4 ms·
Not arguing for or against, but just to echo a good point Peter made about this criticism: If he didn't have any college experience and made the argument that
by AVTizzle 12y ago
Not arguing for or against, but just to echo a good point Peter made about this criticism:
If he didn't have any college experience and made the argument that college is a waste of time, people would challenge that with "well, what do you know? you never went to college."
What better way to realize college is a waste, then to give two solid tries and still receive little value. It could be argued that that would be the only way one could be qualified to cast that judgement.
- foobarqux 12y agoExcept he received enormous value. There is no chance he would have been even in the top 1% had he not attended Stanford (and then Stanford Law).
- omouse 12y agoHow is that possible? Did Stanford help him start his ventures at all and contribute to the success of those? Is there specific knowledge that he learned there that helped him succeed?
- foobarqux 12y agoYes, going to and excelling at Stanford was absolutely essential. It allowed him to go work in a prestigious firm in finance and another in law which provided him with personal capital and also connected him with investors which allowed him to start an investment fund, move back to the Bay area and gave him the time to search for and evaluate investments. Presumably this is how he met Max Levchin and invested in his company. It also allowed him to be confident and respected by others, both of which were extremely important to his success.
- ElComradio 12y agoSo what is going on, then, do you think? Is he oblivious or in denial about it? Is he lying? Or something else?
- foobarqux 12y agoI think he believes, like most successful people, that he had inherent skill and talent and those qualities pre-destined him for success.
- waterlesscloud 12y agoWhich doesn't exclude the value of a Stanford degree.
- yummyfajitas 12y agoInteresting - the main value of school is signalling and networking. The actual (expensive) education isn't really needed. If Thiel recognized this, he might try to give people a way to get the signal/network without college, thereby saving lots of money and cutting out the middleman. If he wanted to be arrogant, he might name it the Thiel Fellowship.
- foobarqux 12y agoThere are important signals that come out of academic success, like the ability to do something hard over a long period of time, that are difficult to easily replicate without doing something that is essentially school-like.
- jeffreyrogers 12y agoIf you have a name like Stanford (or MIT, Berkeley, Harvard, etc.) behind you that's an enormous advantage and people will pay attention to you regardless of your merits. Thiel got his start in corporate law, then finance. Had he not had this background and pedigree there is no chance VCs would take a risk on paypal. Edited to add: Just look at who Y Combinator accepts. It's not random people with good ideas and talent. It's people with strong pedigrees. Sure they're probably bright, but are they the only ones who are capable of succeeding? Of course not. It's rather unfortunate that the opportunities for the largest amount of success go to those who are already successful rather than those who never had the opportunity to succeed in the first place.
- melling 12y agoHow did he get the money for his first venture?