3 ms·
It's a post-factum rationalization of personal experience possibly mixed with some anecdata. Fine as a motivational material but that's all this is.
by 331c8c71 3y ago
It's a post-factum rationalization of personal experience possibly mixed with some anecdata.
Fine as a motivational material but that's all this is.
- helicalmix 3y agoI get what you’re saying, and I agree that there’s a survival bias for all winners. But the pendulum swings too far if you believe you can’t learn anything at all from winners. Can you say that, for all winners of any field, there’s no correlation between the winners and the losers that is not attributable to luck?
- 331c8c71 3y agoI think there are probably some persistent differences between the superachievers and the normals but I am very skeptical in the ability of the former to teach (and of the latter to learn from the former).
- helicalmix 3y agoOh, this is an interesting point that I think I agree with on some level. Are you saying superachievers can’t teach others to be superachievers, or are you saying that superachievers can’t teach non achievers to be achievers