@Hiake: Remember Borat? They actually have classes on how to be funny. It seems that being funny mostly comes naturally; the fact that not many people would sign up for how to be funny classes... However, that's because people have no use for funny in making a living anyway, unless they are comedians. In that case, a comedian whom probably have some natural talent in being funny would take up classes to 'cultivate' their humour (or talent at being humorous). I think most people replying to this thread are biased in the sense that they mistaken talent with skill (which is something you can learn) and that humor something you can't learn.
^ Thats not the reason. cass was just giving his opinions to your remarks abt talent. But it appears that the ultimate reason why him and others choose humor is due to the consideration of the effects of humor on relationships as compared to other talents.
=___=" but sometimes, situations call for seriousness. and if the guys just funny and not intelligent/talented, you'll get sick of them, because laughing is just temporary. the 'joy' is ephemeral. but if you have a 'deep' conversation with someone intelligent, you get more out of it; and it can brighten your mood because you've learned something new about life. =]
I know you didn't actually say that humor can't come naturally; it was more of a rhetorical question. You said there's an obvious difference between an ordinary pianist with 10+ years of practice, and a gifted pianist with 10+ years of practice. My point is that the same thing can be said about a person with a sense of humor, so I don't see how pointing out the difference between skill/talent does anything to support your argument that talent > humor. So is being funny a talent or not? But if you learn to be funny, wouldn't that be considered a "skill"? You're contradicting yourself all over the place. If you say that musical talent is a gift you are born with, I can say the same thing about humor, and if both are natural, how is it that talent is better than humor? You can't really use that as a reason to support your position. I didn't say you had to have rich parents to showcase your talent. I said you had to have EITHER rich parents or luck. In the example which you posed, obviously the person would need luck, otherwise, what are the chances of someone painting a masterpiece on the roadside and a talent scout happens to be walking by? The harder you work, the luckier you get. This is where I disagree. I don't think talent is an accurate measurement of success. You can be talented but lazy, unmotivated, and not succeed as a result. Someone who is not talented, but determined and motivated to learn will have a higher success rate. Success is about effort, setting goals, and having a positive attitude. Sure, talent will make it easier for you to succeed, but only when combined with those traits. Talent is only a small fraction of the equation. Take Madonna for example. Yeah, you can tell me her voice is sh!tty compared to Celine Dion's or whatever, but you can't deny that she's equally popular regardless. Maybe it was sheer luck that got her to where she is today, maybe it was hard work. We don't know. But the fact remains that someone who isn't (to you) talented, is able to be on par with someone who is (to you) talented, and that should tell you something. ‘Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.’ — Calvin Coolidge Here’s a nice article I think you should read: http://www.memory-key.com/Parents/innate_talent.htm What? Being funny has no use for making a living? lol, come on now, babyraindrops, I think you know better than that. You even said yourself that humor can be applied to any situation at any given moment. Doctors with a good sense of humor will attract more patients. Teachers with a good sense of humor will make learning more relaxed and enjoyable, and attract more students. "Oh, did you hear about that one math teacher? I heard she's hella funny! We should take her." The candidate with a good sense of humor is more likely to get hired. "A and B both meet our company's requirements, but B has a good sense of humor, so I'll hire him." And while it's true that humor is something that can be learned, what do you reckon is more difficult, reading a book and learning how to read the notes on a piano, or reading a book and learning how to be funny? You try reading a book on how to be funny, while I try reading a book on how to play the piano. We'll compare results in 2 weeks, deal? No, I'm not really about to go read a book on how to play the piano, I already know how to play the piano, but I think you get my point. Being funny is MORE of a character trait, than it is a skill, and THAT, babyrain, is why most people don't bother taking lessons. So a person who spends less effort to succeed should be looked upon, while a person who spends extra effort, determination, and persistence should be ignored? I don’t see the logic in that. And again, I don’t see how “practice and lessons only take you so far” can support the idea that talent is all great and mighty, while humor is not. I can just as easily say a person who isn’t naturally funny and takes lessons on how to be funny will only go so far, also. Being funny takes cultivation? That’s like telling me every personality trait that I posses was taught to me while growing up. Did I need someone to teach me how to be outspoken? No, I just AM. A funny person’s humor comes spontaneously, it does not need promoting. A talent in fine arts is the potential to be better at music, and potentials need promoting. rofl... so a funny guy can't be serious? A funny/witty guy can think fast, and you need intelligence for that. I think you're mistaking a funny guy with an immature guy. A talented guy is deep? I think you're mistaking talent with intelligence. And you can't say that a funny guy is someone who clowns around 24/7. See, look at me, I'm having a normal conversation without saying something stupid. Congratulate me please, weehee.
