I know what you mean, but like the poster, I have an aversion for all the hustle BS advice that I think is toxic. I'm curious to find out what part of my advice can be considered 'exactly the kind of stuff the OP was complaining about'?

I truely believe that everything we create in life, which includes a new venture, can be viewed in the frame of self actualization. To me this means the motive to realize one's full potential.

To me that is the essence of what an entrepreneur is trying to do, just in the context of co-creation with the market.

I'm not like the poster. I read your comment and I get some message that I think is helpful.

But there is no way I can be reasonably sure the message I got is the one you trying to convey, what means the post isn't clear (and in fact, I get a slightly different message from your answer). There is no indication on your post that the message is largely known to be true, or that it's opinion, or a hypothesis, I can't get how certain I must be of it. Overall I can't be sure that I'm just getting a message that fits my biases from noise, or if I am actually deriving meaning from the text.

A sentence like "How you become unstoppable is finding your 'why' for doing it" is unscientific. That doesn't mean it's wrong, it's just completely open to interpretation. There are too many different ways to refine that idea into a testable hypothesis. So it doesn't mean much to say it's based on scientific research. It doesn't have any bearing on the original comment about vague, facile language.

Treat that sentence as an awkward summation of personal experience then. That's how I took it, and it reflects perfectly my own.

"Telling people to become unstoppable helps them succeed in starting businesses," on the other hand, is a testable hypothesis, as is "people who believe they are unstoppable are more likely to start a successful business", and that's how interpreted the comments in this thread.