3 ms·

That's only the case if you make nonsensical comparisons. I wasn't born to an upper middle class family and I didn't get a ten million dollar trust fund. I don

That's only the case if you make nonsensical comparisons. I wasn't born to an upper middle class family and I didn't get a ten million dollar trust fund. I don't have the correct muscle fibers to be an Olympian, etc. That's happened, it's done. That comparison is completely pointless and irrelevant for me. From the perspective of decision making, what matters is the difference in expected value of different decisions that I make now, from T=0, not some time in the past that I can't affect. (FWIW, 'skill/talent/intelligence/effort' are also part of that initial distribution). The idea that success is primarily random makes no sense at all, because there are certainly paths that an individual can take that will not under any circumstances result in outsized success. There are paths that an individual can take that will by definition result in failure, like if I went out and drove my car into a wall at 100mph.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
shkkmo 7y ago
> From the perspective of decision making, what matters is the difference in expected value of different decisions that I make now, from T=0, not some time in the past that I can't affect. That still depends on the type of decision and context. If you are talking about "should I play video game or should I study" that is a type of decision where valuing individual effort is absolutely beneficial. If you are talking about making a decision based on evaluating other people/companies based on their life outcomes, then awareness of the role of luck is absolutely beneficial. You need to look beyond the results and also evaluate the decision making and luck that went into obtaining those results. It's not an either or sort of thing. When we over-estimate the role of decision making in producing outcomes, we end up with a worse model of the world that will lead to worse decision making.
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  > It's not an either or sort of thing. When we over-estimate the role of decision making in producing outcomes, we end up with a worse model of the world that will lead to worse decision making. Thanks for making my point better than I.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

shkkmo 7y ago

> From the perspective of decision making, what matters is the difference in expected value of different decisions that I make now, from T=0, not some time in the past that I can't affect. That still depends on the type of decision and context. If you are talking about "should I play video game or should I study" that is a type of decision where valuing individual effort is absolutely beneficial. If you are talking about making a decision based on evaluating other people/companies based on their life outcomes, then awareness of the role of luck is absolutely beneficial. You need to look beyond the results and also evaluate the decision making and luck that went into obtaining those results. It's not an either or sort of thing. When we over-estimate the role of decision making in producing outcomes, we end up with a worse model of the world that will lead to worse decision making.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
> It's not an either or sort of thing. When we over-estimate the role of decision making in producing outcomes, we end up with a worse model of the world that will lead to worse decision making. Thanks for making my point better than I.