THE IMPLICATIONS OF AN EMERGENIC–EPIGENETIC MODEL

According to the dictionary definition, the concept of giftedness is closely tied to talent, so much so that the terms are sometimes used interchangeably. Thus, on the one hand, to be gifted means to be “endowed with great natural ability, intelligence, or talent: a gifted child; a gifted pianist” (American Heritage Dictionary, 1992). On the other hand, a talent is “a marked innateability, as for artistic accomplishment” or a “natural endowment or ability of a superior quality” (American Heritage Dictionary, 1992). From these definitions, it would seem either that the two terms are synonymous or that one can be considered a special case of the other (viz., talent may be viewed as a specific form of giftedness). Whatever their proper semantic significance, the terms agree on two explicit claims. First, both maintain that some individuals can be distinguished by exceptional abilities or capacities that set them well above normal expectation. Second, both terms affirm that these extraordinary qualities are in some way innate, the literal gift of some unspecified natural endowment. Most commonly, this innateness is conceived in terms of genetic inheritance.

Aside from these two explicit features of talent and giftedness, there are two other features implied by the definitions that are far more implicit and yet no less important. First, both talent and giftedness seem to represent a static quality of the person – somewhat like the color of a person's eyes.