QUOTE(ReasonableGentleman @ Oct 26 2008, 11:46 PM) [snapback]3984231[/snapback]
My dear
one can successfully argue anything if your opponent is an idiot, or has not done his research. Therefore you are correct but i think it misses the mark here, child.
I think the OP and you share differing opinons of how much your genetic code contributes to your success in life.
THere was a man called Henry, a genious of a boy, pure genious, masters in Law lectured at the university however he could not even set foot into a law court due to his social ineptitude. Yes, genius he was but a social misfit.
There are many factors that determine a mans success and i would argue that a lot has to do with circumstance and sheer luck. Ghenghis Khan was a smart man but smarts alone would not enable him to achieve what he achieved. Most of it would have had to be in the personality. How much do we determine personality through genes? We go back to the nature vs nurture argument and i dont think anyone has drawn a sound conclusion as to that age old debate. Correct me if im wrong.
Men do not follow smart men. men follow men with presense. This comes from personality and soul, upbringing, education. Genetics YES it plays a part but it is only one factor. He was shrewd, smart, socially sensitive, but i believe most importantly he had a strong will. Do we learn such things from genetic code? In my opinon i dont think so, it is our spirits that pull us through life, our will, our world outlook, our determination to succeed. These matter more to a man than mere genetics, to say otherwise is to fall into the notion that our destinies for greatness are already pre-destined from birth! And i believe a man is as successful as he allows himself to be. dont fall into that NAZI blood science now.
To counter your statement i would argue if his genes determined his success, nothing he nor anyone else did/does anything amazing. It is the fact that we continually evolve and improve ourselves, to reach to forever new potentials and levels that is the nature of man, yes man and not beast. It is the fact that it is not our genes but our heart and soul that determine our success which makes everything we do, so amazing.
listen up mr. smarty-pants.
i never said genetics is the
only important factor when determining success.
what i am saying is that one would need the
innate genetic building blocks to achieve certain goals. in GK's case, he was a brillant orator, mathematician (his
precise military strategies are rooted in mathematics, specifically geometry) and intellectual genius due to genetic coding. now, it was up to him to decide whether he was going to use these skills or not. this is where 'free will' comes in. he could have said,
'fu-k it. the chinese army have thousands of soldiers. it's hopeless.' OR he could have said,
'yes, the chinese are larger in number; however, we (mongols) can use our horseback riding skills to overcome our enemy if we position our men here, here and here. in addition, i'm going to invent psychological warfare (yes, GK did invent psychological warfare) to put terror in the hearts of the chinese. now, surely you can see how all of that is genetic based. 'spirit' is NOT an innate talent or ability per se. instead,
'spirit' provides the perseverance and steadfastness to not quit. good example, i can have all the 'spirit' in the world to become a grammy award-winning singer but if i was not born with the
ability to sing then i'm NEVER ever going to become the next whitney houston, irregardless of how much money i spend on singing lessons.
btw, "spirit" is not a good argument tool. "spirit" cannot be quantified; therefore, it's subjective.
i win.