11 ms·

Thanks for reiterating it. I’m saying “so what?” to the takeaway. It is putting one ambition type above others because it is most relatable to the author. It d

Thanks for reiterating it. I’m saying “so what?” to the takeaway. It is putting one ambition type above others because it is most relatable to the author. It doesn’t mean it is the right one as proof by other successful authors who are constantly juggling many projects at a time. There are these types of ambition in all professions. You can’t just assume a type you disagree with is not happy. That’s what I’m saying “so what?” to. I’m fine with being downvoted, but wanted to provide more context to what can be perceived as cynicism.

nirvdrum 4y ago
The author isn't saying one way is better than the other and he's not saying one type is happier than the other. He postulates people are wired one way and trying to work in a style incongruous with that type are causing themselves unnecessary grief, even if they end up ultimately successful. The point is to be honest with yourself which type you are and develop your work style to play to your strengths. It might not be the most insightful article, but most self-help topics are built on repetition and reinforcement. If anything, the author is trying to refute the cultural notion that the Crichton types are better than the Grisham types or vice versa.