Does neuroplasticity cancel the notion of "aptitudes" as a natural gift? Considering the definition of neuroplasticity as the capability of our brain to rewire itself by forming new neural connections throughout the life, it seems to me that our brain is like a programmable computer and all we have to do is to input new codes and debug/delete/re-program what we have internalized from our parents and the environment.

Having that in mind, this notion that people are being born by some special gifts called "aptitudes" loses its credibility. According to what aptitude pros say: "Aptitudes are natural talents born differently in every individual and they are special abilities for doing, or learning to do, certain kinds of things which is unique in every person."

It seems to me that what we have in our unconscious "to some extent" can be controlled by what we consciously decide to do and therefore, neuroplasticity seems more true to me than being born by special gifts called "aptitudes". Am I correct? or, there is still more to know about the relationship between "neuroplasticity" and "aptitudes"?
To elaborate upon @Rooirokbokkie's comment, neuroplasticity is not exactly like changing computer code, because the brain is not a computer. The brain performs computations, but thinking of it as analogical to consumer CPUs and their Von-Neumann architecture is limiting. For more information on this idea, see "Moving Beyond Metaphors: Understanding The Mind For What It Is" by Chris Eliasmith.

The most important difference is that not everything in your brain is re-wireable. Related questions that explore this are:


Does adult neurogenesis occur only in the olfactory bulb and the hippocampus?
What evidence is there that the adult brain can produce new neurons?