**Different ethnic groups have different priorities on what is considered to be an *important* task** - Ability is subjective and depends on individual characteristics and access to resources to enhance the tasks. - The stereotype that Asians are good at maths can be more harmful than beneficial. Although it seems complimentary on the surface, [This article](https://www.hepg.org/her-home/issues/harvard-educational-review-volume-89,-issue-4/herarticle/asians-are-good-at-math-is-not-a-compliment) discusses the dehumanising nature of this stereotype. - The fact that White people are sometimes depicted as the ones that are creative over the other ethnic groups may be because they've had more privilege in that they can afford to explore creative avenues. Minority groups in predominantly white countries feel the pressure to exceed in non-creative avenues to ensure job security, whereas the privilege that some white people have experienced may have allowed them to seek more creative endeavours.

**Some backgrounds foster different skills, however generally, all different ethnicities include lots of people who are good at all different things.** - I think it is important to recognise the word ‘ethnicity’ rather than race used here. To argue that races differ significantly in what they are good at does not mean much, as [the idea of biological race categories is outdated.](https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/) It could be argued that people with a shared physical characteristic outside of these categories of race, might be more likely to be good at something (e.g people with long legs being good runners.) - Ethnicity by definition is made up of different factors. The word ethnic is defined as, [‘of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background’)](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethnic). Therefore, people who come from a background that encourages a particular skill for whatever reason may be more likely to be good at it. To take running as an example, East Africans are perceived as especially good runners, and this is said to be [down to the practice of barefoot running, high altitude, diet, BMI, and the incentive to create a running career in a poor country.](https://globalsportmatters.com/science/2019/11/01/what-makes-east-africans-so-good-at-distance-running/) - However, even though there may be a greater number of people excelling in certain fields from particular ethnic groups, I think usually this is only noticeable at the very highest level, like the Olympics. It is unfair to suggest that this being at this level constitutes being ‘good’ at something Even then, to use the running example, not all runners will be East African. People are good at different things and ethnicity does not seem to have huge significance. However, ethnicity can have some relevance.

TLDR: Opportunity determines ability. Everyone has the ability to succeed, but not necessarily the opportunity to do so. Factors, especially race, unfortunately, can predetermine one’s outcome due to societal nature and the norms and values that exist from the past. On the contrary, factors that disadvantage one can become an opportunity to develop motivation to succeed further, as those born with a ‘silver spoon’ have a tendency to see the world through ‘rose tinted glasses’ and perhaps don’t see the desire to do better. Even though there are advantages and disadvantages to both developing from poverty or having opportunities present themselves without needing to take action, I believe the individual has a vital role in taken part of their own success.

If we're talking purely physical attributes and genetics, I'm sorry but the answer is no. There are genetics in alot of white ethnic groups that would allow for height advantage over an Asian in let's say a strongman completion. When we are talking about mental attributes like intelligence and creativity, the answer is a definite yes. The factors that majorly influence this is not genetics but exposure and culture. If you were to bring up non-native kids as native South Koreans or Japanese and let them be exposed to the school and work culture. Most likely they'd mirror the results of the average population.