PHJust like the title says,
You, who is only average at everything in terms of skills, would only produce an average output. Meaning, you're not bad but that doesn't mean you're good either. You're just average. In the middle. No matter what, you won't improved nor worsen your skills. You'll stay like that forever, stagnant.
As for the other one,
You are a savant, totally exceptional in a specified field. You're above from everyone else. One could say that you're the best person in the world. Hence, a genius. A person who focuses each vector quantity of skills to one direction. There's also a chance that you'll have a savant syndrome, the bad one. Meaning, being a genius but lacks the minimum skills required for an average person.
So, what would you pick?
A person who is just average at everything?
or
A person who is a savant but only to a specific field?
Here's what I've chosen:
A savant. Why? The context above didn't mean I am bad at other fields nor average at other fields. You can simply say that I can only have one particular field that I am a genius at and the rest would be either being average or bad. I've always been an average person. I don't have any skills that I am particularly good at. It'll make me happy if I can at least have one skill that I am really good.
Also, what if the specified field that I am being a genius at is learning? Seems OP asf. I don't mind having a savant syndrome tho
I don't if you've noticed this but I'll say it. In our world, only exceptional beings were only able to provide progress to the entire world. That would be a creation or a destruction.
Now, if you're just average, what could you possibly contribute to the world? I mean, you're just plain average, boring, close to being non-existent.
But that's just my own opinion, who knows being average is one of being a perfect person.
You, who is only average at everything in terms of skills, would only produce an average output. Meaning, you're not bad but that doesn't mean you're good either. You're just average. In the middle. No matter what, you won't improved nor worsen your skills. You'll stay like that forever, stagnant.
As for the other one,
You are a savant, totally exceptional in a specified field. You're above from everyone else. One could say that you're the best person in the world. Hence, a genius. A person who focuses each vector quantity of skills to one direction. There's also a chance that you'll have a savant syndrome, the bad one. Meaning, being a genius but lacks the minimum skills required for an average person.
So, what would you pick?
A person who is just average at everything?
or
A person who is a savant but only to a specific field?
Here's what I've chosen:
A savant. Why? The context above didn't mean I am bad at other fields nor average at other fields. You can simply say that I can only have one particular field that I am a genius at and the rest would be either being average or bad. I've always been an average person. I don't have any skills that I am particularly good at. It'll make me happy if I can at least have one skill that I am really good.
Also, what if the specified field that I am being a genius at is learning? Seems OP asf. I don't mind having a savant syndrome tho
I don't if you've noticed this but I'll say it. In our world, only exceptional beings were only able to provide progress to the entire world. That would be a creation or a destruction.
Now, if you're just average, what could you possibly contribute to the world? I mean, you're just plain average, boring, close to being non-existent.
But that's just my own opinion, who knows being average is one of being a perfect person.