Is talent something you’re born with or can it be cultivated? This question makes us think about how talent and hard work contribute to success and whether talent really matters.

Talent or hard work?

“First you have to have talent. Then comes discipline.” So said Ernest Miller Hemingway. Whenever we’re faced with a difficult task, we’ve all asked ourselves this question at one point or another. “Am I not trying hard enough? Or am I just not good at this? Am I lazy when I should be working harder? Is talent innate or acquired? How much effort does it take to know if you have talent or not? Is an inability to put in hard work a sign of lack of talent?” and so many more thoughts can run through your mind on the topic of talent and hard work.
There are many hardworking people, but none of them seem to have a special talent for it. On the other hand, some people achieve amazing things without much effort, despite their laziness or because of their natural talent. As someone who wanted to go to graduate school, I remember thinking to myself, “Is this an excuse or is this reality?”
“I spend 10 hours studying, and he studies for 3 hours, or maybe even less, and he seems to be able to do well. This is fine for major classes, but won’t this gap increase as I go deeper into my studies, and I’ll only be able to reach the same level as the rest of the world’s competitors if I focus solely on studying?”
Does talent really exist, and if so, is it so powerful that it can’t be overcome through hard work? Let’s take a quick look at how these debates have played out among researchers in the past. Regarding the classic question of whether talent is genetic or environmental, Thomas Bouchard, a professor of psychology at the University of Minnesota, is willing to bet that “exceptional talent definitely has a strong genetic component.” On the other hand, Erikson, born in 1947 and based in the U.S., is a leading proponent of the acquired theory. “The controversy about whether it is genetic or environmental is based on the differences between different people, but the differences cannot be attributed to a genetic predisposition, and if there is such a predisposition, it has not yet been identified,” he argues. In Erickson’s view, what matters more than innate talent is hard work, practice, and the internal motivation to achieve a goal. This view seems to be in line with the advice that “hard work is a talent”.
This debate between genetic aptitude and environmental effort is not easily resolved. In the end, some conclude that there is no solid evidence that the innate talent theory is correct, and others say that “even if there were, it would be impossible to prove it.” My takeaway from this discourse is that the “genetics vs. learning” debate may be a moot point. What is worth noting, however, is that more and more experts are rejecting the idea that intellectual talent is innate.

Talent, an invisible treasure

There’s a fable that came to mind while writing this blog post. It’s Lafontaine’s “The Invisible Treasure” fable. The story goes like this A farmer who had a premonition of death said to his lazy sons “When I die, never sell our land. I don’t know the exact location, but there is a great treasure buried there.” When their father died, the sons dug up the land to find the treasure. But there was no treasure anywhere. In fact, there was no treasure to begin with. But because they dug so deeply, farming was great that year, and the sons became very rich. This fable shows how imagination can turn into reality. If the three sons hadn’t imagined the treasure, the land their father left them would have remained a wasteland. If we didn’t expect ourselves to be talented, would we put in the effort? I think it’s the illusion of talent that allows us to have even the slightest hope for our desired goals.
It is difficult to determine whether you have talent or not at the beginning. Even those who have failed or succeeded can’t be sure whether it was due to constant hard work or natural talent. I’m reminded of a scene from a childhood American cartoon movie. A character is running over a cliff, unaware that his feet are in the air for a while, until he looks down and realizes that they are, and he plummets to his death. I believe that we are all in this situation, stuck between two states: walking in the air, hoping to be talented, or trying to achieve even though we don’t think we are, and the devastating state of falling when we realize that there is a talent barrier that we can’t overcome.
Should you catch the character walking on air and pull them down? The answer to this question is: “Why should we?” A person who risks his life in ignorance may seem ridiculous, but in some ways he may be wiser. This person is constantly thinking and striving, even while on the wrong path. He or she is surely a few steps further along than someone who realizes they have no talent and gives up on everything. In fact, I think it’s more tragic to realize one’s lack of talent and then walk away, throwing away even the knowledge based on previous efforts.
Our lives are always full of tension. People believe that the ground they stand on is firmly established by reason, and they challenge and talk about vain things that cannot be overcome by effort. Like an aerialist who believes in a safety net, or a cartoon character who walks on air. The reason why a person who challenges and strives can stay in the air without falling is because gravity temporarily stops working. Who has the right to pull someone down when they’re chasing their dreams in a place where gravity doesn’t work? Paradoxically, it’s the “illusory talent” that makes the untalented strive even harder. As the Amsterdam marker says, “Failure is better than despair,” so instead of despairing over your lack of talent, why not follow your passion, even if it’s an illusion, in the name of talent? I believe that the invisible wings of talent will lift us out of the gravitational pull of our own endeavors.