Agreed, 'Neato. It seems patently obvious that there must be SOME nature component.

If you have no brain matter, you cannot be GT. Physically impossible. So there is some nature there. Genetic factors seem to set the ceiling for what a person can learn. I didn't research this--no coffee yet this morning!--but it seems to fit all that we know about genetics and psychology. Then, after physiology and genetics have set the ceiling, environmental stimulation allows a child to grow into that potential, or lack of environmental stimulation stifles intellectual growth. So some kids start with a higher IQ than others because of the genetic lottery, while for others, a positive learning environment allows them to achieve more than they might have done without such stimulation.

This doesn't seem to me to be at all controversial. <shrug>

Directing growth through hothousing can probably make a child a better performer in one area, but I really think that strategy works against all natural brain development. Focusing all attention on one thing all the time--like chess--is not the way the brain *wants* to develop. In my experience, kids have "ripe periods" for things like math and language, times when they're just ready to learn that subject matter. I suspect that ignoring these natural growth tendencies in order to hothouse something else might actually delay development overall, though I only have my own experiences as a parent to support that claim.

If Susan Polgar hadn't been hothoused in chess, for example, would she have been GT at something else other than chess? Or would she have been GT at chess AND other things, but all the focus on chess actually prevented her from developing other talents? (Disclaimer: I didn't watch the documentary.)

We'd need an alternate universe to try all the "what if" scenarios to know what really works best.

But if we want to develop kids into happy, productive adults who grow in ALL areas--including socially and emotionally--I think there's ample evidence that hothousing in the early years is a lousy idea. Following the child's lead is a much better way to maintain for life the child's natural love of learning.

Kriston