3 ms·
That doesn't seem to follow, unless intelligence and ability to make money are mostly uncorrelated, which I think is a very strong claim that needs to be substa
by johnfn 4y ago
That doesn't seem to follow, unless intelligence and ability to make money are mostly uncorrelated, which I think is a very strong claim that needs to be substantiated.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago> Although such an unequal distribution may seem unfair, it might be justifiable if it turned out that the most successful people were indeed the most talented/competent. So what did the simulation find? On the one hand, talent wasn't irrelevant to success. In general, those with greater talent had a higher probability of increasing their success by exploiting the possibilities offered by luck. Also, the most successful agents were mostly at least average in talent. So talent mattered. > However, talent was definitely not sufficient because the most talented individuals were rarely the most successful. In general, mediocre-but-lucky people were much more successful than more-talented-but-unlucky individuals. The most successful agents tended to be those who were only slightly above average in talent but with a lot of luck in their lives. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-role-of-luck-in-life-success-is-far-greater-than-we-realized/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-rol...
- c22 4y agoFrom my observations these traits may be inversely correlated.