What is the deal with these people who are super-successful offline (e.g. Chamath, Marc Andreessen, Elon Musk), but on social media have such mediocre, cringe, or bad opinions, getting easily-verifiable facts wrong or just repeating sale or boring stuff, or digging in when wrong? Why is there such a large disconnect between being so successful in one domain (e.g. creating companies) and the ability to produce good, well-informed opinions online?
My answer: People who are really successful offline tend to be specialists--they find something that works, and then scale or repeat it. People who have "good opinions about a broad range of topics" are generalists, but this does not necesailty lead to large wealth, which typically requires specialization.
Generalists tend to be higher IQ and get bored more easily, seeking novelty, but this comes at the cost mastery at a skill to become wealthy. Becoming a billionaire at running restaurants means knowing everything about the restaurant industry--perhaps not exactly intellectually simulating work--but necessary for success. Specialists can be really smart, but I would say generalists are smarter in the aggregate. There is no "industry person" who is as broadly read about history and other humanists topics as Moldbug, for example, as the ultimate generalist.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
This is IMO the strongest piece of evidence the leftists have for their thesis that “Billionaires aren’t skilful they’re just lucky”. Some captains of industry have opinions that are just SO bad, it’s impossible not to get a sort of anti-halo-effect about them and conclude that they must, indeed, be generally dumb, and so any success they have comes from rolling natural 20s at life rather than having a consistent pattern of beat-the-market intelligence.
But in the examples cited they are trying but fall short. Their opinions are not well received despite their business success. Marc Andreessen tries to be contrarian, and it blow up in his face because he gets basic stuff wrong and cannot bring himself to conceding the point. David Brooks and Tyler Cowen for example have consistently well received opinions despite neither of them being on the left. It's not just a matter of political bias. Elon Musk has the biggest platform in the world. If he wanted to write a thoughtful argument, I am sure he would get much more praise if he could write it better than how he normally writes. Swapping Elon's wealth for Moldbug's erudition would produce much more successful opinions on Elon's end. Moldbug would not get basic facts wrong even if his opinions mare controversial.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link