I wanted you to congratulate me over my serious post, but anyway... It's not even long. The only reason why it looks long is because of all the quotes.
I am pointing out the difference between skill/talent because obviously a lot of people here are biased, defining talent as skill whilst thinkin funny is natural ie. can't be learnt and thus do not hesitate to choose funny as they say, "Oh I can always learn that". As something they can learn easily. No doubt you can take lessons of whatever you wanna be good at; but without talent, it's going to take lots more hard work and time compared to someone talented, if you want to be good at it. There are two kinds of talents, man-made talent and God-given talent. With man-made talent you have to work very hard. With God-given talent, you just touch it up once in a while.--Pearl Bailey Now now, I have already defined talent/skill. So there's a difference between talented at being funny and 'skilled' at being funny. No doubt a person who is born with a sense of humor is always going to be spontaneous and more natural than a person who learnt how to be funny by taking how-to-be funny classes... So that is why I said I can learn to be funny; which is exactly the same when a person said I can learn to be good at this. Should I make it even clearer here? Good sense of humor/funny = talent/gift however, good sense of humor/funny can ALSO = skill learnt by takin lessons. "Leave funny to me. I can be funny, try to be funny, learn to be funny. Talents however, are not something i can learn." -> True I have contradicted myself here and let me apologize for that. What I wanted to say, in fact was I find it easier/I am more willing, to learn to be funny than to learn other talents as other talents take harder work. And this of course is just my personal opinion; just as you have your personal opinion that being funny is the best talent and that learning to be funny is harder than learning how to play the piano (which I do not agree with). So you are saying harder work = getting more lucky? Then why are those people in the third world country working their asses off don't get lucky? Why are those hardworking blue-collared workers who are slaving their asses off don't strike it rich? When you are poor but talented; you jz need hard work and determination to persist; and not luck or rich parents. If you recognize yourself as having a talent and makes the effort to find a talent scout instd of them coming to you; you can succeed. I believe life is a series of near misses. A lot of what we ascribe to luck is not luck at all. It's seizing the day and accepting responsibility for your future. It's seeing what other people don't see And pursuing that vision. You don't need luck when you have talent. It's believing in your talent; and taking time to discover your talent that is the key to success. Sure, luck means a lot in football. Not having a good quarterback is bad luck. ---Don Schula LOL casshern, you disagreed with everything I said anyway. First of all, i never equated talent = success. The comparison made between someone whom is talented but lazy, unmotivated and someone who is not talented, but determined and motivated to learn is just biased. If you want to make a fair comparison, then it should be someone with talent AND determined; vs. someone minus the talent but determined and motivated to learn. Now then, who is more likely to achieve a better success rate? I am saying between a person with talent who works hard at polishing his talent vs. a person who has no talent but works hard to learn; the former is likely to accomplish more. Whilst talent is an IMPORTANT ingredient in determining a person's success rate; it's not the ONLY ingredient. I believe I have never said a person with talent doesn't need to work hard. True, he may not need to work as hard as the one who is learning to be good at it... but he still has to do some 'touch-ups'. Now look, i did say Madonna does not have a talented singing voice. But did I say she is NOT talented? Lol i don't think so. Madonna is talented of course, in showmanship; and maybe some other field. She has ideas, she has dared to be different; those shocking pointy-bra outfit and outrageous acts are what drove her to be famous and where she is at today. So, that again proves that talent plays an important role for someone to shine in what they are doing. Without talent; only hard work, it's what hiake said "practice and lessons only take you so far... " They may succeed; but they may not excel at it as much as a person with talent can (with some effort of course). Actually i don't understand why you get so agitated that I picked talented in other fields rather than talented in being funny. In fact I am surprised you are even making ur pick; when the thread asks: GIRLS, which would you rather have? talented or funny guy? You seem to be trying really hard to influence all the girls' pick on funny, casshern... I wonder why? Having said that the original question is intended to be directed