I tend to shy away from discussions that address the concept of rights, any sort of universal morality, or what one deserves. I consider these to be social constructs entirely dependent on the existence of other human beings in groups.

Rights originated as a necessity of law for relative peace and unity to be maintained within the group, common morality functions strictly as a deterrent against those who would otherwise infringe upon the artificial rights of others, and what one deserves is functionally related to the perceived quality and quantity of resources expended.

I would also be negligent if I were not to point out that you've dissected your traits and how they were undetermined by you, so you as an individual are undeserving, yet your identity as an individual and the object of inquiry remains unexplained. What are you, that can be deserving or undeserving of your success? You aren't some third person observer and judge; credit is what others grant, in their opinion. The summation of biology and experience is what you are, I would say. Refuse to consider yourself as an individual, only a collection of cells that produces an effect which perceives the sensation of false autonomy (individuality). Social constructs such as rights, morality, and deservedness dissolve into unintelligible nonsense. Accept who you are, which includes all of your biology and experiences, as well as those shunned traits, and follow your own wishes without feeling guilt over or antipathy towards your success.

Well put. So the credit you can take is what you're willing to own?

The credit is yours, regardless of whether or not you accept it. The concept of deserved credit, however, should not factor into one's sense of worth as it relates to successes or failures during life. You, as an individual, performed as your biology and mental state (arrived at through prior experiences) dictated, but here's the hard truth; those two qualities are a part of the individual and can't be separated from him or her when judging worth, which negates the entire reason for the concept. The author of this thread seemed to conceive of himself as a disembodied third party, examining himself from a position without the influence of biology or mental states, but the truth of the matter is inescapable; those qualities are essential to who you are; they are you.

"I did nothing to earn my talents- they are extension of things I was either born with or acquired during my upbringing, namely intelligence, stubbornness, pragmatism, idealism, a complete disregard for a good night's sleep, etc. I didn't choose to be good at math."

His talents, things he was born with or acquired, what he didn't choose. He is what the world has made, and in some small way, the world is what he will make. The man that typed the original message, filtherton, will endure what befalls him merely through his continued existence, and deservedness is only what others will apply to him along his journey. He is free to act as he wills, knowing that what he wills is the result of his biology and mental states, and that effectively is him. He is not the result of those factors, those factors are his essence as a being.

The failure to accept one's whole self is a fatal oversight of philosophers throughout history, and it gained traction through the belief in an immaterial soul or its equivalent that is independent of human thought or experience. For whatever reason, folks still cling to it, as though in a fugue; it is difficult to accept that past experience and biology aren't somehow foreign causes involuntarily forced upon the 'pure' and independent individual. Free will is an unfortunate casualty; everyone is free, they just aren't accepting certain parts of themselves that contribute to decisions, pushing away instead of embracing the factors that shaped them, that are them, namely biology and past experience.

Edit: The whole dilemma reminds me of a dog chasing its tail. He could pause for a moment and realize that the tail is actually a part of him, but he only resolves the truth after managing to capture the furry thing. Unfortunately for us, our identity isn't a physical object to be captured with our teeth, so we're endlessly performing mental 360 degree rotations in search of the elusive and supposedly free will. The tail is our body and mind, biology and past experience, and the current mental state resulting in the upcoming decision that we're fretting over (is it or isn't it free?); it is the summation of our existence as a distinct individual.

I haven't mentally separated myself from my traits. In fact, it is the very things that make up me that allow me to ask the question in the OP. I am fully willing to embrace the idea that we're all merely the result of a very long, random, complex, iterative, multiscale process. I don't feel guilty about my successes to date and have embraced the traits I deemed worthwhile and tried to alter or mitigate the effects of the traits I've deemed detrimental.

I fully intend to enjoy whatever success I've achieved. I just don't plan on building a shrine to myself.