>>13753048Everyone has talents, it's just that being smart enhances all of your talents, at least relative to where your talent would be if you were dumb. It follows from being able to learn how to learn. You can optimize how you foster and grow your talents. Maybe somebody dumb has a talent, but there's a couple things to think about:
>if he were smart, would his talent be even more god-tier?>if he instead wasn't "talented", but average at this skill, would him being smart elevate it to the level of being "talented"?Remember, what constitutes "talented" depends on the context somewhat. Where normies might consider a batting average above .200 against 90 mph fastballs a talent, in a professional baseball context, that's the "norm". If you can't hit that, and you can't slug, you may not even be up to bat, if the coach can help it. If you're a dedicated hitter, norm's closer to .300, especially in major leagues. And the guy batting .301 will probably look at the guy batting .350 and think
>man, that guy has a special "talent"So power levels are relative, really.
Also, there's some implementation details, like smart people stressing over more things, that might inhibit talents under certain conditions, but smarts can probably still be treated as a "talent for being talented".
