Discover Life

Who taught tiger how to handle 20 escorts at the same time? was that his daddys hard work too?

Heroes are not born!!! They are made!!! *Ironman theme plays*

Who taught tiger how to handle 20 escorts at the same time? was that his daddys hard work too?

No, I never mentioned that Earl Woods (Tigers father) made tiger an expert.When tiger was born, his father a "golf addict" focused on tiger. He gave tiger a club when he was 7 months old and started taking him to golf courses at age 2. Quite an early age and he was clearly nurturing him towards golf. Afterwards, Tiger had the top coaches and still does today. But what initialized the whole process? Why is tiger so great...maybe because of a freaking 12 year (3hrs per day) head start at a time when everything is developing and adapting at a fast pace? Not to mention he himself credits his father for his success.

So, it is unlikely that his daddy taught him all the fancy moves and techniques or whatever, but he did play a very significant role. Plus, he started getting professional coaching at age 5.

I guess nature does play its part, but its more on the person. Every person is born with a talent, whether it may be studies, sports, singing or dancing. I do believe that every person has their own special talent in them , now learning a new talent is another thing. But its like u said, Tiger woods father gave him a club when he was 7 months, so it depends on how you are trained. Like for example take me, I used to play football since I was a kid because my dad was a player as well ,therefore I became good at it, it was my talent. Now something else is my talent but its not the same thing. But talent is not over rated.

both play a role, some people r just born so smart, example : me ^__^

and who said einstien and newton r smart, newton only supposed gravity exists, becuz he got worried why an apple fell

You need to study the brain a bit more. the people who are talented, are in fact more intelligent, or have a mental leaning towards a perticular field. They are dexterious in that regard. For example, Einstein was a coon in bio, and could never match Darvin, and vice versa. This has a LOT to do with how your brain function. you see, most of our brain is inactive, and is only used for neural transmission, not for any information processing. The more active your brain is, the more quickly you will process info, and thus understand things better than others. So yes, you are born with these intellectual perks, so this author is obviously loony.

P.s: Please don't bring sportsmen into this...please, for the love of god, please. These people are mere entertainters, I can't believe you placed that slut tiger, who is always in the woods with people like Einstein. Shame on ya.

IMHO its both, nature and nurture.

Nature in the sense that some people have higher IQs than other people.
Nurture in the sense that most people and sportsmen (like Ronaldo for example), were born in such an environment, their fathers were coaches, their fathers/family-members died somewhere, this led to them going that extra mile and in the end making the next level.

I believe in both.

Originally Posted by Arsal

This, basically.

@Shary, that's impossible. Scientific theories thrive off of one another; one theory supports another, which sprouts yet another, and so on. This is how scientific progression is made, and what we have been doing for the past 5000 years. Science is not "absolute truth", science is the "relative truth", grounded by thousands of years of research and empirical evidence. None of these theories are absolute. They are all relativistic points of view that exist only in conjunction with each other, and at best, rough estimates of what is truly happening.

A person living in remote jungles, without access to the previous scientific theories/a relative compass to navigate through science is... let's just say, the likeliness of this happening is so small that it's on par with the infinite monkey theorem.

what the hell Arsal why do you have to be a nerd and write paragraphs anyway,
The Blog is pretty good and your're right talent is over rated.

the people who are talented, are in fact more intelligent, or have a mental leaning towards a perticular field. They are dexterious in that regard. For example, Einstein was a coon in bio, and could never match Darvin, and vice versa. This has a LOT to do with how your brain function. you see, most of our brain is inactive, and is only used for neural transmission, not for any information processing. The more active your brain is, the more quickly you will process info, and thus understand things better than others. So yes, you are born with these intellectual perks, so this author is obviously loony.

Yes! They have a mental leaning towards the field. I agree. But I do not agree with that they are born with these so-called "perks"
Intelligence is useless in predicting most great performance, for performance relies on developed abilities in specific domains, while intelligence only demonstrates GOOD general abilities. It is true that IQ is a decent predictor of performance at unfamiliar tasks; however, once a person covers the basics of the subject, IQ does not matter much anymore. It is true that high IQ people will have an edge over a low IQ person in a new domain at first, but soon enough the relationship disappears. And those who excel will be those who work harder. I could provide examples of various studies conducted by researchers.

If Einstein was a such a genuis why was he a "coon" in bio? Einstein, as far as I know never focused or studied bio extensively. Instead he studied physics. Therefore he was not great at bio, but phsyics. This proves my point. He could not have been born and then suddenly 20 years down the road had an epiphany which later turned into some theory, I find that hard to beleive.

As for the psychological mumbo jumbo: Are you referring to the 10% or 20% brain myth? Because that is what I am interpreting when you say our brain is more inactive compared to the brains of geniuses. We all use our brain: 100% most of the time. I recommend you read this: http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...rcent-of-brain

Einstein and others are persistent and learn from their mistakes, something which the majority of people lack, only because they choose to do so.

P.s: Please don't bring sportsmen into this...please, for the love of god, please. These people are mere entertainters, I can't believe you placed that slut tiger, who is always in the woods with people like Einstein. Shame on ya.

I think sports represents talent quite well, which is the reason I brought it in. Call tiger or any other athlete anything you want, but you can't deny the fact that they excel at the sport.

I never said that we don't use all our brains. Read what I wrote again. The processing part specifically.

Okay, I read it wrong. Sorry. However, does neurontransmission not play a huge role in both mental and physical informaion processing? Sensory neurons allow us to arouse our 5 senses, while other neurons linking us to other parts of the brain, in this case the cerebrum which allows higher thinking..and therefore if we use most of our brain in neural transmission, and that automatically includes information processing, which includes higher thinking, i.e Intelligence.

^ That process is a little more complex than that. I am no expert, but it depends how fast the information is processed. While the whole brain is used as a transmitter, it is considered inactive because it does not aid in information processing. And processing and tranmission are two totally different things. You should read about the inactive brain research. That will explain things much better than I will ever be able to.

I understand. Inactive brain research? Never heard of it. Will search about it.

You guys going off the track..
Ok so quite hot discussion going on here..Never expectected that serious discussion in this type of site...
Well as far as the topiic goes, I wud state my stance as well..
Ok consider brain as the whole cpu case...The genes that you inherit from your parents is your genome, and
think of this genome as the processor..Some people inherit dual cores, some get core2quad and yet some inherit core i7 ..But you'll realise that processor alone doesn't matter much unless we know other associated hardware like ram, mobo, gpu, etc,,And in this case, this associated hardware is the environmental factors, effort and hard work and practise...So the thing becomes quite simpler now..Although some people are born with good genomes (better processors) but its of no use unless they get proper environment and they work hard. An inferior processor but with gud combination of rams and mobo and gpu can outclass a far superior processor with bad rams, mobo, gpu combination ..BUT keep one thing in mind that if a superior genome is complemented with gud combination of environment and hard work, then an inferior genome can reach no where near to it however much effort and hard work it puts in. Apply the same bottle-necking principle to human and you'll understand all, i,e, genomes can bottle-neck external factors and external factors can bottle-neck the genome, easy cheezy....And that sums it all I suppose

yup Rebeca black have talent too telling us accurately what day tomorrow is