Hacker News Reader

Comment by alex_hitchins | Hacker News Reader

I strongly disagree with this thinking and think at worst, it could be harmful.

You wouldn't want your heart,brain,etc operation to be in the hands of someone who isn't that talented but keeps on trying.

View on HN

I strongly disagree with this based on personal experience. I regularly met people I was smarter than in medical school who _consistently_ out performed me. And the reason was simple: They were _extremely_ diligent, hard-working, motivated, and professional. Among other valuable lessons I learned that people vastly overestimate the role of intelligence in just about every aspect of life. It can give you sorts of advantages in life, but the majority of success is still chalked up to grit, persistence, motivation -- and the knowledge that results from it.

> You wouldn't want your heart,brain,etc operation to be in the hands of someone who isn't that talented but keeps on trying.

I dunno... I can't imagine any of the surgeons or doctors I've seen have been top of their class, at the #1 school in the country. Probably not even top 10. I've probably seen a lot of just average doctors, who probably did an average job at school, and now are pretty average as far as pure talent goes. But I'm still alive, so I guess it's not that bad.

>You wouldn't want your heart,brain,etc operation to be in the hands of someone who isn't that talented but keeps on trying.

If they tried enough that they got their degree and are known for having a good track record, then I absolutely do.

I'd also take them over a merely "talented" doctor any time.

Nobody ever said you should always choose persistence, just that in the absence of a better plan, persistence will work.

I still don't understand the argument, even less so with your explanation. Perhaps I'm missing something big.

I was arguing from the perspective of somebody trying to get something they want, the individual perspective, but it seems like you are considering the social utility one. While I can facially agree that there can be some arenas in which persistence can cause concern, I don't understand where your strong disagreement comes from.

And personally, I want my heart operated on by the guy that's done hundreds of heart operations, preferably my exact procedure. I want Dr. House to diagnose me, and Todd from Scrubs to actually do the operation. Dr. House's brilliant diagnosis doesn't actually affect my body, the potential problems that genius presents only guide what more sane, stable, dispassionate professional hands actually do to me. Stable dispassion is the realm of persistence.

> the individual perspective

I see your side more clearly now. You are correct that I was thinking more along the social unity side. Not sure I'd say I agree completely with you, but I see where I was mistaken before.

On the individual note, is it that persistence wins, or that the win is felt with the inevitable mental compromise taken in order to feel one has succeeded? I do see that it's better to try and fail than never try at all, just feel it's 'elitist' to think that persistence wins, as only the wealthy can really persevere. In my mind anyway.

When you look at how wealth is built, perseverance approaches (hard work) usually win out over attempts to avoid hustling. The idea is to build a vehicle, like a company, that can then continue to generate income without direct application of effort. This vehicle can only be built through hard and smart work. The startup community also likes to focus their efforts on ideas that can scale to more broadly socially-useful ideas.

What wealth buys you is the ability to employ someone else to do the grunt work. But to get there the grunt work needs to get done.

Most wealthy people worked their asses off to get there. Persistence wins again.

It's sad, but this is a fact that so many people discount. It's much easier to think in terms of "the rich asshole" who got all his money from Daddy and didn't have to lift a finger.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com