Knowledge: a natural "knack", or can it be acquired? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Stompy · 01-03-2005, 02:54 PM

In thinking of various degrees I could gain in addition to my CIS degree, I was wondering if a person is generally born with a knack for their specific area, or if it can be acquired.

For example, getting a PhD in Mathematics. Would anyone be able to do that with enough work and dedication, or do you pretty much have to have the natural ability to completely understand and easily grasp logical concepts? There's people I know that don't know math for the life of em... but I wonder if they could attain a PhD if they so chose if they did put in enough effort.

Likewise with being a lawyer. They need a VERY keen eye for detail. Can that be picked up over the years through various classes and training, or does the person have to have the natual ability to pick out that detail.

Same for detectives - can anyone just up and become a detective and get trained in how to spot those crucial pieces of evidence and ability to piece together the puzzle?

Growing up, I'm sure we've all heard the, "You can be whatever you want to be as long as you work hard!" Is this true? If I'm doing CIS now, could I just up and decide to get a PhD in Particle Physics?

munchen · 01-03-2005, 03:43 PM

It's just like everything else. it requires both nature and nature. if someone is born with the improper brain structure to become a physicist they won't "get it" no matter how hard they work. if they are born with the right tools but don't develope them, they won't be able do it either. you need both natural and devolped ability to be able to do anything of that degree, or any degree.

Our brains are very plastic so we can train our selves to a large degree, but if you dont have a bat you can't hit the ball. i think people should do whatever they enjoy doing. since people like to do what they are naturally inclined towards, which will tend to be what they're best at. "You can be whatever you want to be as long as you work hard!" i interpret this as follow your heart and don't let anyone decide what you should do but yourself. so for your additional degrees do something you'll enjoy

Slavakion · 01-03-2005, 03:56 PM

To a certain extent, I believe that you can "be all you can be". *hides from Army*
Although it's probably limited to your general area -- logical/scientific vs creative/artistic. The people who combine both would likely have the best success in, erm, multi-jobbing. Such as police officers, who have to logically think out clues and evidence, and also think divergently to extrapolate evidence that isn't there or to find new leads.

fallsauce · 01-03-2005, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Likewise with being a lawyer. They need a VERY keen eye for detail. Can that be picked up over the years through various classes and training, or does the person have to have the natual ability to pick out that detail.

Aw, crap.

Back to the topic.

I think knowledge, like sports, depends on your natural ability. To be the best (or even to reach a certain level) you must have some natural talent. Of course you'll also need to work hard at it, but some people, no matter how much they may want something, simply can't do it.

Personally, I think the whole "You can be whatever you want to be as long as you work hard!" thing is a load of crap.You can't be everything you want to be, even if you give it your all, or else a lot more people would have their wishes granted.

A bit pessimistic, excuse me.

fckm · 01-03-2005, 07:15 PM

By the end of puberty, the human brain has probably made about 90% of the connections it will ever make. Prior to puberty, the human brain is said to be very "plastic" in that it has the ability to learn and adapt to an astounding degree. After the brain has matured, it still has the ability to learn and alter itself, but is nowhere as plastic as it used to be.
It's during those critical first 15-16 years of your life that you learn to become curious, to seek out knowledge, to learn to manipulate mathematics and think abstractly, to have a keen eye for detail. The degree to which are abilities in these areas develop are shaped primarily by our environment.
After puberty, it becomes very very difficult (although not necessarily impossible) to alter yourself in these areas to large degrees.

fckm · 01-03-2005, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy

Growing up, I'm sure we've all heard the, "You can be whatever you want to be as long as you work hard!" Is this true? If I'm doing CIS now, could I just up and decide to get a PhD in Particle Physics?

