Because that wasn't your point. You claimed it's hubris and ego because greatness is in the eye of the third-party beholder. Now you argue it is necessary that

Because that wasn't your point. You claimed it's hubris and ego because greatness is in the eye of the third-party beholder. Now you argue it is necessary that greatness must be unlikely, which is of course true but changes nothing. History of science, maybe history of progress is the history of (at that moment) unlikeliness prevailing.