ABSTRACT
Outstanding achievements in a specific domain of action are a requirement before the label “talented” is attached to an individual. The excellence of an individual’s performance is inferred from a comparison with (a) other individuals considered comparable, or (b) a normative developmental timetable plausible to the judges. Thus, one speaks of a young individual with a “talent for mathematics”, “a talent for cooking”, or a “talent for music”. In one sense the qualification of being talented refers to the past: outstanding performances that became known to a judging audience. In another sense being called “talented” also refers to the future: one may legitimately expect that the talented individual will show more and/or higher-level achievements, assuming a not too unfavourable environment. Calling someone talented is treating such an individual as if he or she had entered a contract to deliver outstanding achievements (in mathematics, cooking, or music) which surpass the previous ones, and which are also due in the near future. As in any contract, commitments are established between at least two parties by sets of conditional promises. But who are the parties with whom the talented individual has to deal? One party is certainly the individual’s social environment, which is assumed to be “conducive to or fitting for talent development”. In the “talent-contract” the social environment is supposed to promise and provide developmental opportunities, and the individual is supposed to fulfil these promises.