at GIRLS, that could be why some girls like L'Ange D Mort said "talented of course... in the end when u need to count on him, funny ain't gonna cut it" because a gal would expect to be able to count on a guy and being talented could assist him in making a living in the particular field, thus making her feel secured. (HER OPINION). Everyone has their own choice; for various reasons. Hiake for example, picked talent (in other field) over funny because she believed she has none... so in ur own words... Why do you seem to be picking at each and every line I made? Why do you seem to have a problem with people who picked talent rather than funny? If you don't agree with my opinion or others; so be it. Nobody has to agree with urs either. You don't have to advocate to each and everyone of us who picked talent over funny that YOUR choice and opinion is better. You seem to think that the correct 'answer' for this topic is FUNNY and when other people picks talent for their own reasons; you get upset... Again; what you believe to be 'right' as in humor is always better than talent in other fields is your OWN opinion. There's no statistical readings or scientific formulaes proving that being FUNNY is the BEST talent you can have in the world. Some people may prefer humor; some may not. So.. chill out~
I think this discussion has fallen into the pitfall of rhetorics. We discuss a mix of things at the same time, wanting to sort out a rule that applies to all of them, it is simply unlikely. My defintions: Talents: something one is born with, often are qualities that do not bless every person. Think of it as crude ore of precious gems. Skills: something acquired. often are qualities that everyone can acquire with proper training/practice. Precious gems after refining and polishing. So is being funny a skill or a talent? It can be either or both. Talent without cultivation remain unrefined ore that lack lustre and is often overlooked. Skills can only refine qualities to mediocre at best (One cannot refine a worthy diamond from a random rock). So one can be funny, for sure, from acquiring the skill at being funny and practice. Yet if someone is talented in being funny (assuming that's the talent in question), one may not be funny in a traditional sense (since the talent may lack "training"), but it is possible that the jokes one tell would be more unheard of and quirky. And if talent is combined with cultivation (as the untalented skill would have been), the sense of humour can be quite unique and great. However, I think the choice of talent over humour/being funny, to me at the very least (since I wouldn't know the reasons behind other members' choice), is that I am not into funny. It's just not a quality I regarded highly. I am not saying talent is better than humour (since I am sure many will beg to differ) but I am saying that humour has no place in my priorities. When in contract, a funny person with an unfunny (?) person with identical traits on every other aspect, I am not certain that I can (or will) find the funny one better. So that's my verdict, it's just my personal choice. Rest assured to all funny persons, there are millions other people in the world, lacking one single tree in the forest does not make the canopies any less dense for you
i dont agree with this dude. If everybody put the same amount of effort, will everybody get the same result? Lets take soccer for example, so are u telling me players like Pele and Maradona trained harder than the rest and that is why they are better? no other players trained at least as hard as they do? Or maybe if i were to study as hard as Einstien do i will be as smart as him? The answer to all the questions are NO. They are GIFTED and thats why they are better than the rest.
A perfect example of the success rate and how far a person may accomplish between a person with talent and determination vs. a person with no talent but with determination AND motivated to learn. Talent is indeed an important ingredient and cannot be undermined...
^Well actually if u take the time to read some of our posts up there.. we kinda established that humor is a talent...
If it's strictly talent (not even allowing if the person is talented in many things, including humour) or humour, I really cannot choose one over the other.. Ideally, I would want both.. errr, I almost said talented lol, but I love humour as well... =( Cant decide.
^ You are greedy -devil JKS. Of course we would want to have a perfect human specimen as our better half, talented and all. But it's just a matter of preferring one thing over the other.
^ Yes... I want it alll lol jk. Maybe I'm taking this Q too seriously lol.. I still cant decide.. I'll just choose talented to see the poll results, my curiosity is getting the better of me now..-unsure
^Welcome to the club Hahaha Hiake too late for dat.. we got a convert here! The results ain't fair tho; some guys voted
lol too late, already voted... I dont think I could've viewed the results until I, myself cast a vote.. Oo well.
