The issue is social signals. "Resentment" is perfectly natural, and is a result of social status posturing. Party A views Party B as socially competitive and th

The issue is social signals. "Resentment" is perfectly natural, and is a result of social status posturing. Party A views Party B as socially competitive and the result is discomfort, an attempt to pull B back towards the status quo or block them from succeeding, and of course, resentment. I think the "lighting another candle" group are naturally wired more pragmatically; they're confident enough (or otherwise differently programmed) so that they don't feel socially competitive, and instead focus on growth. They focus on complementary aspects of Party B's success and act within reasonable social contexts to help propel Party B forward, understanding that if they're able to play a role in doing so, they'll likely be rewarded (be it financially, socially or otherwise). I would posit that Silicon Valley can only exist because of a surplus of the latter category; it's the underpinning of VC as an industry, and business development as a branch of a corporation. In fact, it's downright dangerous for an investor to be socially competitive with founders - if you're expecting power law returns, you, by definition, have to invest in somebody that's likely going to end up more individually successful than you are and it's your job to make sure they get there. All that said, there's definitely grey area. I'm sure that the "pragmatic" / "candle" group can still easily succumb to envy when the party they're interfacing with is quite literally competitive in a vertical they're operating in. None of us are perfect, so I think creating a delineation is a little dangerous. In-group vs. out-group thinking is only going to increase the social resentment factors (we can see it in this thread already).