Great writeup—I’ve felt this way nearly my whole life. I have a different take on this—not sure if it was intended and no one else has brought it up: imposter syndrome is almost universal among intelligent and high-performing people who are not sociopaths or narcissists. Perhaps this internal drive helps these people continue improving and avoid becoming complacent.
That incompetent people who present well inevitably manage to find their way into organizations (and sometimes advance to a high level) is also common—I know doctors I wouldn’t trust with a stuffed animal and airline pilots who shouldn’t be allowed to drive—I’m sure everyone can give similar examples—but I think these are the minority outside of professions where mediocrity is the baseline.
An intelligent and self-reflecting person will realize that luck plays an important role in their success. It’s just, if they do not expect this to be the general rule, they will feel guilty about luck playing a role in their success.
If luck does not play a role in your success, it means you remain completely within your comfort zone, and you could on average profit by doing something more difficult, where let’s say your chances to succeed are only 80%, but the potential profit is double. As a side effect, this will also provide an opportunity to learn more.
(So I am talking about two things here: The fact that the more difficult job allowed you to learn more, that is a result of your good strategy. But the fact that had enough time in the more difficult job to learn more, before a problem happened you would be unable to solve, that part was luck. “What doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger”, but first you need the luck to avoid getting killed.)
Great writeup—I’ve felt this way nearly my whole life. I have a different take on this—not sure if it was intended and no one else has brought it up: imposter syndrome is almost universal among intelligent and high-performing people who are not sociopaths or narcissists. Perhaps this internal drive helps these people continue improving and avoid becoming complacent.
That incompetent people who present well inevitably manage to find their way into organizations (and sometimes advance to a high level) is also common—I know doctors I wouldn’t trust with a stuffed animal and airline pilots who shouldn’t be allowed to drive—I’m sure everyone can give similar examples—but I think these are the minority outside of professions where mediocrity is the baseline.
What kind of evidence do you have for that claim?
An intelligent and self-reflecting person will realize that luck plays an important role in their success. It’s just, if they do not expect this to be the general rule, they will feel guilty about luck playing a role in their success.
If luck does not play a role in your success, it means you remain completely within your comfort zone, and you could on average profit by doing something more difficult, where let’s say your chances to succeed are only 80%, but the potential profit is double. As a side effect, this will also provide an opportunity to learn more.
(So I am talking about two things here: The fact that the more difficult job allowed you to learn more, that is a result of your good strategy. But the fact that had enough time in the more difficult job to learn more, before a problem happened you would be unable to solve, that part was luck. “What doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger”, but first you need the luck to avoid getting killed.)