Nature Vs Nurture

I love the Nature vs Nurture debates.

Are leaders born or made? Are elite athletes born or groomed? Are top corporate performers born or trained? Are elite militias trained or born?

My first awareness of my fascination for this topic was when I read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers a long time ago.

I started my reading this Hacker News discussion

Below is my take on the issue. 

Talents exist. But the fundamental flaw is the focus on talent on alone. A full-grown "Talent" isn't just made of Talent. Focusing on talents starts with a cliche-style definition of talent. It's at best harmful.

Nature or Nurture? It's both. Nature vs Nurture debates quells when we understand differing degrees of each are required in different fields. So, stop bringing up a clip of Messi or Maradona when the discussion is talent in the workplace. Or better still be very careful with your use of Mozart is an example that Talent is everything even when hard-work is required.

Also noteworthy is that not every career needs geniuses. In fact, it's a silly thing to start out in a space where you need to be a genius to just survive. Also, a society that is actively optimizing for geniuses or 10x folks is doing it wrong and it won't end well.
Nurture and Nature are just different parts of the elephant that the blind are feeling.
2021-02-09 14:36:47
These crazy talented people (Messi, Maradona, Mozart, et al) are, 99% of the time very unconventional. In other words, you can't have multiples of them, certainly not on the same team, but even in general. Sheer logic dictates that if everyone is now Messi, then nobody stands out and a new Maradona needs to emerge and to be completely unconventional in his effectiveness in order to be recognized for his genius. 

You have to always be willing to push boundaries and somehow be apart from the pack, because that's the only place talent has the room it needs to thrive. Warning: It's also the place where the autists hang out. 

2021-02-09 22:00:24