Seeing as how you're doing CS, you probably have a fair math background as well as abstract problem solving skills. The jump isn't as great as you may think, although you'd probably fair much better as an experimentalist rather than a theorist (I'm talking out of my ass here, as I don't actually know you, so I'm basing my oppinions strictly on my understanding of CS).
If you were an art histroy major, on the other hand, I would say that you have no chance as a Particle Physicist. Not because art history majors are less intelligent, or more intelligent, but rather because art history majors don't tend to do a lot of the abstract math that would be required for any physics degree.
Furthermore, psychology tells us that toward the end of puberty, unused skillsets in the brain tend to get "pruned". For instance, if during the early developement of a child, they learn a lot of abstract math skills. However, like our art history major, during high school they gravitate toward history and art, rather then the sciences. This means that during the end of puberty, the synaptic pathways associated with abstract math tend to die out, or become "pruned". In college, our art major would have a difficult time in their math and science distributions, while excelling at art history.

fckm · 01-03-2005, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fallsauce

I think knowledge, like sports, depends on your natural ability. To be the best (or even to reach a certain level) you must have some natural talent. Of course you'll also need to work hard at it, but some people, no matter how much they may want something, simply can't do it.

I think sports tends to be slightly different than "are they artsy or are they sciency" developement questions.
Based on what I've said about pruning above, the hand/foot/body - eye coordination would be greatly affectly by pruning and brain developement. However, sports performance also has a lot to do with musculature and body type, which is (I believe) more tied to genetics than brain developement.

BK1017 · 01-05-2005, 05:16 AM

There are some good ideas posted here already. Kudos to ya'll and being knowledgeable about knowledge.

I think that if someone works hard enough, has the dedication, has a lot of patience, AND has a good attitude, then they can pretty much do anything they want in the realm of knowledge. I think an art history buff can definitely become a particle physicist if that person has all of the the above. However, I'm sure it will require much time and will certainly not be easy, but it is definitely attainable.

Sports, however, is a bit different. Up to about the end of high school, I believe that anybody can play it as long as they bust their tail all the time AND have a great attitude toward the team and teammates. I played basketball until the end of my high school career (at a school of more than 4,000 kids) simply because of these attributes. I was never a big scorer, but I gave it my all and did what had to be done for my team to win. That mainly included diving on floor for loose balls, blocking out and getting rebounds, and doing the things that no one else would do. But I got the opportunity to play because I busted my arse in every practice and hustled when no one else was.

After high school though, it's all genetics and talent. Pro athletes are simply genetic freaks. Either you have it or you don't.

Frowning Budah · 01-07-2005, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BK1017

There are some good ideas posted here already. Kudos to ya'll and being knowledgeable about knowledge.

I think that if someone works hard enough, has the dedication, has a lot of patience, AND has a good attitude, then they can pretty much do anything they want in the realm of knowledge. I think an art history buff can definitely become a particle physicist if that person has all of the the above. However, I'm sure it will require much time and will certainly not be easy, but it is definitely attainable. .......

I agree, but I think you have touched on the key. I think a knack allows you to have the dedication, patience and I will add desire to learn something or develop a talent. Could I learn to be a math wizard? Maybe. But, because that is not where my interest lie I am not likely to devote the effort necessary to achieve in that area. Whereas I will spend ten times the effort learning and working at something that does interest me.

pinoychink790 · 01-07-2005, 07:39 PM

i think it's usually just acquired

roderickpsu · 01-07-2005, 08:19 PM

I think much of it is inherited from your parents. Look at friends that are great in math...their parents probably are too...

genuinegirly · 01-10-2005, 09:27 AM

Ahhh the age-old nature vs nurture debate. Here's my take on it all.

You are born basically a blank slate. Even your interests are not determined by genetics. You can train your mind to analyze in a number of methods. It will take a great deal of study before you will have the adequate background to pursue a degree in partical physics. It IS possible. The average individual is capable of far more than they believe they are. Even were an individual to have severe brain damage to the portion of the brain that is traditionally used for mathematical or abstract analytical skills, they are capable of retraining their mind to processing that information in a different sector. Such retraining is difficult, complicated, often requires the aid of a highly trained neurologist, but it IS possible.

But then again, I still maintain that the human being is capable of instantaneous space/time travel without the aid of a machine, so who would listen to me?

fckm · 01-10-2005, 11:54 AM

Quote:

You are born basically a blank slate.

