3 ms·

The other thing is that winners don't experience reality. Success doesn't teach you anything. It just makes your life easier and this ease can give people fals

The other thing is that winners don't experience reality. Success doesn't teach you anything. It just makes your life easier and this ease can give people false confidence.

sysbin 7y ago
You're postulating that reality isn't multidimensional and or one reality is worth experiencing compared to another.
canjobear 7y ago
> Success doesn't teach you anything I can’t think of any sense in which this is true
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ksdale 7y ago
  I think an illustrative example would be certain young professional athletes who struggle when they reach the level where everyone is as good of an athlete as they are. Throughout their amateur careers, they excelled by being a far better natural athlete than everyone else, and may have not learned as much in the way of strategy and tactics because they could win regardless. I think another example could be very smart kids who breeze through school on raw intelligence and struggle when they reach something slightly beyond their natural abilities because they've never learned how to deal with difficult subjects. I don't think most success is this way, but I believe it can be.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
redtexture 7y ago
Success is a path littered with many many failures on the way to constructing and finding success. A naive conception of success as a lucky singular event allows your statement. Some organizations, and nations after their thousands of failures, leading to success, forget their origins, and are by their wealth shielded from understanding the sources of their success and wealth, via turnover in personnel and leadership, and forget what they learned. Xerox (Haloid Corporation), for example transformed itself from a vulnerable photographic chemicals company under the thumb of Kodak, and risked the company in order to create a successful xerographic business. Its subsequent leadership failed to do the same in developing and furthering a wide variety of computer technologies that we rely on today, the ethernet, graphic computer interfaces and more via the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company)
- bitwize 7y ago
  They failed to turn those into end-user products. But according to Alan Kay, the royalties from the laser printer alone were more than enough to pay back all the costs of running PARC in the first place.
mikelyons 7y ago
What I think you mean to say is that luck doesn't teach you anything.

The other thing is that winners don't experience reality. Success doesn't teach you anything. It just makes your life easier and this ease can give people false confidence.

sysbin 7y ago

You're postulating that reality isn't multidimensional and or one reality is worth experiencing compared to another.

canjobear 7y ago

> Success doesn't teach you anything I can’t think of any sense in which this is true

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ksdale 7y ago
I think an illustrative example would be certain young professional athletes who struggle when they reach the level where everyone is as good of an athlete as they are. Throughout their amateur careers, they excelled by being a far better natural athlete than everyone else, and may have not learned as much in the way of strategy and tactics because they could win regardless. I think another example could be very smart kids who breeze through school on raw intelligence and struggle when they reach something slightly beyond their natural abilities because they've never learned how to deal with difficult subjects. I don't think most success is this way, but I believe it can be.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

redtexture 7y ago

Success is a path littered with many many failures on the way to constructing and finding success. A naive conception of success as a lucky singular event allows your statement. Some organizations, and nations after their thousands of failures, leading to success, forget their origins, and are by their wealth shielded from understanding the sources of their success and wealth, via turnover in personnel and leadership, and forget what they learned. Xerox (Haloid Corporation), for example transformed itself from a vulnerable photographic chemicals company under the thumb of Kodak, and risked the company in order to create a successful xerographic business. Its subsequent leadership failed to do the same in developing and furthering a wide variety of computer technologies that we rely on today, the ethernet, graphic computer interfaces and more via the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PARC_(company)

bitwize 7y ago
They failed to turn those into end-user products. But according to Alan Kay, the royalties from the laser printer alone were more than enough to pay back all the costs of running PARC in the first place.

mikelyons 7y ago

What I think you mean to say is that luck doesn't teach you anything.