What some people call talent is really 3 things:

[lana@beige.party]

What some people call talent is really 3 things:

1. Advantage
2. Interest
3. Skill

A person with natural physical or mental advantages plus a natural inclination toward the subject but no skill at doing it yet is called a student.

A person with a deep interest in the subject plus skill acquired through years of study but no innate physical or mental advantages is called a hobbyist.

A person with years of study in a subject plus physical or mental characteristics that advantage them toward it but no interest in actually doing it for fun is called a professional.

So does your child have talent? Here's the god's honest truth - no. No they don't. Not yet. Your child's body and mind are both still developing. They have small hands and they're still figuring out how the heck to use them. They won't have any kind of physical or mental advantage for years. Your child also has not yet put the tens of thousands of hours of practice in to acquire skill. Both of those will come with time and effort. And as for interest, you either have that or you don't, and nobody can make your child's mind up one way or another.

And here's the really weird part. While your child either does or doesn't have the interest, and while physical and mental advantages certainly are additive toward talent, the time and effort they will spend developing and honing their skill is not just multiplicative but an exponential multiplier of the other two. And skill is just effort plus time.

Talent = (interest + advantage) ^ (effort + time)

Put in the time. Put in the effort. And watch your talent grow.

[realcainmosni@mastodon.me.uk]

@Lana You're equating "talent" with "ability". The two are not the same.

[lana@beige.party]

@realcainmosni I have taught for 30 years. I would be fascinated to hear what I have missed in that time.

[realcainmosni@mastodon.me.uk]

@Lana Some people just have certain innate skills; they can simply do things without effort and it is an intrinsic part of who they are. That is talent. Which is not to say that their ability with that talent cannot be refined with practice and training. Other people, do not have the same facilities, but that does not mean they cannot be learned.

As the Collins dictionary says talent is the *natural* ability to do something *well* (their emphasis, not mine).

[lana@beige.party]

@realcainmosni so your source for this is the dictionary?

[realcainmosni@mastodon.me.uk]

@Lana That's generally where we get a common standardised meaning of words, yes.

[lana@beige.party]

@realcainmosni

My understanding of the subject comes from:
- A master's degree in education
- A performance minor
- 44 years performing
- 31 years teaching
- I run a music school with a staff of 12

Stop equating your ignorance with women's expertise.

[joshg@mathstodon.xyz]

@Lana @realcainmosni yeah wow, what a useless incorrect take. on the dude's part. (creds: masters in math education, been teaching math for 15+ years)

[joshg@mathstodon.xyz]

@Lana @realcainmosni and it's interesting to consider how someone could have the same thoughts but simply phrase it as a question, rather than speaking from an imagined position of authority.

"Isn't this mixing up talent with ability?"
"No, ability is basically synonymous with skill, but 'talent' is this hazy concept people have where they imagine skills magically appear without time and effort at all."

see? approach it with a perspective of learning, then you don't have to get dunked on

[dave_cochran@infosec.exchange]

@joshg @Lana @realcainmosni yeah but that doesn't let me feel smug, man. c'mon.

[joshg@mathstodon.xyz]

@dave_cochran @Lana @realcainmosni neither does getting dunked on HEEYYOOOOOH XD

[dave_cochran@infosec.exchange]

@joshg @Lana @realcainmosni I have found that most dunk-on-able people are also fervent adherents to the Tao of the Ostrich