This is debatable. A newborn baby can cry, breath, see, hear, feel, eat, etc etc. These all require some level of brain activity. Obviously, these low level functions are different from high level abstract thinking, but it shows that the brain is wired from the get-go. It is currently unknown how much of our higher brain functions are affected by the initial wiring., but it seems that our so called slate isn't entirely blank. It may be that the effect of the initial connections on later developement is negligable, it may not. I don't think we know enough currently to make that determination.

El Kaz · 01-10-2005, 01:45 PM

Intelligence is for a BIG PART innate, not learned, that's hardly debatable, with all the experiments that tend towards this conclusion.

In my opinion, same goes for the specific ability you listed as examples. Sure anyone can improve a lot with practice, but they're gonna progress slower, and probably hit a limit that's lower than someone else with "innate abilites" in that domain.

stingc · 01-11-2005, 03:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Kaz

Intelligence is for a BIG PART innate, not learned, that's hardly debatable, with all the experiments that tend towards this conclusion.

I tend to agree that a lot of this is innate, but I wasn't aware of any good experiments on it. Do you have a particular example in mind?

Kalibah · 01-30-2005, 01:36 AM

I've been told 1 thing whenever I fail
Theres two reasons why, either your not smart enough, or you didn't try hard enough, and I know your smart enough... so try harder

I think thats a big part of it. We get so ingrained with " ohh Im not good at math so I dont like it... " but do I not like it because Im not good at it? It has to do with personality I believe- but I honestly beleive there is NO Reason why someone couldnt be a Physcist , or a doctor, or a programmer, as long as they try hard enough.

It might be EASIER if you have genetics going for you ( parents good at math,etc) but balance that out with hard work, and you can succeed at anything.

pig · 01-30-2005, 03:28 AM

I think it all depends on how much you care about the subject, and how patient you are in attaining your goals. If you want to be a *professional* particle physicist, or baseball player, or tamborine player, or whatever - then time is crucial. Not too many people are going to hit the Pro Leagues or start a tenure track position at the age of 50. However, in my opinion, if you just want the knowlede / skill, you can start anytime and get as far as you can, within limits of physical/mental degradation, before you pass on into the wild blue yonder. I know too many people who started off in something like Classic Greek Studies, and switched into things like parallel computing and meta-data management at ages of 40+ - or who went from being science team captains to whip-ass guitarists later in life to believe it isn't possible.

Do you want it? How badly? Will you wait in devotion to the knowledge, not the appearance of knowledge?

fckm · 01-30-2005, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Kaz

Intelligence is for a BIG PART innate, not learned, that's hardly debatable, with all the experiments that tend towards this conclusion.

In my opinion, same goes for the specific ability you listed as examples. Sure anyone can improve a lot with practice, but they're gonna progress slower, and probably hit a limit that's lower than someone else with "innate abilites" in that domain.

Intelligence as a whole may be innate (a la, humans are innately more intelligent than snails), but as far as individual variations of intelligence throughout the human species, well, I'm not sure it's that innate.

Paradise Lost · 01-30-2005, 05:20 PM

I feel that any knowledge can be learned no matter who you are. I feel the reason that
a lot of people can not 'learn' certain things, is that they just don't want to, not matter
how hard they try to make themselves learn it. It's just not them. Lack of dedication
seems to be the biggest problem.

For example, I can do Calculus, it's not very tough, as long as I work at it. But the fact
is, I don't want to work on it, because it's long, somewhat hard, etc, so therefore,
I'm not going to learn it very well -- and it may just seem that I can't learn it, but
that's not it at all. I just lack the dedication to figure the crap out.
People are also (it seems to me,) stereotyped to certain things, such as Calculus is
for brainiacks and you should stay away from it at all costs, so most people don't
learn it.

But then you see people out there who are expert zoologists, or something, but also
have an extreme liking of physics, and understand as well as anybody else on this
board who really likes physics. I think it's because these people have some sort
of dedication to the subject, a real desire to learn, no matter what the subject.

