Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey_
Beyond a certain threshold, not as much as most people think.
In fact blind naivete, in some cases, can lead to success by allowing the person to be the one to walk the path 99 others avoided because logic lead them to believe it would be the wrong one.
Grit and persistence are much more important.
|
when it comes to skilled performance over the span of decades (doctor, scientist, tennis player, musician etc), study after study after study has shown that IQ only plays a minor role at a young age with only a small correlation to success in developing a skill and is proven time and time again to be a non-factor as time wears on - where learning via experience takes over. and that assumes the learning is done by someone who is trying to learn and improve, where in most cases performance in a given skill, generally declines over time for most people.... as it takes ~10 years for learned information/skills to become permanently encoded and stored in the brain in a permanent, unalterable manner. (note: your memories aren't as faithful as you believe they are and most are actually quite wrong or even entirely false confabulations) so if you graduate from med school, anything which you aren't forced to recall since med school will ultimately be either too fragmented and wrong or completely forgotten. your most and broadest knowledge on medicine will only be at the time of study and decline rapidly from there with the exception of what you specialize in.
We all learn the same regardless of IQ. A smart person isn't going to learn to race a motorcycle any faster than a dumb person. At the end of the day, the one most determined to both learn, improve and succeed will be successful.
as i've said many times, there is no correlation between intelligence and chess grandmasters. the only a small correlation between IQ and skill in a very young chess players skill. that won't determine at all where he ends up and what level of skill he achieves