uc pseudonym wrote:While I accept your logic, my previous statement has not been thoroughly considered, as what I said on the subject of the adjective "extraordinary" was merely an example. You may well be correct in regard to the vernacular definition of extraordinary. By definition it would not apply to many people.
To state, however, that you are neither interesting nor talented is a different matter.
Okay, I will explain why as a person I do not consider myself interesting and talented.
uc pseudonym wrote:I would suggest that the numerous questions in this forum may indicate you are at least somewhat interesting.
Admittedly, classfying someone or something as interesting is very subjective. What I find interesting might not interest you.
In my experience, when a person says someone is interesting, as a quality of his character in general (i.e. interesting not to just one person or small group of people), this is what they meant: an interesting person is someone who can arouse the curiousity or hold the attention of people around him a good deal of the time. I think this is a definition that most people use. There can be other definitions, but this is the one I use when I say a person is interesting in the general sense.
So why do I say I am not an interesting person? Because in my life, it was very rare that I got the attention or aroused the curiousity of the people that I ran into. I guess this was because, I rarely spoke, socialized, or put myself in the center of attention. In the rare occasions that I said or do something in front of other people, sometimes I ended up startling them since they have forgotten my presence. So for the most part, I did not arouse their curiousity nor hold their attention. Therefore, I do not consider myself an interesting person, in general, since most of the time, people around me do not take interest in me. I could become an interesting person if I made the effort to grab people's interest wherever I go, but I do not.
Now, uc pseudonym, you mentioned "somewhat interesting," and that is a little different in my mind than what I explained here. However, my original statement was in response to Golden_Griff's statement, where I thought "interesting" was used in the general sense as I described here, not in the "somewhat" sense.
I can accept that I am somewhat interesting somehow to someone. (I say that seriously.)
uc pseudonym wrote:As for talented, one could reasonably assume that all human beings have talent of some sort. For example, you are an engineering student. That requires a variety of talents, particularly in the math area.
To me, a talent is an unusual innate ability in a certain field of a high (sometimes superior) quality. So, who is a "talented person?" To me, a person who has a great deal of talent in one field, or a person who has some significant talent in several fields.
Now, for my beliefs relating talent to success. I do not believe talent is necessary to be successful in a field, including engineering. Talent will make achieving success easier, but it is not necessary. However, I do believe that if a person does not work hard and does not develop self-discipline then his chances for success are quite low regardless of his talent level. Also, I do not consider working hard or self-discipline talents since I do not believe they are unusual innate abilities.
So am I a talented person? I will have to say no for now. You mentioned math. I became proficient at math purely by determination, like with my piano studies. I rarely "got it" quickly in math. In fact, I was kind of slow (and I am not quick now). New topics really did confuse me at first glance and several glances afterwards. So, how did I get to the top? I worked harder and for longer periods of time than most people, just so I can stay at pace with the "talented" ones in math. I spend my summer breaks working on my math studies (and several other subjects too). When other people spend time with their friends in the evenings or weekends, I worked at my studies. I simply kept banging my head on the subject until I eventually "got it." With this work ethic, I was able to keep pace with the "talented" ones who simply did not need to exert that much time and effort in their subjects. This basically applied to everything I have done so far. I cannot think of a time when an "unusual innate ability" came out of me.
uc pseudonym, you mentioned that it is reasonable to assume nearly everyone has talent of some sort. Okay, I will assume that, but I cannot honestly consider myself talented when I have not seen my talent revealed in a fashion that would fulfill my definition I stated earlier.
Sure, maybe my standards are high in these definitions for these adjectives. (I think they are.) But then, these words deal with the unusual innate abilities of high quality, beyond the norm, arousing curiousity and holding attention from other people.... and I do not believe I have done that in my life. If I have, then... I am wrong.
*shrugs his shoulders.*
I'll have to come back to read the rest--it's too much at once! You sound like a very interesting, talented, and extraordinary person Omega.
well, in my eyes anyway. I really admire you.
Man, I wonder what all else I could have accomplished if I had more self-discipline...well, I guess it's not too late to start 
...