01-03-2005, 02:54 PM	#1 (permalink)
Stompy Banned from being Banned Location: Donkey	Knowledge: a natural "knack", or can it be acquired? In thinking of various degrees I could gain in addition to my CIS degree, I was wondering if a person is generally born with a knack for their specific area, or if it can be acquired. For example, getting a PhD in Mathematics. Would anyone be able to do that with enough work and dedication, or do you pretty much have to have the natural ability to completely understand and easily grasp logical concepts? There's people I know that don't know math for the life of em... but I wonder if they could attain a PhD if they so chose if they did put in enough effort. Likewise with being a lawyer. They need a VERY keen eye for detail. Can that be picked up over the years through various classes and training, or does the person have to have the natual ability to pick out that detail. Same for detectives - can anyone just up and become a detective and get trained in how to spot those crucial pieces of evidence and ability to piece together the puzzle? Growing up, I'm sure we've all heard the, "You can be whatever you want to be as long as you work hard!" Is this true? If I'm doing CIS now, could I just up and decide to get a PhD in Particle Physics? __________________ I love lamp.

01-03-2005, 03:43 PM	#2 (permalink)
munchen Crazy Location: Sudbury, Ontario	It's just like everything else. it requires both nature and nature. if someone is born with the improper brain structure to become a physicist they won't "get it" no matter how hard they work. if they are born with the right tools but don't develope them, they won't be able do it either. you need both natural and devolped ability to be able to do anything of that degree, or any degree. Our brains are very plastic so we can train our selves to a large degree, but if you dont have a bat you can't hit the ball. i think people should do whatever they enjoy doing. since people like to do what they are naturally inclined towards, which will tend to be what they're best at. "You can be whatever you want to be as long as you work hard!" i interpret this as follow your heart and don't let anyone decide what you should do but yourself. so for your additional degrees do something you'll enjoy __________________ "Love is a perky elf dancing a merry little jig and then suddenly he turns on you with a miniature machine gun" -Matt Groening

01-03-2005, 07:15 PM	#5 (permalink)
fckm Insane Location: Ithaca, New York	By the end of puberty, the human brain has probably made about 90% of the connections it will ever make. Prior to puberty, the human brain is said to be very "plastic" in that it has the ability to learn and adapt to an astounding degree. After the brain has matured, it still has the ability to learn and alter itself, but is nowhere as plastic as it used to be. It's during those critical first 15-16 years of your life that you learn to become curious, to seek out knowledge, to learn to manipulate mathematics and think abstractly, to have a keen eye for detail. The degree to which are abilities in these areas develop are shaped primarily by our environment. After puberty, it becomes very very difficult (although not necessarily impossible) to alter yourself in these areas to large degrees. __________________ And if you say to me tomorrow, oh what fun it all would be. Then what's to stop us, pretty baby. But What Is And What Should Never Be.

01-10-2005, 09:27 AM	#12 (permalink)
genuinegirly Eat your vegetables Super Moderator Location: Arabidopsis-ville	Ahhh the age-old nature vs nurture debate. Here's my take on it all. You are born basically a blank slate. Even your interests are not determined by genetics. You can train your mind to analyze in a number of methods. It will take a great deal of study before you will have the adequate background to pursue a degree in partical physics. It IS possible. The average individual is capable of far more than they believe they are. Even were an individual to have severe brain damage to the portion of the brain that is traditionally used for mathematical or abstract analytical skills, they are capable of retraining their mind to processing that information in a different sector. Such retraining is difficult, complicated, often requires the aid of a highly trained neurologist, but it IS possible. But then again, I still maintain that the human being is capable of instantaneous space/time travel without the aid of a machine, so who would listen to me? __________________ "Sometimes I have to remember that things are brought to me for a reason, either for my own lessons or for the benefit of others." Cynthetiq "violence is no more or less real than non-violence." roachboy

01-30-2005, 03:28 AM	#17 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	I think it all depends on how much you care about the subject, and how patient you are in attaining your goals. If you want to be a professional particle physicist, or baseball player, or tamborine player, or whatever - then time is crucial. Not too many people are going to hit the Pro Leagues or start a tenure track position at the age of 50. However, in my opinion, if you just want the knowlede / skill, you can start anytime and get as far as you can, within limits of physical/mental degradation, before you pass on into the wild blue yonder. I know too many people who started off in something like Classic Greek Studies, and switched into things like parallel computing and meta-data management at ages of 40+ - or who went from being science team captains to whip-ass guitarists later in life to believe it isn't possible. Do you want it? How badly? Will you wait in devotion to the knowledge, not the appearance of knowledge? __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

01-03-2005, 03:56 PM	#3 (permalink)
Slavakion Mjollnir Incarnate Location: Lost in thought	To a certain extent, I believe that you can "be all you can be". hides from Army Although it's probably limited to your general area -- logical/scientific vs creative/artistic. The people who combine both would likely have the best success in, erm, multi-jobbing. Such as police officers, who have to logically think out clues and evidence, and also think divergently to extrapolate evidence that isn't there or to find new leads.

