Whenever you read anything citing a few examples of outlying success, such as Jobs, think of Nassim Taleb and his observation that there will always exist exceptionally successful fund managers, you just don't hear about the other 99%. Regarding Gladwell, if you read carefully there's always an catch in his articles and books, something even as short as a sentence or two that is illogical and refutes his entire argument. For example, he argued the installation of the suicide barrier on the Golden Gate bridge, because suicide is an impulsive act and a barrier would stop people from jumping. The cost of this barrier was $220 million dollars. Are nearly a year in bridge tolls... Not once does he mention that suicide rates in the US have been going up year after year, a barrier, and one of this incredible cost, is not going to make a difference to that reality.
Right yes he loves the "telling detail" that proves a narrative, but at the end of the day it's just a narrative. I haven't actually read Talking With Strangers, the book your example comes from, but his example about the GG Bridge is about 'context' i.e. ppl only wanted to suicide on THAT particular bridge, and most ppl who didn't jump thanks to being stopped, would not go on to suicide elsewhere. So a barrier made sense. He's saying context or environment is everything to human beings. We're creatures of context. Maybe so, but it's also a reductionist, environmental, view of humans that makes less of things like grace and agency. His viewpoint also does not try to understand the broader macro trends in society such as suicide incidence and why it might be increasing
Thank you for eloquently explaining this. Whenever i see Gladwell analysis, i try think people want to reduce him a lot more than what he deserves. He does oversimplify his data but the data still speaks for itself
Tom. great article! Yes, I believe successful people are much more likely to be self-made rather than a "product of their environment" or "product of their time or era", etc. Malcolm Gladwell seemed to cherry-pick a few examples here and there, and then build a narrative around those examples to try to "prove" people are successful due to their circumstances. You did a very good job showing such thinking overall is just not true. It was a bit of a long article but worth the time in reading it.
Thanks Joe glad you found it enlightening. After publishing the post ppl have come out of the woodwork to say they felt something wasn’t quite right reading Outliers. My aim was to articulate that.
Whenever you read anything citing a few examples of outlying success, such as Jobs, think of Nassim Taleb and his observation that there will always exist exceptionally successful fund managers, you just don't hear about the other 99%. Regarding Gladwell, if you read carefully there's always an catch in his articles and books, something even as short as a sentence or two that is illogical and refutes his entire argument. For example, he argued the installation of the suicide barrier on the Golden Gate bridge, because suicide is an impulsive act and a barrier would stop people from jumping. The cost of this barrier was $220 million dollars. Are nearly a year in bridge tolls... Not once does he mention that suicide rates in the US have been going up year after year, a barrier, and one of this incredible cost, is not going to make a difference to that reality.
Right yes he loves the "telling detail" that proves a narrative, but at the end of the day it's just a narrative. I haven't actually read Talking With Strangers, the book your example comes from, but his example about the GG Bridge is about 'context' i.e. ppl only wanted to suicide on THAT particular bridge, and most ppl who didn't jump thanks to being stopped, would not go on to suicide elsewhere. So a barrier made sense. He's saying context or environment is everything to human beings. We're creatures of context. Maybe so, but it's also a reductionist, environmental, view of humans that makes less of things like grace and agency. His viewpoint also does not try to understand the broader macro trends in society such as suicide incidence and why it might be increasing
Thank you for eloquently explaining this. Whenever i see Gladwell analysis, i try think people want to reduce him a lot more than what he deserves. He does oversimplify his data but the data still speaks for itself
It's a balance, I think, and Gladwell is a positive force in furthering and underrepresented side.
https://ancientwisdommodernlives.com/p/success-control-luck-self-help-books
Incredible essay!
Thank you!
Tom. great article! Yes, I believe successful people are much more likely to be self-made rather than a "product of their environment" or "product of their time or era", etc. Malcolm Gladwell seemed to cherry-pick a few examples here and there, and then build a narrative around those examples to try to "prove" people are successful due to their circumstances. You did a very good job showing such thinking overall is just not true. It was a bit of a long article but worth the time in reading it.
Thanks Joe glad you found it enlightening. After publishing the post ppl have come out of the woodwork to say they felt something wasn’t quite right reading Outliers. My aim was to articulate that.