While being a proficient typist can help to a programmer, it’s less critical than excelling in problem-solving skills. For instance, a programmer typing at 70 wpm might outperform someone typing at 200 wpm if the former has superior problem-solving skills and deeper technical knowledge. Discipline alone cannot surpass the natural advantages of talent. The Gaussian distribution demonstrates that people have fixed ranges of cognitive abilities like IQ, memory, and focus, which are are inherent and barely, if ever, changed by effort. For example, someone with an IQ of 95 will generally not outperform someone with an IQ of 110 in complex tasks. This is a general rule, not an exception, similar to how running speed is related to an athlete’s physical attributes. This highlights that while discipline is important, it works within the limits of one’s natural talent. The belief that discipline alone can surpass talent often comes from personal experience and a desire for recognition. Talented people tend to emphasize their discipline over their natural gifts because acknowledging talent requires humility and doesn’t get as much praise. While discipline is essential for success, it has its limits. My original reply argues that the statement "discipline surpasses talent" is actually the reverse, because talent itself already stands out among those who lack it. Best regards to Gerson Azabache (10fastfingers.com/user/3151359/). Thank you, I have enjoyed the debate, it helped clarifying my ideas. Our visions are clear and I think can't go deeper, each one has his own point of view. :)

•   Visitors
•   Recent Competitions