4 ms·

Luck = Skill + Opportunity

sidlls 10y ago
Could you explain how that isn't circular? As I see it, opportunity is infrequently in one's control. Whether one can take advantage of it is less infrequent, but still often enough outside of one's control. The only thing about opportunity that isn't heavily influenced by luck is whether, having the means, one takes advantage of the opportunity.
- hackinthebochs 10y ago
  The point is that there no such thing as luck as we generally understand it, but rather it is equivalent to opportunity plus skill (or better, preparedness). That is, you need to be prepared for the opportunity when it presents itself. Most people aren't and they deem themselves unlucky.
  - AstralStorm 10y ago
    You also first need to be at the right place and time. To do so, you need to know what that is for the opportunity you want to invite and have means to get there, as well as means to recognise it. Those things do not come free.
  - sidlls 10y ago
    My point was that you're kind of defining luck as a form of opportunity, which is itself a product of chance. I think maybe you're just describing luck in different terms without altering what is meant by the concept.
    - hackinthebochs 10y ago
      Well luck is usually thought of as favorable chance occurrences, usually as a way of rationalizing why some people have success in some area and some don't. The argument is that this form of "luck" doesn't exist. Certainly chance occurrences are a part of reality, and some of those happen to be favorable for some people. But ultimately "favorable chance occurrences" isn't a good explanation for the observed disparity of success. What is a good explanation is chance occurrences plus preparedness. And so what we generally refer to as luck is really better understood this way.
      - sidlls 10y ago
        How is your explanation better? What studies and research support that?
        hackinthebochs 10y ago
        I don't think the meaning of concepts are the types of things studies generally shed light on. It's just a philosophical argument. Feel free to accept it or not.
cmdrfred 10y ago
That function can be corrected as 'Luck = Opportunity', the Walton family isn't particularly skilled.
- zip1234 10y ago
  Sam Walton was incredibly skilled. Certainly his children are lucky but it is not correct to say that their money was not gained primarily through luck. It was their father's skill that was responsible.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    The luck of winning the genetic lottery and being related to someone with skill is still luck. Really, the purest form of luck, since there is absolutely no way you could have any influence over it, unlike most other instances of "luck" which have often have some element of personal choice to at least opt-in to a particular opportunity, even if the outcome once that choice was made had a significant contribution from chance.
  - cmdrfred 10y ago
    >It was their father's skill that was responsible. As in, not theirs? As in, they aren't that skilled? As in, they are very lucky to have Sam as a dad? Put it this way, if you or I had Sam Walton as a dad would the outcome be different?
sharemywin 10y ago
Success = Skill + Opportunity * Charisma * followers effort Opportunity = Risk * Potential Reward * Luck Skill = Hard work * Time Potential Reward = Scale of Problem * Better Solution * Number of people effect Which finally equals Bull Shit the key to success is Bull Shit * the number of people that buy into your Bull Shit.

Could you explain how that isn't circular? As I see it, opportunity is infrequently in one's control. Whether one can take advantage of it is less infrequent, but still often enough outside of one's control. The only thing about opportunity that isn't heavily influenced by luck is whether, having the means, one takes advantage of the opportunity.

hackinthebochs 10y ago
The point is that there no such thing as luck as we generally understand it, but rather it is equivalent to opportunity plus skill (or better, preparedness). That is, you need to be prepared for the opportunity when it presents itself. Most people aren't and they deem themselves unlucky.
- AstralStorm 10y ago
  You also first need to be at the right place and time. To do so, you need to know what that is for the opportunity you want to invite and have means to get there, as well as means to recognise it. Those things do not come free.
- sidlls 10y ago
  My point was that you're kind of defining luck as a form of opportunity, which is itself a product of chance. I think maybe you're just describing luck in different terms without altering what is meant by the concept.
  - hackinthebochs 10y ago
    Well luck is usually thought of as favorable chance occurrences, usually as a way of rationalizing why some people have success in some area and some don't. The argument is that this form of "luck" doesn't exist. Certainly chance occurrences are a part of reality, and some of those happen to be favorable for some people. But ultimately "favorable chance occurrences" isn't a good explanation for the observed disparity of success. What is a good explanation is chance occurrences plus preparedness. And so what we generally refer to as luck is really better understood this way.
    - sidlls 10y ago
      How is your explanation better? What studies and research support that?
      - hackinthebochs 10y ago
        I don't think the meaning of concepts are the types of things studies generally shed light on. It's just a philosophical argument. Feel free to accept it or not.

cmdrfred 10y ago

That function can be corrected as 'Luck = Opportunity', the Walton family isn't particularly skilled.

zip1234 10y ago
Sam Walton was incredibly skilled. Certainly his children are lucky but it is not correct to say that their money was not gained primarily through luck. It was their father's skill that was responsible.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  The luck of winning the genetic lottery and being related to someone with skill is still luck. Really, the purest form of luck, since there is absolutely no way you could have any influence over it, unlike most other instances of "luck" which have often have some element of personal choice to at least opt-in to a particular opportunity, even if the outcome once that choice was made had a significant contribution from chance.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  >It was their father's skill that was responsible. As in, not theirs? As in, they aren't that skilled? As in, they are very lucky to have Sam as a dad? Put it this way, if you or I had Sam Walton as a dad would the outcome be different?

sharemywin 10y ago

Success = Skill + Opportunity * Charisma * followers effort Opportunity = Risk * Potential Reward * Luck Skill = Hard work * Time Potential Reward = Scale of Problem * Better Solution * Number of people effect Which finally equals Bull Shit the key to success is Bull Shit * the number of people that buy into your Bull Shit.