It is generally believed that some people are born with certain talents, for instance for sports or music, and others are not. However, it is sometimes claimed that any child can be taught to become a good sports person or musician.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Views often differ on what creates a high achiever. Although it can be argued that it is either natural talents or practised skills that solely determine one's excellence, I am in favour of the view that both can make up a person with outstanding triumphs.
On the one side of the argument, some people believe that one need not work hard to obtain his skills if born to own them. To put it another way, on account of genetic elements or living context excluding parental guidance, some people have been geniuses in specific fields, including sports or art, from an early age with remarkable accomplishments. Mozart, the world's music prodigy who had a great sense of sound at the age of 3, can be taken as an example. In addition, some abilities are so unique that they seem easy to only an individual but impracticable to virtually everyone else. At this point, no matter how hard the learner tries, he still cannot acquire the expected results.
However, opponents of native talents' role as a success indicator claim that guidance, dedication and hard work can lead to the mastery of skills. It appears to be the case that parents, as well as teachers, share this viewpoint as they encourage students to develop their capabilities with appropriate teaching and practice. In addition, some have shown extraordinary progress regardless of their hardships to achieve the conquest of skills, which enables them to be professional athletes or renowned musicians. Among the evidence supporting this is the footballer Ronaldo, who overcame the economic difficulty of his family to fight for his football ambition.
From my perspective, I clearly understand both mentioned views, but I would not fully favour either of them over the other. As with the matter of nature versus nurture, I assume they are not mutually exclusive because any person can have hidden innate talents and the potential to be taught well to excel in the future. Without natural talents, continuous practice may not be effective. Meanwhile, invaluable inherent skills would wastefully fade through time without training and effort.
In conclusion, there are good reasons both for native talents and for practice to be the answer to the question of what makes a brilliant achiever. Personally believing, there should be a hybrid combination of them inside a person to make him obtain accomplishments with flying colours.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 155, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
... practised skills that solely determine ones excellence, I am in favour of the view ...
^^^^
Line 2, column 363, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'worlds'' or 'world's'?
Suggestion: worlds'; world's
...remarkable accomplishments. Mozart, the worlds music prodigy who had a great sense of ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 30, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'talents'' or 'talent's'?
Suggestion: talents'; talent's
... results. However, opponents of native talents role as a success indicator claim that ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, still, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1997.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 393.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08142493639 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80608859607 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 176.041082164 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600508905852 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 625.5 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.457928283 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.470588235 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1176470588 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06120827912 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279778611117 0.244688304435 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0707065327267 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0519520924852 0.0667982634062 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140134273799 0.151304729494 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0341157239355 0.056905535591 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 155, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
... practised skills that solely determine ones excellence, I am in favour of the view ...
^^^^
Line 2, column 363, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'worlds'' or 'world's'?
Suggestion: worlds'; world's
...remarkable accomplishments. Mozart, the worlds music prodigy who had a great sense of ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 30, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'talents'' or 'talent's'?
Suggestion: talents'; talent's
... results. However, opponents of native talents role as a success indicator claim that ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, still, well, while, in addition, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1997.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 393.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08142493639 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80608859607 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 176.041082164 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600508905852 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 625.5 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.457928283 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.470588235 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1176470588 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06120827912 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279778611117 0.244688304435 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0707065327267 0.084324248473 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0519520924852 0.0667982634062 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140134273799 0.151304729494 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0341157239355 0.056905535591 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.