In the Ignobel Prize, "Talent vs. Luck: The Role of Randomness in Success and Failure" was a hot topic for a while. Many meanings have been found, and some have stated that "luck is more important than talent. Also, even when scientifically investigated, induction has its limitations, as in the relationship between the white swan and the black swan.
If luck were more important than talent, would it change your behavior?" I believe it should be more thoughtful.
Statistics lie.
The purpose of the paper is to understand that talent contributes to success, but sometimes luck contributes a lot.
This is a warning against the common assumption that people with talent should have wealth, when in fact some people have no talent, only luck, and a great deal of wealth is distributed to a small portion of the population.
However, some books refer to "luck rather than talent," which we believe changes the purpose or is based on other research.
First of all, it is important to understand that statistics can easily lie. Even if a statistic is telling the truth, it can be turned into a plain lie and translated into an intentional lie. There are many cases since the emergence of online media where such lies are not malicious or not, but simply an appearance to get attention.
interpoint (interword separation)Email Consulting
interpoint (interword separation)Requests to Write
interpoint (interword separation)request for an interview
interpoint (interword separation)Request for Lecture
interpoint (interword separation)Profile of Akihiro Kojima
interpoint (interword separation)Free mailing of Akihiro Kojima's Self Magazine
interpoint (interword separation)Tenmusubi Certified Public Tax Accountant Office Web site
interpoint (interword separation)4/26(Wed.) Shorten your hiring time with ChatGPT! Webinar on streamlining HR operations for one-person HR
interpoint (interword separation)5/26(Fri.) Even Names Make an Impression! Company Naming Workshop
Does knowing change your behavior?
If it were statistical, and if luck was more important than talent, how would you take it?
- Keep your research and yourself separate and keep working on what you want to do.
- Keep trying, but give up somewhere because there is an element of luck.
- If "luck is more important than talent," then give up trying.
I don't really care which one you choose. What I am saying here is that when you understand the hypothetical correct answer that luck was important, you can only choose to ignore it and continue, or to follow it and give up. This may be a reason to justify your failure or success, but it is not a reason to avoid something.
To begin with, this study is not useful if understood in the wrong direction, since its purpose is to consider the distribution of wealth to the successful.
Selecting and choosing from an abundance of information
We can be bombarded with as much information as we want and consume as much time as we want. What I consider important in this case is whether the information is meaningful enough to change your behavior.
Purchasing information that does not change your behavior may give you satisfaction in time consumption, but it is unlikely to give you any other satisfaction. What kind of satisfaction do you want to get in the first place? If possible, spend time actively interacting with and taking in information that will change your behavior.
[Editor's Postscript
Shooting for YouTube together. It's fun to be able to collaborate with another person.
[Exercise record].
Stretch○
Child-rearing diary (6 years old and 2 years old)
When we got back, they both wanted to play and came up to me with guns blazing. Lately, they seem to enjoy riding horses, and both of them have been riding me together. I still have plenty of time to spare!