Pros And Cons Of Being A Natural Learner

Another pro would be for the children that might not be as gifted as others but still try their best. An example done on this very con was done at Stanford University by Professor Carol Dweck. Dweck conducted an experiment where she had 400 fifth graders take an IQ test. After the test, the students were praised for either being smart or praised for working hard. The students then took another test where they had the choice of either taking an easy one like before or challenge themselves to a more challenging one. Dweck found out that more students who were praised for their hard work on the first test took the more difficult test, while the ones who were praised for the being smart stuck to the easier test. This experiment shows that some kids might not be as gifted but still want to give it their very best when they can, and they deserve a reward for that.

Author Ralph Waldo Emerson once sad " Unless you try something beyond what you have already mastered, you will never grow". On past experiences in my life I would agree with Emerson because one will never truly master something but people everyday have said people have mastered a sport or a instrument but everyday that person practices on that one thing all the time. Look at some great sports players like Messi or Stephen Curry both are spectacular at what they do. Messi was looked at by many people when he was young at not able to play due to how short and small he was. He started to practice on end to help him get to a point where a small soccer team picked him up and play for them at this point he wasn't done so he got even better and now competes with some of the other worlds best

Most scientists agree that genes have some influence over general intelligence and special aptitudes in such activities as athletics, mathematics, music, and science. But genes are not the only factor involved in producing these characteristics.

Early specialization is characterized by year-round training in a single activity, beginning at a young age, apart from other activities with the goal of developing expertise (Ericsson et al., 1993). Ericsson and his colleagues studied pianists and violinists of varying skill levels and discovered that the expert musicians typically began training between ages four and five while the non-experts started training later in life. Moreover, a pattern emerged indicating that the level of performance attained related to the amount of deliberate practice. By age 20 the best performers had spent over 10,000 hours, an intermediate group had put in 8,000 hours, and the least accomplished group only 5,000 hours. In their theory of deliberate practice, Ericsson et al. (1993) suggest that talent plays no role in the development of expertise, rather it is an effortful activity motivated by the goal of improving performance. Typically, deliberate practice requires a high amount of concentration and must be carried out over time. The obligation to significant amounts of deliberate practice in one sport from a young age has been demonstrated as one approach to developing elite athletes (Helsen et al., 1998).

After reading The Sports Gene and Outliers, it is determined that people become “talented” with practice and there is no such thing as innate “talent”. In Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell, in chapter 2 it is said, “...10,000 hours of practice is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert-in anything.” This supports the idea that people become “talented” with practice. The quote supports the claim because if it is being said that it takes 10,000 hours to master anything, it can be assumed that people do not have innate “talent”, but rather have a level of mastery over many hours of practice. It could be said on the opposite side of the argument that if it takes 10,000 hours to master anything, “ Why is there

The Sports Gene, written by David Epstein, supports the argument that natural ability controls our lives. Malcolm Butler, author of Outliers: The Story of Success, argues that preparation and work ethic are more important than innate talent. With great examples and reasoning, Butler builds a more convincing argument by presenting evidence and reasoning from the text, making Butlers position better for answering the question How much of what happens in our lives do we control?

 Many successful people are born with special talents or skills. Specifically, talents are such as height, speed, strength, awareness, smartness, and many other abilities. Such as, Yao Ming. He was the tallest Chinese center to ever play basketball. He was born with that height, and put it into use. In the book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell finds analytics and found that the younger players were more selected than older in hockey. As it also goes with when you are born. You could have big hands like Odell Beckham, speed like Usain Bolt, or even be as smart as Einstein. However, some people may need to work hard in order to achieve their dreams.

People may think that this does injustice to the naturally gifted, but if someone is naturally gifted, they would still fulfill those hours because of their passion for whatever it is they are gifted in. You would have the urge to keep doing what you are good at until you are even better, meaning whether

Which is more important, talent or hard work?. Other people refer to this question as Nature vs. Nurture (Taylor). Throughout the years there has been debates about the topic and it will go on in the future because of different beliefs and thoughts that people have. This argument can be compared with democrats and republicans, some believe one thing and the others something else. Hard work always comes out on top of talent because of the time and dedication a person utilizes to work hard and get to a high level of skill and knowledge.

“A theory of general psychology that states the differences between expert performers and normal adults reflect a life-long period of deliberate effort to improve performance in a specific domain. (Ericsson, K. A).”

A person is capable of learning a skill if they put their time and effort towards what they feel passionate about. Has someone ever wanted to develop an ability that you practice it for hours a day? I did, I have spent around 100 hours a year trying to perfect my loving skill, volleyball. It was a hardworking skill, but enjoyable as well. It is my way of life. The most important years of my life was my volleyball experience in High School.

Cote et al. (2007) points out the principle of the power law of practice, where great improvements are seen in the initial stages of practice, but the improvements level-off as one becomes an expert. This power relationship seems to be converted into a more linear relationship with increased deliberate practice. Violinists were studied, and time spent in deliberate practice was examined. By 18 years of age, experts accumulated 7,400 hours of practice, whereas intermediate-level performers had 5,300 hours, and lower-level performers only completed 3,400 hours. This linear law of practice seems to be generalizable to other domains, namely sport and chess (Cote et al., 2007, pp. 185). Although deliberate practice is very important, it is not the sole predictor of elite-level

There is no doubt that learning outside the classroom should be compulsory for all schools. Many of my own memories from Primary School are those in which I spent outside of the classroom making daisy chains and learning about birds at a local park. Nowadays, children are losing the opportunity to explore their natural world and have fun outside as advances in technology have caused them to play games on their tablets or iPads and the increase of cars means that it is safer for them to play inside. Many children do not go outside at all, apart from when they are at school, therefore it is extremely important that they are given as many opportunities as possible during the school day to have enjoyable experiences outside of the classroom.

The first reason why talent is more important than hard work is people with naturally born talent at a skill will have the upper hand. People with natural talent don’t have to work as hard than other people giving them the upper hand on other people. People with naturally born talent at a skill don’t have to work as hard to get it or learn it than people who have to work harder than they do to get it or learn it. Certain things come easy to them which makes them better at a skill than someone else who has to work super hard at a skill.

This first half part of the essay will summarize the main points of naturalism, creationism and existentialism suggested by Baggini. Both pros and cons of the above positions will be discussed and the preferred position will be indicated. The later part of the essay will be focused on two moral issues, which are love, sex, marriage and euthanasia, and will be supported by the preferred position.