That makes sense to me. It seems that there is a threshold of talent that one must pass through and then that is where hard work manifests. For example, among athletes, talent is required to get you in the top 1% and no amount of hard work can circumvent this. But the best guy in a sport and the ones just below them are not that divergent talent-wise. A mixture of hard work and dedication seems to count more here. Though there could be a question as to how much of that is also a matter of talent; you could imagine that the best in a given field practice so much that it isn't a chore to them anymore, it's just a default activity. That too may have some genetic component related to conscientiousness.
This should never have been much of a debate. Given the choice between talent/giftedness and hardwork/grit I wonder which most people will go for. But then as you rightly noted, even hardwork/grit is as innate as they come. Outcomes are sorted according to how individuals are distributed on these traits/qualities.
I knew I could never be in esports because my APM (actions per minute) doesn’t come close to the necessary level. No amount of practice can increase your apm to a pro level.
A bit unrelated to the post, but I wanted to ask a few questions about iq, and you are the best source I know of.
As IQ is highly heritable and also fairly correlated to income, how is it that some people are able to go beyond their initial social class? For example, Richard Nixon grew up poor on a farm. Or something not quite as impressive, but one part of my family were Latvian serfs just 150 years ago or so. But they managed to become fairly successful in about one generation. I would say this side of my family generally lands around 120-130 iq. Did we really have serfs walking around in the 19th century with this type of cognitive ability? It’s highly likely they at some point mixed with higher social classes, but idk if that would be enough. Do you know what would explain this phenomenon?
And a second question, I have some recollection of you listing Substack writers or prominent rw writers iq, did you make that kind of list or am I misremembering?
Thank you, but I don’t understand how this could be since most people inherit the majority of their intelligence, and most people stay in the same social class as their parents (at least historically) and I can imagine the higher social casts have higher IQs, especially historically, when these could probably be said to be fairly distinct genetic groups. Anyway… just one last question.
The vast majority of people were among the peasants or doing some other form of low class occupation 150 years ago. There was way less social mobility. So it is not a statistical anomaly that some of your ancestors were smart and very poor at the same time
Life is truly not fair and its just so depressing no matter what nothing can beat this constant inferiority all of this evidence and this modern society just makes me even more suicidal I am tired of competing.
Would be true if talent would not be another form of work. I am fairly talented in verbal intelligence. Now, my mother spent a huge amount of time of teaching me language stuff when I was tiny, then during school I had two different foreign language teachers... I do not think it is genetic.
Talent stratifies people. Hard work sorts people within strata, or might move someone on the edge from one level to the next.
That makes sense to me. It seems that there is a threshold of talent that one must pass through and then that is where hard work manifests. For example, among athletes, talent is required to get you in the top 1% and no amount of hard work can circumvent this. But the best guy in a sport and the ones just below them are not that divergent talent-wise. A mixture of hard work and dedication seems to count more here. Though there could be a question as to how much of that is also a matter of talent; you could imagine that the best in a given field practice so much that it isn't a chore to them anymore, it's just a default activity. That too may have some genetic component related to conscientiousness.
Seems obvious if you pay even a little attention to your peers. Good post.
This should never have been much of a debate. Given the choice between talent/giftedness and hardwork/grit I wonder which most people will go for. But then as you rightly noted, even hardwork/grit is as innate as they come. Outcomes are sorted according to how individuals are distributed on these traits/qualities.
I knew I could never be in esports because my APM (actions per minute) doesn’t come close to the necessary level. No amount of practice can increase your apm to a pro level.
I have an extremely fast RT (170ms) and high APM, but I was only above average at most games.
I suspect a lot of performance in games is due to hand/eye coordination + quality of the autonomic nervous system.
When I watch some guy individually micro-ing each zergling minutely I just know I don’t stand a chance.
A bit unrelated to the post, but I wanted to ask a few questions about iq, and you are the best source I know of.
As IQ is highly heritable and also fairly correlated to income, how is it that some people are able to go beyond their initial social class? For example, Richard Nixon grew up poor on a farm. Or something not quite as impressive, but one part of my family were Latvian serfs just 150 years ago or so. But they managed to become fairly successful in about one generation. I would say this side of my family generally lands around 120-130 iq. Did we really have serfs walking around in the 19th century with this type of cognitive ability? It’s highly likely they at some point mixed with higher social classes, but idk if that would be enough. Do you know what would explain this phenomenon?
And a second question, I have some recollection of you listing Substack writers or prominent rw writers iq, did you make that kind of list or am I misremembering?
Thank you!
Social class of parents only correlates with child IQ at 0.45.
Thank you, but I don’t understand how this could be since most people inherit the majority of their intelligence, and most people stay in the same social class as their parents (at least historically) and I can imagine the higher social casts have higher IQs, especially historically, when these could probably be said to be fairly distinct genetic groups. Anyway… just one last question.
What would you consider midwit IQ?
The vast majority of people were among the peasants or doing some other form of low class occupation 150 years ago. There was way less social mobility. So it is not a statistical anomaly that some of your ancestors were smart and very poor at the same time
before modern industrial economies and standardized testing, many talented people lived their lives without utilizing that talent
However, this fact can be overblown.
Life is truly not fair and its just so depressing no matter what nothing can beat this constant inferiority all of this evidence and this modern society just makes me even more suicidal I am tired of competing.
The only person you should be competing with is yourself.
Agreed. It's noncognitivism all around. A life of private protest becomes your birthright.
AI might make innate differences moot, hang in there.
Or it could exacerbate those differences, or select for narrower ones. I'd hang up my hat now if I wasn't such a pussy.
Would be true if talent would not be another form of work. I am fairly talented in verbal intelligence. Now, my mother spent a huge amount of time of teaching me language stuff when I was tiny, then during school I had two different foreign language teachers... I do not think it is genetic.
So er, can you get more talented?