Well, with sports it's a lot of repeating things to perfect them. This speeds up response time. With, say, something intellectual, it's stretching the mind -- so to speak -- to do entirely different things. Not slamming sports. Just questioning applying the term "genius" here. Agile, yes. Expert, yes. But genius?
Yes, genius. Learning to write a poem is a lot like learning to throw a ball. In both cases, mastering a skill requires practice - whether you call it "a lot of repeating things" or "stretching the mind." The fact that physical skills also require physical capabilities (muscle strength, flexibility etc) doesn't diminish the mental aspect of it.
What leads you to this conclusion? I am not a natural athlete nor a gifted writer, but I don't find one to be significantly less challenging than the other.
I'm not an evolutionary biologist, but it seems to me we've been running around hunting for a lot longer than we've been sitting around writing (/ doing math / other mainly intellectual activity), and thus one is significantly more natural than the other given our history. The human body seems designed to throw spears / rocks / balls. The necessary mental faculties for writing a poem seem more complicated than those needed for doing sports. The proportion of good athletes to good writers.
I'd love to be corrected on this if the opposite is true, that becoming a good athlete is just as difficult as or more difficult than becoming a good writer. I'm just not seeing it.
Writing is just another form of communication. Be it grunting noises, speech, or song, it has been in development for a very, very long time.
I won't comment on the difficulty of becoming a good athlete to that of being a good writer because it really is like comparing apples to oranges. That being said, becoming a good athlete can be incredibly tough both physically, and mentally.
Take a relatively simple sport like running. You will find a huge variation in the efficiency of joggers, even though it is a "natural" motion for the body. This is not even taking into account training, or nutrition. In fact, there are actually people who study the science of running:
The best athletes have an improvisational quality--they're not just repeating techniques but applying the right technique to the given tactical situation in creative and unanticipated ways.
"Good genes may account for some of the differences in ability, but even the most genetically well-endowed prodigy clearly needs practice—lots of it—to develop the brain of an athlete. As soon as someone starts to practice a new sport, his brain begins to change, and the changes continue for years."
Comments
Genius? Or just highly-skilled?
pray tell what exactly is the difference
Well, with sports it's a lot of repeating things to perfect them. This speeds up response time. With, say, something intellectual, it's stretching the mind -- so to speak -- to do entirely different things. Not slamming sports. Just questioning applying the term "genius" here. Agile, yes. Expert, yes. But genius?
Yes, genius. Learning to write a poem is a lot like learning to throw a ball. In both cases, mastering a skill requires practice - whether you call it "a lot of repeating things" or "stretching the mind." The fact that physical skills also require physical capabilities (muscle strength, flexibility etc) doesn't diminish the mental aspect of it.
"Learning to write a poem is a lot like learning to throw a ball. In both cases, mastering a skill requires practice"
I don't disagree, but I think due to our evolutionary history one requires significantly less practice than the other.
What leads you to this conclusion? I am not a natural athlete nor a gifted writer, but I don't find one to be significantly less challenging than the other.
I'm not an evolutionary biologist, but it seems to me we've been running around hunting for a lot longer than we've been sitting around writing (/ doing math / other mainly intellectual activity), and thus one is significantly more natural than the other given our history. The human body seems designed to throw spears / rocks / balls. The necessary mental faculties for writing a poem seem more complicated than those needed for doing sports. The proportion of good athletes to good writers.
I'd love to be corrected on this if the opposite is true, that becoming a good athlete is just as difficult as or more difficult than becoming a good writer. I'm just not seeing it.
Writing is just another form of communication. Be it grunting noises, speech, or song, it has been in development for a very, very long time.
I won't comment on the difficulty of becoming a good athlete to that of being a good writer because it really is like comparing apples to oranges. That being said, becoming a good athlete can be incredibly tough both physically, and mentally.
Take a relatively simple sport like running. You will find a huge variation in the efficiency of joggers, even though it is a "natural" motion for the body. This is not even taking into account training, or nutrition. In fact, there are actually people who study the science of running:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrOgDCZ4GUo
The best athletes have an improvisational quality--they're not just repeating techniques but applying the right technique to the given tactical situation in creative and unanticipated ways.
I must still disagree: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genius
This is like people calling skills "artistry."
Both:
"Good genes may account for some of the differences in ability, but even the most genetically well-endowed prodigy clearly needs practice—lots of it—to develop the brain of an athlete. As soon as someone starts to practice a new sport, his brain begins to change, and the changes continue for years."