01-05-2005, 05:16 AM	#8 (permalink)
BK1017 Upright Location: San Marcos, TX	There are some good ideas posted here already. Kudos to ya'll and being knowledgeable about knowledge. I think that if someone works hard enough, has the dedication, has a lot of patience, AND has a good attitude, then they can pretty much do anything they want in the realm of knowledge. I think an art history buff can definitely become a particle physicist if that person has all of the the above. However, I'm sure it will require much time and will certainly not be easy, but it is definitely attainable. Sports, however, is a bit different. Up to about the end of high school, I believe that anybody can play it as long as they bust their tail all the time AND have a great attitude toward the team and teammates. I played basketball until the end of my high school career (at a school of more than 4,000 kids) simply because of these attributes. I was never a big scorer, but I gave it my all and did what had to be done for my team to win. That mainly included diving on floor for loose balls, blocking out and getting rebounds, and doing the things that no one else would do. But I got the opportunity to play because I busted my arse in every practice and hustled when no one else was. After high school though, it's all genetics and talent. Pro athletes are simply genetic freaks. Either you have it or you don't.

01-07-2005, 07:39 PM	#10 (permalink)
pinoychink790 Loser Location: McDonald's Playland	i think it's usually just acquired

01-07-2005, 08:19 PM	#11 (permalink)
roderickpsu Crazy Location: State College, PA	I think much of it is inherited from your parents. Look at friends that are great in math...their parents probably are too...

01-10-2005, 01:45 PM	#14 (permalink)
El Kaz Crazy Location: Canada	Intelligence is for a BIG PART innate, not learned, that's hardly debatable, with all the experiments that tend towards this conclusion. In my opinion, same goes for the specific ability you listed as examples. Sure anyone can improve a lot with practice, but they're gonna progress slower, and probably hit a limit that's lower than someone else with "innate abilites" in that domain.

01-30-2005, 01:36 AM	#16 (permalink)
Kalibah Insane Location: Padded Playhouse	I've been told 1 thing whenever I fail Theres two reasons why, either your not smart enough, or you didn't try hard enough, and I know your smart enough... so try harder I think thats a big part of it. We get so ingrained with " ohh Im not good at math so I dont like it... " but do I not like it because Im not good at it? It has to do with personality I believe- but I honestly beleive there is NO Reason why someone couldnt be a Physcist , or a doctor, or a programmer, as long as they try hard enough. It might be EASIER if you have genetics going for you ( parents good at math,etc) but balance that out with hard work, and you can succeed at anything.

01-30-2005, 05:20 PM	#19 (permalink)
Paradise Lost "Afternoon everybody." "NORM!" Location: Poland, Ohio // Clarion University of PA.	I feel that any knowledge can be learned no matter who you are. I feel the reason that a lot of people can not 'learn' certain things, is that they just don't want to, not matter how hard they try to make themselves learn it. It's just not them. Lack of dedication seems to be the biggest problem. For example, I can do Calculus, it's not very tough, as long as I work at it. But the fact is, I don't want to work on it, because it's long, somewhat hard, etc, so therefore, I'm not going to learn it very well -- and it may just seem that I can't learn it, but that's not it at all. I just lack the dedication to figure the crap out. People are also (it seems to me,) stereotyped to certain things, such as Calculus is for brainiacks and you should stay away from it at all costs, so most people don't learn it. But then you see people out there who are expert zoologists, or something, but also have an extreme liking of physics, and understand as well as anybody else on this board who really likes physics. I think it's because these people have some sort of dedication to the subject, a real desire to learn, no matter what the subject. __________________ "Marino could do it."