Link to original post: [drupal=5193]Paradigm Paralysis (the line between good and great; incompetent and prodigious)[/drupal]
I was recently asked a good question: what separates the poor from the good from the great? (in terms of ability/skill/talent/whatever)
I think talent is determined by how efficient your thought model is for the given task. After all, the task is an application of information, and how effectively you wield that information determines the outcome. Think about it: your brain is essentially an enormous Boolean logic network, so everything ultimately reduces to information and how it's processed. There's nothing irreducible about talent or skill.
With that in mind, people who're apparently talented for no good reason just have the inheritance of a suitable model for whatever it is that they're good at. Some talented Smash players who got good, but not national-level could be argued to be people who approached the construction of relevant thought models a certain way, but said way capped and reached its potential, and they never thought or bothered to reconstruct that model by virtue of what I call paradigm paralysis, or, being stuck in one particular mode of thinking.
Visualize this concept as two lines. Bad models, i.e. ones where information isn't processed in an efficient way could be analogized as two lines that intersect and subvert early on. Good models can be said to be lines with higher slopes, so their limit is higher. Great models can be said to be parallel lines, wherein the process of amending the thought model never ends by virtue of an active effort to examine preexisting ones, identify problems, and adapt.
Talent and skill are available to anybody; it just depends on you being observant and being able to identify your thoughts so you can interface with you how think. If you consider the essence of information, you'll see that this is absolutely true. \
I was recently asked a good question: what separates the poor from the good from the great? (in terms of ability/skill/talent/whatever)
I think talent is determined by how efficient your thought model is for the given task. After all, the task is an application of information, and how effectively you wield that information determines the outcome. Think about it: your brain is essentially an enormous Boolean logic network, so everything ultimately reduces to information and how it's processed. There's nothing irreducible about talent or skill.
With that in mind, people who're apparently talented for no good reason just have the inheritance of a suitable model for whatever it is that they're good at. Some talented Smash players who got good, but not national-level could be argued to be people who approached the construction of relevant thought models a certain way, but said way capped and reached its potential, and they never thought or bothered to reconstruct that model by virtue of what I call paradigm paralysis, or, being stuck in one particular mode of thinking.
Visualize this concept as two lines. Bad models, i.e. ones where information isn't processed in an efficient way could be analogized as two lines that intersect and subvert early on. Good models can be said to be lines with higher slopes, so their limit is higher. Great models can be said to be parallel lines, wherein the process of amending the thought model never ends by virtue of an active effort to examine preexisting ones, identify problems, and adapt.
Talent and skill are available to anybody; it just depends on you being observant and being able to identify your thoughts so you can interface with you how think. If you consider the essence of information, you'll see that this is absolutely true. \
