How much of the ability to play an instrument is aptitude, and how much is training? Or maybe a better question is how much (if any) training can overcome a complete lack of aptitude and how much aptitude can overcome a complete lack of training?

I've known many a competent musician in my life, and they way the describe even the most simplistic of concepts makes absolutely zero sense to me. As an example, one was showing me a youtube video of an auto-tuning guitar. From an engineering perspective, it was fascinating...little actuators were attached to the neck of the guitar and tightened or loosened each string in response to playing a reference chord. But he started with "OK, he's going to play a reference chord, now, you hear how out-of-tune that is?" Um, no. I can't. He just strummed a guitar. It sounded different before and after, but I couldn't tell you which one was "right" if my life depended on it.

I genuinely think it would be impossible for me to learn to play an instrument at anything above a laughably rudimentary level, no matter how much I practiced. Just like I think if I trained for 60 hours a week I still would never be able to dunk a basketball.

So how relevant are your natural gifts compared to how much work you are willing to do when trying to learn a skill?

In the shadow of Father's Day, is it better to teach our kids "you can do anything you set your heart to and are willing to practice," or should we be teaching them to "play to your strengths?"