Forum Moderators: open
My mother, rest her merry, brainy soul, convinced me early on that I was - as she liked to put it, quoting the cartoon character Yogi Bear - "SMARRR-ter than the average bear!" I happily assumed that my Yogi-like intelligence would ensure great things. My sense of entitlement grew when I easily won good marks in school, then grew some more when three different college professors told me I had a talent for writing. Rising to the top, I gathered, was a matter of natural buoyancy.The reality check came in my twenties, when nearly a decade of middling effort failed to cast the glow of my writing genius much beyond my study walls. By my early thirties I saw the obvious: my smarts and "talent" - above average or not - would count for little unless I outworked most of the other writers. Only when I started putting in ...
Essentially the full story is that just having a good brain or a lean frame isn't enough: you have to work and train, and have a supportive environment, usually for 10--15 years, before you become an "expert" or a "genius" in your field, in sport or intellect. The nice bit is that you don't have to be very "smart" (eg high IQ) to become a "genius". (I live in hope.)
It does mean that those get-rich-quick schemes/scams won't get you to be rich or a genius, of course!
(On top of the 10--15 years' work, I think that an "edit" button is very important if I am going to have a chance!)
Rgds
Damon
[edited by: DamonHD at 12:38 pm (utc) on Sep. 25, 2006]
Yes, Edison.
The article suggests that it's probably more accurately/scientifically:
1% inspiration, 29% education and support, and 70% perspiration.
Rgds
Damon
