Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > Instruments > Guitar Techniques
User Name  

Closed Thread
Old 08-27-2013, 03:35 AM   #101
Est. 1966.
SlackerBabbath's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Burnley, UK
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
some people can still read and write better than others, though.

i mean i agree, education goes a long way, of course it does.

but just because it does doesn't negate the fact that (for whatever reason, as i said, it's complicated) some people like and are better at some things more than others.

Maybe some people are better at certain things than others because they happen to 'like' doing those certain things.
To become truly good at something, to the point where people would label you 'talented', I've always found that it's almost imperative that you enjoy doing it, otherwise it's almost impossible to put the hours in gaining the experience that makes you good at doing something, unless of course you happen to have a good incentive, such as getting paid, which explains why some people become really good at doing jobs that they don't particularly like doing.

While we can certainly see evidence that would suggest that eye colour, skin colour, body shape, etc are all things that are passed along geneticaly, I don't think we can say the same thing about a person's likes and dislikes.
Personaly, I appear to be the first serious artist in my family. There's no evidence that a serious liking for art is something that is geneticaly present and passed on in my family, although that said, my daughter is now following in my footsteps and becoming a pretty mean artist herself, my son on the other hand, while he appreciates art, doesn't have a particular interest in it.
I would say that my daughter's interest in art is a result of nurture. She happened to be influenced at just the right optimal time in her life.
Y'see, my son is almost 21 years old now, while my daughter is 14. I didn't start seriously painting until about 5 years ago, (and hadn't really done any art since before my daughter was born) so at the time my son was already an adolescent, more interested in the influences of his friends than his family (and now he's seriously into computer games as a result of those influences) but my daughter was only around 9 years old when I started painting, still of an age when a kid watches and copies their parents and older siblings (yep, she's also into computer games as a result of her older brother's influence) more than being influenced by their friends.

Studies have shown similar things happening in other primates. At a young age they tend to copy and learn off their parents and from adolescence onwards tend to learn more from their peers than their family.

Now, the interesting thing is that this behaviour of switching influences at around a certain age does seem to be hard-wired into our genes. So we can say that it's kind of a mixture of both nature and nurture. The nature provides the mechanism that decides who we are influenced by while the nurture provides the influence itself.
“Our life is what our thoughts make it.”
― Marcus Aurelius

Slacker's Art Website.
SlackerBabbath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 05:03 AM   #102
Shallow and pedantic.
Zaphod_Beeblebr's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind a desk.
Originally Posted by Dreamdancer11
Teaching as word implies instruction not formal instruction.The neighbor taugh you your first chord,he is not much of a player or really a musician or a berkley teacher or anything "formal" for that matter but the fact that you played your first chord was because of him you werent "selftaught" this however you may want to spin it .

If you think about it that is your main problem.You take waaaay too many things for granted that they simple are not.You expect pentatonics and music from the kids in my example? say whaaaaat!!!??!!!? maybe a few centuries down the road when the knowledge has accumulated enough so their decendands CAN LEARN IT ...but those kids? they would be basically cavemen(both "gifted" and "ungifted").Not even a regular voice but earie screams(both "gifted" and "ungifted").Guitars would be most likely used as a weapon or a toilet cause you see they would have nothing to be taught from...to mimic.Even those tribes you say and the noises they created wasnt the result of an overnight process,of someones talent but of accumulated knowledge passed on from generation to generation.

Thats why this is a great example cause it clearly shows that you take too many "innate talents" for granted when its basically only things you were taught(formally or...informally ).Taking you to that situation or anyone for that matter you would be just another caveman.You are what you are from nurture alone.

Take all the knowledge out and you are just another caveman.IF there was innate talent that wouldnt be the case....but it clear that its not.

In "Neural Correlates of Consonance, Dissonance, and the Hierarchy of Musical Pitch in the Human Brainstem" (Bidelman G, Krishnan A, Journal Of Neuroscience 2009), the authors suggest, with quantitative evidence, that harmonic relationships are likely to be neurological rather than learned. "The basis of musical consonance as revealed by congenital amusia" (Cousineau M, McDermott J, Peretz I, PNAS 2012) supports this assertion. Further to this "The Neurocognitive Components of Pitch Processing: Insights from Absolute Pitch" (Wilson S, Lusher D, Wan C, Dudgeon P, Reutens D, Cerebral Cortex, 2009) finds that differences in ability in pitch recognition and duplication are not only neurological but identifiable during early stages of cognitive development.

Thus, my assertion: I expect basic diatonic harmony from people left with no cultural influence, except in cases where the person has congenital amusia, a condition clearly identified as having hereditary roots in "The Genetics of Congenital Amusia (Tone Deafness): A Family-Aggregation Study" (Peretz I, Cummings S, Dubé M-P, American Journal Of Human Genetics, 2007).

Thus I put it to you: talent exists, nurture is not the only thing that matters. If you can actually prove what you say rather than more or less saying "NO" as you have done so far then please, be my guest.
R.I.P. My Signature. Lost to us in the great Signature Massacre of 2014.

Zaphod_Beeblebr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 05:14 AM   #103
steven seagull
not really a seagull
steven seagull's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southport, UK
yeah guys, this has been kinda interesting and all that but it's wandered a little far from the realms of guitar techniques
Actually called Mark!

Originally Posted by TNfootballfan62
People with a duck for their avatar always give good advice.

...it's a seagull

Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
i wanna see a clip of a recto buying some groceries.

steven seagull is offline   Reply With Quote
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:21 PM.

Forum Archives / About / TOS / Advertise with us / Customer Support / Ultimate-Guitar.Com © 2016
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.