it would appear to the average person that most rational types are only moderately successful while all the extremely wealthy people are irrational.
This only makes sense if you consider “rational” to equal “geeky Spock-wannabe”, in which case the correlation is reasonable. Bill Gates comes close to that stereotype, though, except for being irrationally passionate about controlling everything and yelling profanity a lot.
I do know a few wealthy guys—some are more stereotypically rational, others are only moderately instrumentally rational in the context of “do what works, stop doing what doesn’t”, while being utterly wacko with respect to everything else.
Of course, these guys are only moderately wealthy—businesses with 8-figure annual sales, net worth below $100 mill, so they’re certainly not in BillG’s league.
Anyway… I can see normal people associating people who like to signal an ideal of rationality with a lack of success and wealth, as it seems to me there’s a correlation there. However, being rational—at least instrumentally—doesn’t require even a fraction of the sort of mathematical rationality promoted here.
See, all of the wealthy people I know, got that way because they don’t mind losing thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars trying things that might not work, and which they have no guaranteed way to evaluate in advance, and no science to study. They don’t mind being wrong, because they understand that they’re in a business where the black swans are on the upside, not the downside.
it would appear to the average person that most rational types are only moderately
successful while all the extremely wealthy people are irrational.
This only makes sense if you consider “rational” to equal “geeky Spock-wannabe”,
We’re talking here about perception, not reality, and I’m sorry to say that “geeky Spock-wannabe” probably does equate to the average person’s perception of “most rational types” .
(Most people take a concept to mean whatever most uniquely distinguishes it from other concepts—so ‘rational’ means whatever, in the characteristics they associate with rationality, is most unique and different from the other concepts they have. i.e. Spock-like).
This only makes sense if you consider “rational” to equal “geeky Spock-wannabe”, in which case the correlation is reasonable. Bill Gates comes close to that stereotype, though, except for being irrationally passionate about controlling everything and yelling profanity a lot.
I do know a few wealthy guys—some are more stereotypically rational, others are only moderately instrumentally rational in the context of “do what works, stop doing what doesn’t”, while being utterly wacko with respect to everything else.
Of course, these guys are only moderately wealthy—businesses with 8-figure annual sales, net worth below $100 mill, so they’re certainly not in BillG’s league.
Anyway… I can see normal people associating people who like to signal an ideal of rationality with a lack of success and wealth, as it seems to me there’s a correlation there. However, being rational—at least instrumentally—doesn’t require even a fraction of the sort of mathematical rationality promoted here.
See, all of the wealthy people I know, got that way because they don’t mind losing thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars trying things that might not work, and which they have no guaranteed way to evaluate in advance, and no science to study. They don’t mind being wrong, because they understand that they’re in a business where the black swans are on the upside, not the downside.
We’re talking here about perception, not reality, and I’m sorry to say that “geeky Spock-wannabe” probably does equate to the average person’s perception of “most rational types” .
(Most people take a concept to mean whatever most uniquely distinguishes it from other concepts—so ‘rational’ means whatever, in the characteristics they associate with rationality, is most unique and different from the other concepts they have. i.e. Spock-like).