-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is it better to be born rich than talented?
- Thread starter DARK WOLF
- Start date
Google for "lottery losers" for some ideas about how wealth, in and of itself, can be unpleasant.
A possible angle is elaborating on what "being born rich" entails. Is it just the money, or does it involve having the guidance and example of people who made it? How much of a burden can it be to carry the expectations and name of succesfull people?
Another is to focus on the concept of talent. Talent does not always translate into financial wealth, but then again financial wealth isn't always the best reward.
A possible angle is elaborating on what "being born rich" entails. Is it just the money, or does it involve having the guidance and example of people who made it? How much of a burden can it be to carry the expectations and name of succesfull people?
Another is to focus on the concept of talent. Talent does not always translate into financial wealth, but then again financial wealth isn't always the best reward.
talent brings richness, but richness does not bring talent.
I would say its better to be talented. Mainly because being talented and using that talent just seems a lot more furfilling then having lots of money. Not speaking for everyone, of course, just for myself
.Depends on what you define as "richness". For example, take Nicholas Tesla. He died a poor man despite being a genius. And I am not sure how "rich" he was on the spiritual side. He was a little... insane.
EDIT:
I think I might have been too picky... again. I do agree with your sentiment. Talent can bring a lot to a life and cannot be bought with money.
Last edited:
Many people who are born rich do not appreciate the things they have. It is better to have done without for a part of your life to gain some perspective and truly be thankful.
I would rather be talented.
You can steal my money but not my talent.
I would rather be talented.
You can steal my money but not my talent.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
This question is too vague to deserve an answer. If you have to give one though the best one you can give is: It depends.
What good will it do if you are born rich but for some reason, which may even be completely out of your control, you end up losing it all before you even reach adulthood?
What good will it do if you are born talented but your talent doesn't earn you a ( at very least ) decent life?
The best possibility is to be born with a talent that makes you rich.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Actually, althought this sentence isn't false, it also isn't completely true either.
Diseases can take away the means through which you manifest your talent.
Last edited:
Sure, wealth can be lost, but often I see talented people wasting what they have.
So talent is like wealth.
There's no guarantee it will be used well, & it ain't gonna guarantee success or happiness.
So talent is like wealth.
There's no guarantee it will be used well, & it ain't gonna guarantee success or happiness.
Last edited:
There is a saying that goes something like this:
-The first generation builds wealth.
-The second generation maintains the wealth.
-The third generation loses the wealth.
In other words, if a person becomes fairly wealthy and her children then inherit some of the money, they typically don't have the same skill set that the first generation did. And then if a third generation inherits it, they're far removed from the same values that built it, and they will more likely squander it.
So it seems to be that talent is preferable to wealth.
That being said, talent can be useless in a society that doesn't allow for that talent or doesn't really allow that type of talent to be useful. And, if someone is really poor, their poverty can greatly slow down their potential.
So the best scenario seems to be to have a comfortable amount of money, and to be talented.
-The first generation builds wealth.
-The second generation maintains the wealth.
-The third generation loses the wealth.
In other words, if a person becomes fairly wealthy and her children then inherit some of the money, they typically don't have the same skill set that the first generation did. And then if a third generation inherits it, they're far removed from the same values that built it, and they will more likely squander it.
So it seems to be that talent is preferable to wealth.
That being said, talent can be useless in a society that doesn't allow for that talent or doesn't really allow that type of talent to be useful. And, if someone is really poor, their poverty can greatly slow down their potential.
So the best scenario seems to be to have a comfortable amount of money, and to be talented.
It would be best to give both a try.
Only fair, eh?
Infinitum
Possessed Bookworm
Of course. It would be a waste of talent not to.
If a person is born talented, then that person would probably never have any trouble supporting himself/herself- so being talented is better.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Talented painters, just to cite one example, may have a really hard time supporting themselves.
This pretty much nails it.
Philda Tressie
God Supremist
Much of a muchness, unless it's spiritual wealth. Both do not guarantee happiness or success.