If you came from the future and saw a young man who would grow up to become, say, the greatest musician ever known, only to find that they hated music and lacked any passion for it, would you think it right to force them to continue in the hopes that they would 'develop' love to it after time passed?

What I'm asking is, should people with incredible talent be forced to use their talent even if they don't want to?

No. Because he wont become an incredible musician no matter how talented unless he wants to. Talent means nothing without hard work developing it.

1. No. In any case, if I came from the future, I know that he will succeed. No need for me to intervene: evidently, he will come to like music eventually anyway.

2. No. Forcing people to do things is acceptable only in an extremely limited number of circumstances, and "they could write some very good music" or something like that does not cut it. Plus, talent does not work like that anyway — you can force acceptable results, with the right incentives, but you just cannot force exceptional ones.

I think that if someone has great skills, they have a duty to use them for the benefits of others. But the way in which they do so should be left to their own choice. And in any case, that's not something that only incredibly talented people are bound to: if you have average skills, or even frankly mediocre ones, you still have a duty to use them for the benefit of humankind.

edited 1st Nov '11 4:09:57 PM by Carciofus

NO.

And more sophisticatedly...Everything Carc said.

The only problem with this line of thought is that You Already Changed The Past may apply...

For all you know, forcing Jimmy Hendricks to pick up that "stupid thing called a guitar" is what got him interested in music...

Carcio's got this one.

I woould try to encourage him, but never outright force him.

By what right can "humankind" lay claim to my skills or those of anyone? I agree it would be a good thing, but no-one is under any obligation to do so, as 'duty' would imply.

Do nothing. Unless a few seconds later your future future self appears to stop you from making a mistake you're good.

edited 1st Nov '11 4:38:46 PM by GreatLich

Oh, I don't think you'd need future!self... Just a hologram from the future telling you how you should be changing the past...

No.

You can't have Talent without Choice. Harmony without Discipline.

There's really only one reply to this necessary, IMO:

Predestination Paradox.

There is no change. There is only Zuul

It's a bit of a stretch from "It's peoples responsibility to do good" to "doing good is what humans exist for"*

^{of course, I'd argue that humans don't exist for anything at all — we just happen to have occurred. That's a separate issue though.}

edited 2nd Nov '11 4:44:55 AM by SavageOrange

Perhaps ours is just a disagreement more of words that of substance. You say that it would be a good thing, and I agree; but I also think that people have an obligation to do good things, to the best of their abilities, and from this the conclusion follow at once.

Being "good" is not something extra that someone can do if they want to get extra brownie points, it's what human beings exist for.

I believe subservience, assumed or implied, to such as goals, ideals or any other external entity robs a man of precious personal responsibility. Furthermore, how are we to properly recognize the talented, gifted and genius if they are "merely doing what they are supposed to". I admit the latter to be a matter of mentality rather than philosophy.

Hmm. I was going to come up with an argument why I wouldn't force him no matter what. But now I think, well, how's the music?

That. Except for genius — I don't believe it exists.

Well, since I stepped out for a bit when I had a break, I can give a proper response.

First, if you're asking this question for a specific reason, I apologize, but I think the initial question is composed of a two part question of principles.

1) Is it okay for a society (or person) to force someone to exercise a skill/talent/knowledge/whatever for societies benefit?

2) Is it okay to force someone to do something they don't like if they'll eventually come to like it?

1) I would say that while it's always wrong to force someone to do something against their will, it's sometimes the smart choice (smart>right). In the case of a specific individual, it would have to be a subject which is important*

^{which music is not, but I'm assuming you're using it as an example of something that is}

, and the changes they make would have to be groundbreaking.

2) If I used Electric Torture on someone to the point where they enjoyed being shocked, did I still torture someone? Yes. So it is wrong.

I'd show his cousin the new sound he's looking for.

@OP,

Why?

You have a definite outcome. If you know he's going to become a great musician, it doesn't matter what he is now, 'cause that's his future.

So stay the fuck out of it.

The real question is, "why in the hell are you time travelling, retard?!"

Okay, take out the time travel. Just say you know someone who is really good at some instrument. Is it right to force them to continue to play if they don't enjoy it or even hate it?

My answer remains the same since I did not consider time travel to be relevant.

Not directing that at you, sorry.

No. I feel like this is sort of my story here. According to everyone I know, I have the talent for piano, but after my grandma moved away I really lost motivation and I know I am definitely not as good as a could be given my talent. But my mom forcing me only made me hate piano more.

Huh? Isn't subservience to goals, ideals and the like the very definition of personal responsibility?

By recognizing that they did what they were supposed to, and celebrating this? I mean, a human being that truly did all that they (in my opinion) are "supposed to" would be something incredible to behold.

In any case, I fail to see why innate talent or genius would be worth recognition. Effort I will recognize, sure; and dedication, and high-minded ambition, and loyalty too, and much else besides.

But sheer natural genius — useful though it may be — is not praiseworthy. It's not something that the person has done, it's something that, well, just happened. Congratulating someone for having an excellent brain makes about as much sense to me as congratulating someone for having won the lottery.

edited 5th Nov '11 12:04:13 PM by Carciofus

.. No.

That is the definition of discipline. — EDIT: Actually no, it's more like rejecting that one has to choose one's own goals and ideals according to what is good for one currently, rather than getting stuck in one particular set.

edited 5th Nov '11 8:12:00 PM by SavageOrange