parent comment was a bit tounge-in-cheek but I'll continue the sentiment: You're saying that the curiosity is "natural" hence one is either born with it or not. I think that there is no way around the fact that it will be hard and uncomfortable to mimic the progress of someone that has an innate inclination towards a subject (be it talent or focus or curiosity) artificially.

Hey, that doesn't have to be what "natural curiosity" means. Besides which it makes no sense to say people are born with complex interests. I mean, OK, your genes might incline you a certain way, but that's not the same thing.

Being interested in a subject is massively helpful to learning it. But interest arises circumstantially, it's an emotion. The grim reality that it would be really useful to you to learn a certain subject does not necessarily make you interested in the subject, unfortunately. (Perhaps "financially interested", but that's something else.)

I was talking about curiosity in general not curiosity about something in particular. We are naturally inquisitive to the point we have to be restrained by our parents. The problem is some of the restraints are based on the fears of our parents and not on actual dangers. Also, it's hard to develop an appreciation for something when it's forced fed to you.

> You're saying that the curiosity is "natural" hence one is either born with it or not.

Why does curiosity being natural necessarily mean some people are born without it? It could also mean everyone (or every average human) is born with it, and overtime it gets pushed out of people.