Genetics as it applies to evolution, molecular biology, and medical aspects.
There has actually been a gene discovered that might detremine your I.Q.
However, I don't think that there is a gene that says 'this kid will be good at music'.
Maybe it's not the actual talent that is inherited, maybe it's the requirements, such as good hearing to be able to play an instrument well?
I don't think the environment plays such an important role. If a person has a passion for something, then they'll make the best of whatever resources they have.
Of course talent can be inherited but it has no relation with intelligence.... which is one's own and unique ability or capacity..Though people around a kid say that he is a master at drawing and has inherited it from his dad or mom.. it solely depends on the practice taken by the kid... and one thing... as a child of five years.. he cannot become a master jus by drawing a stroke on a sheet of paper...he certainly needs practice and the environment which encourages him
so which one?
Cis or trans? That's what matters.
"Is talent inherited?" - Absolutely.
1. Talent by definition is an aptitude for something. Presence of talent does NOT guarantee its use. Thus, while I have a talent for math (I understand new concepts of it almost as if I already knew them) I prefer studying biology and my math practical abilities are about average and way underdeveloped. I inherited my talent form my father, who does not use it either (he knows less math than I do).
2. Intelligence has nothing to do with the talent. Please, look up definitions.
That is absolute nonsense. Since I.Q. is a made up concept, it’s like saying that you discovered a gene that determines what you made up…
I.Q. is subjective, superficial, and culture specific; so how can it possibly be determined by any gene (considering I.Q. exists only in our imagination)?
Amongst people with equal cerebral health, there is nothing innate within the intellectual capability of a person like talents, inclinations or inherited abilities. All that forms the dispositions and the personality of an individual comes solely from their growth.
The reason for this is the nature of how growth works inside the human body:
DNA evolves from bodily necessities and changes extremely slowly in response to these. What is inherited does not come from DNA evolution, but from DNA fusion and renewing.
The brain, on the other hand, develops all that is needed during the lifetime, and all that is inside the brain is just a piece of "software" that is created after the birth, not inherited. Artistic talent is not stored inside the DNA, it's just a wont that builds up from environment (e.g. practice).
If anything, I would say that pure brain speed/neural connectivity might be inherited, being the brain raw structure stored in the DNA.
Completely false! Do you realize that according to what you are saying, autism is not genetic and we know that it is? Do you realize that what you call "cerebral health" is determined by genetics?
As I said before, there is no such thing as "equal cerebral health". Not even in twins - identical genetics + different epigenetics.
Best example to the contrary of what you are saying is when among twins one is right-handed and another is left-handed. Or do you think it is due to upbringing? Or is it another exception under elusive "equal cerebral health"?
Being right- or left-handed is actually one of the best examples of upbringing.
Genetically identical twins have exactly equal cerebral health, as in, brains with identical biological structure - therefore, no difference at the moment of birth. Absolutely *all* of their differences are gain after it, as the person evolves.
Twins (to be more correct, clones) are, in fact, also one of the best examples for the point I'm trying to explain. Thank you, I really didn't think of it.
You must specify the scope. Just how much genetic or environmental variability are you taking into consideration? If I inhereted the genetics of a dog, I would be terrible at reading. If I had untreated syphillus, likewise, I would be terrible at reading. If I was born in a suffocating vacuum, I would be dead.
Unless you specify the scope, the only logical answer is that it's both genetic and environmental, for one builds atop the other, and each contain necessary factors without which the talent would never develop.
To be more specific, I admit I was taking into consideration only the human race and standard breeding. Also, to avoid further logical problems, I was talking about relative cerebral health (i.e. comparative between two individuals), but it can be generalized once a proper measurement method is found.
P.S. I'm not lurking 24/7. I was just happening to check for answers at the right moment.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests