heck! I would also throw in a dash of networking since knowing high people can get you more advantages within the workplace. While intelligence is nice, I think employers tend to prefer hard-work since they tend to be more diligent on a job than a lazy smart aleck.


----------



## Croaker (Nov 5, 2014)

If you are talking about the work place then you need to pay attention to the metrics that the employers are measuring your work by. It may not be 'insight' as that is hard to quantify. 'productivity' is the most common metric, in whatever units apply to your job and that's also a mindset even when productivity is not clearly singled out. What can you contribute to the engine of commerce?


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

IQ don't mean diddly.

And, it's not that it's wrong to bring 'naturally giftedness' to the table, it's that it doesn't really exist as you are defining it.

What gives someone a propensity for something has a lot more to do with a lot of different variables fitting in at the right time and place.

Mostly, it's interest, and a willingness to learn, take chances, make mistakes.

But, what's also very important with learning is discipline. Persistence. Stick-to-itiveness.

How one is raised, and what they're exposed to, and how they react to exposure, also has a lot to do with it.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

ArBell said:


> As Albert Einstein once said: "Genius is 1% talent and 99% percent hard work"


That was Thomas Edison. Einstein probably would never say that.


----------



## ArBell (Feb 10, 2014)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> That was Thomas Edison. Einstein probably would never say that.


My bad, goodreads failed me!


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Bnova said:


> I dont get it....I've lived my entire life on my talents now that I meet these hardworkers I'm losing ground, losing to people whos I.Qs are lower than mine
> 
> 
> what rules and lawsdid I miss about my giftedness
> ...


I had similar problems in high school. Actually, to the point where I ended up having horrible maturity grade exam scores and unable to go to public college. (I also had lots of absences so being able to easily absorb stuff by just being on lessons didn't help.)

Much later I realised that one is much more likely to do things that one does, than do other things. So, I started reaching for textbooks when doing pauses from computer (a 15 minutes pause every 45minutes) and this way I was studying more and more and more until I could study a few hours every day.



Word Dispenser said:


> IQ don't mean diddly.
> 
> And, it's not that it's wrong to bring 'naturally giftedness' to the table, it's that it doesn't really exist as you are defining it.


No. IQ means a lot. An intelligent person when working as hard as someone of average intelligence can easily absorb high-school level material in primary school and start doing college-level stuff much earlier. The problem is that school systems tend to encourage waste of potential and lack of discipline by neglecting gifted students.


----------



## Bnova (Feb 10, 2015)

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar said:


> I had similar problems in high school. Actually, to the point where I ended up having horrible maturity grade exam scores and unable to go to public college. (I also had lots of absences so being able to easily absorb stuff by just being on lessons didn't help.)
> 
> Much later I realised that one is much more likely to do things that one does, than do other things. So, I started reaching for textbooks when doing pauses from computer (a 15 minutes pause every 45minutes) and this way I was studying more and more and more until I could study a few hours every day.


thats the same thing thats happening to me! :-0

or it did happen until i left high school for alternative education to try and force the stuff into my own hands and i thought maybe that would get me working again-_- the plan failed so the calculated risk didnt pay off but thx for the advice!!!

I'll be starting with my national certificate course soon in Crime Scene Investigation which is an 18 month course NQF level 5 so maybe this will kill my boredom? i dunno but its worth a shot


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar said:


> No. IQ means a lot. An intelligent person when working as hard as someone of average intelligence can easily absorb high-school level material in primary school and start doing college-level stuff much earlier. The problem is that school systems tend to encourage waste of potential and lack of discipline by neglecting gifted students.


Well, I am inclined to disagree, but then, I don't really know my own IQ.

I think that the _problem _is that schools tend to waste potential in general. I think that there would be a lot _more _gifted students, if the teachers themselves were actually passionate about _what _they're teaching, and the parents were actually paying more attention to the children in educating them at home.

This may not mean a lot, but I have experience working at a kindergarten-- And the only difference between the 'gifted' children, the average children, and the poor children, were diet, exercise, and how much attention they were getting at home. One little girl was reading at a 3rd grade level, and grasped things much quicker than the other students, because she was taught to read much earlier, and was not treated as if there were limitations due to age. 

Two gifted little boys were brothers, nigh a year apart, and they grasped concepts very quickly, were very conscientious and caring to their peers, and were generally advanced. This was because of the attention they were getting at home.

I do agree that different students require different levels of attention, and _should _be able to advance as quickly as befits their individual degree of understanding, but I highly doubt that IQ plays a significant role, except in determining what level they are at. 

I think that IQ is just the _effect_ of giftedness, not the cause. The _cause_ of giftedness is fairly self-explanatory, based on what I've written, I think. :kitteh:


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

Bnova said:


> I dont get it....I've lived my entire life on my talents now that I meet these hardworkers I'm losing ground, losing to people whos I.Qs are lower than mine


Please correct me if I'm wrong. But isn't your 'entire life' less than 18yrs? If so, then you've hardly lived it based on your talent. I think your parents have had a lot to do with your survival to date.  

Could it be that this is the first time you've ever had to really achieve anything and are stunned and shocked that actually you can't just wing it and effort is required?


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Word Dispenser said:


> Well, I am inclined to disagree, but then, I don't really know my own IQ.
> 
> I think that the _problem _is that schools tend to waste potential in general. I think that there would be a lot _more _gifted students, if the teachers themselves were actually passionate about _what _they're teaching, and the parents were actually paying more attention to the children in educating them at home.
> 
> ...


Research on twins raised in different families and adopted children shows that genetics have much stronger influence on IQ than environment. Though environment is also a significant factor.

I suspect that with optimised upbringing/schooling, differences between gifted and non-gifted students would be even more pronounced.


----------



## adultchildofalieninvaders (Aug 29, 2014)

To answer the original question: because sheer dogged persistence with a small amount of natural talent will beat the lazy used to be child geniuses, now sitting in a shady corner of the pub drowning beers while complaining about how nobody understands them and appreciates their brightness, EVERY BLOODY TIME.


----------



## adultchildofalieninvaders (Aug 29, 2014)

InSolitude said:


> Please correct me if I'm wrong. But isn't your 'entire life' less than 18yrs? If so, then you've hardly lived it based on your talent. I think your parents have had a lot to do with your survival to date.
> 
> Could it be that this is the first time you've ever had to really achieve anything and are stunned and shocked that actually you can't just wing it and effort is required?


That's what I thought, too.

Also, if you're looking for correlation between I.Q. and success in life measured by standards like career trajectory, education level, income, etc, you're in for a rough awakening: the most successful (not necessarily happy, although I'd be interested to see data) people are bright but not specifically so.


----------

