[mfro]

What are you trying to say with this, that you disagree, or that it's an intelligent perspective afforded to those who are not hopeless? I don't see how anyone can disagree that the aggregate actions of your parents, your locality, your culture, your nation, play the largest role in the cards you are dealt from the beginning.

[bdangubic]

> If we make choices based on not just what's best for ourselves but what's best for all of us, we will all suddenly become more "lucky".

I personally know handful of extremely lucky people who spent their entire lives doing the exact opposite of this

[jrussino]

I think the point is that this only works in the aggregate. Individuals in a group/organization/society can make small positive decisions that improve the likelihood that any individual in that same group will get "lucky".

There's a sort of "freeloader" problem, though, which is that the ones who get "lucky" don't themselves have to be making positive choices. In fact, being a selfish individual in a group of generous ones can be an easy way to get ahead - as long as you can get away with it without being noticed or punished.

[mfro]

The point is not that individual luck plays no part. It's about what your environment offers you as a baseline, not accounting for individual luck.

[bdangubic]

I don’t disagree but there is also an immense impact of random, pure luck outside of any environment that plays a huge part in many lives

[dillydogg]

I read it as in alignment with the previous definition of luck; meaning that a number of previous conscious decisions have created a world where they could come to this understanding of luck