I don't think that necessarily holds. It's a common trope to look at someone who's had a rough childhood and then become a success and say that it's because of

I don't think that necessarily holds. It's a common trope to look at someone who's had a rough childhood and then become a success and say that it's because of their rough childhood. But this overlooks all the people who had a rough childhood and didn't become a success, why doesn't it hold there? Similarly, many people are successful without having a rough childhood. In essence, if you can easily make the same argument either way, that the childhood did/did not matter, then it's hard to say that it holds any bearing. Of course, I don't disagree that coming from that background comes to define many parts of one's character, but to say that that's the reason for where they ended up is in my opinion a bit too reductionist.