discus both view of creativity inborn or it is achievable

It has always been a controversial issue whether people are born creative or they learn it during their life. In my opinion, some people have this ability when they are a child, although there are lots of methods to achieve this skill. Furthermore, how creative the one is depends on many factors which have not been found quite easily. Firstly, the majority of people believe that some people are gifted. They take prominent scientists as examples who have talent since their juvenility, and then in adulthood have massive influence on science history. Decort, for instance, published his first equation in algebra when he was just 16. Moreover, all innovative inventions are invented by people who are too young to be taught, as a result they cannot be taught in this short time. In contrast, opponents believe that there are huge number of exceptions who create a unique instrument with many trials and errors, plus their equipment have numerous useful features, while they are in old age. For example, Gerahamble invented telephone when he was 60, and it is still useful. In addition, Experts can measure level of this skill by particular tests then they would give student creativity score. there are diverse scientific methods that develop creativity by which this skill could be taught. To conclude, believers think that all methods just awaken the ability that people have since they are born, furthermore this capacity just has been flourished late in case of old people. However, the others insist that scientific approach and case study both show the opposite saying that all forms of creativity could be taught regardless of age. In my view there are many cases that support both innate/inborn and teachable creative skills so there is room for reconsidering creativity from other aspects and perspectives.