I have heard this all my life (I am still very young there is a lot of life still left) from various sources...
"Intelligence is an asset, but, it is not a substitute for hard work"
This might be true...but I strongly believe that
"Hard work is not a substitute for intelligence"
Updated: My friend Vinay believes that hard work can substitute intelligence but it would require tremendous effort (like in the movie Forest Gump).
I do not agree to it. I am not saying that "Intelligence is a substitute for hard work". All I am saying is "Hard work is not a substitute for intelligence" you might keep working like a donkey if you are not intelligent.
4 comments:
I really liked this part "(I am still very young there is a lot of life still left)"..
thanks man..
Hardwork is not a substitute for intelligence... for doing what and under what conditions and constraints... I feel its all relative... If you talk about cracking a complex algorithm, a genius like John Nash may take time t1 because he his other input is a lot of intelligence. You and me may take time t2, considerably more than t1 because our input intelligence may not be as high as John Nash.. Someone like Chintu may take a lifetime... so basically if you look at a task, IMO the output is a function of intelligence and time devoted (hardwork)... a clear hyperbolic relation can be seen.. Moreover if you take t1 to do a task for the first time, you would take t2 less than t1 to do the same task for the second time.. Evolution at its best..wat say?
"Ouput is a function of intelligence, time devoted and intuition". I read an article on "Deep Smarts" (Intuition) in the Harvard Business Review.
Nice example of Chintu...I duno what will happen to you if he read this ;-).
As far as time taken to do the same thing again...its not necessary t2 < t1 as all other conditions might not be the same.
Post a Comment