"I fear that people will take this article to heart without realizing that it wasn't Bill Gates background that allowed him to succeed, but it was his instinct and drive."
False. Both of things things enormously contributed to his success. There are tons of people with drive who never even got close to his achievements, and tons more with ideal situations who never created anything of value. Gates had an ideal mix of character and good fortune.
There's also the sad fact that personality derives a lot from upbringing and genetics, so you could say that the "instinct and drive" Gates had was also a facet of luck. In a way, most of what we are is roughly predetermined. Our character is a throw of the dice. We don't even know if free will exists at all. This is why I tend to laugh at libertarians who believe they owe nothing to anyone.
Face it, luck is perhaps 90% of any tremendous success. Just because Gladwell wrote about this doesn't mean it's not true. It's not a reason to diss Gates and his ilk and stay envious and bitter; it just means we should stop basing our self worth on whether we've changed the world or not, and stop adulating important figures or trying to derive lessons from their every move. Plenty of innately great people have failed and plenty of less than adequate people have succeeded immensely.
Do I really need to? I think you can come to this conclusion on your own.
When you are born, there are already a ton a factors which will stay with you (well, mostly) till you die. Your health and innate intelligence will have a huge effect. Your carers and the early environment as well. As a biological creature, you can never be left untouched by your environment. You can never be truly free.
In fact, is there anything you can say is the sole result of your own person? That question is impossible to answer because the person you are has been molded by a ton of different experiences, both positive and negative and is not a static object.
The whole point of my post is that it's silly to to claim that some people have "deserved" their success or failure, or that you can do anything if you want it bad enough. The very fact that you are able to be deeply driven is the consequence of factors forever beyond your control.
I'm not saying you should give up and do nothing, just that we should have a more relaxed, forgiving and objective view of the moral and intrinsic value of individuals.
> Face it, luck is perhaps 90% of any tremendous success.
Thinking about it a bit, I see you're right. The key word being "tremendous". For simple success, hard work can get you there, but for the world famous one in a million++ success stories, luck likely always does play the largest role.
False. Both of things things enormously contributed to his success. There are tons of people with drive who never even got close to his achievements, and tons more with ideal situations who never created anything of value. Gates had an ideal mix of character and good fortune.
There's also the sad fact that personality derives a lot from upbringing and genetics, so you could say that the "instinct and drive" Gates had was also a facet of luck. In a way, most of what we are is roughly predetermined. Our character is a throw of the dice. We don't even know if free will exists at all. This is why I tend to laugh at libertarians who believe they owe nothing to anyone.
Face it, luck is perhaps 90% of any tremendous success. Just because Gladwell wrote about this doesn't mean it's not true. It's not a reason to diss Gates and his ilk and stay envious and bitter; it just means we should stop basing our self worth on whether we've changed the world or not, and stop adulating important figures or trying to derive lessons from their every move. Plenty of innately great people have failed and plenty of less than adequate people have succeeded immensely.