|
|
|
|
|
|
by samdoesnothing
201 days ago
|
|
|
> The problem with the self-made man myth Is that it's a complete straw man. It's not about not having help - every great achiever has had a figurative (sometimes literal) army of supporters behind them. Including those in history. What the "theory" actually posits seems trivially true - that the people who do super extraordinary things are extraordinary themselves. Whether it's talent, hard work, both, insanity, etc. The idea that these people are just normal and very lucky or whatever is absurd. |
|
|
The problem is the inverse. You imply that people who do not do extraordinary things are not themselves extraordinary.
You can be extraordinary but shit out of luck. You can't rise to the top by just being the best, you also need and the right support. Take for example any startup. Good luck getting to scale without that. Eventually someone needs to take a chance on you.
This is something VCs even know. They invest broadly because a small percentage will be big hits. It's because things fall along a power distribution rather than a normal. The upside is unbounded. Most will lose, for many reasons, including just bad luck.
Or I'll let Picard say it
Its because random elements exist in life. It is not deterministic. If it was then VCs would exclusively invest in unicorns and take no losses.Hindsight is useful but it's also easy to ignore subtle but critical variables
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1TCX90yALsI