::scr Re: doesn't have the morlocks
Alaric Snell
scr@thegestalt.org
Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:18:59 +0100
On Monday 08 April 2002 17:33, you wrote:
> But the point is, if you believe that nature has such an effect on you,
> then you fall in to the trap you have above, that you would have to
> *overcome* your nature to excell at something. You've already put a massive
> barrier in front of yourself.
Yes. This certainly holds for physical variation; why shouldn't it hold for
mental variation? But *I* haven't put up a barrier; Fate has!
It's not such a massive barrier, though, which was part of my point. It makes
it more *challenging* for me to be good at, say, football (let's not talk
about art any more!) since my musculature seems better optimised for sudden
bursts of motion rather than sustained output and my instincts tell me to
deal with competitive situations by blending into the background until the
last moment then making a decisive strike... I'm better at paintball than
football, and I can trace that to core aspects of my mentality and pshyiology
rather than *practice*. I've had more practice at football than paintball
(sadly).
So I don't have a head start at football; but is that such a 'barrier'?
There's nothing stopping me trying; I'd just have to try harder.
> What if you (or hypothetical Bob) don't _have_ the nature to be an artist?
> Is it just a complete waste of time?
If you're not cut out to be an artist, then you're going to find it hard to
produce better art than an accomplished artist, obviously...
ABS
--
Alaric B. Snell
http://www.alaric-snell.com/ http://RFC.net/ http://www.warhead.org.uk/
Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software