
School of Hard Knocks: ‘How Children Succeed,’ by Paul Tough - tokenadult
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/books/review/how-children-succeed-by-paul-tough.html?pagewanted=all
======
confluence
_Nothing in the world can take the place of Luck. Talent will not; nothing is
more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded
genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated
derelicts. Luck and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Good Luck'
has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race._

\- A reality based Calvin Coolidge

Hard work and luck are what's needed to succeed. If you ignore luck - you will
end up bitter, sad and depressed.

If you were born female in the 1920s - you will not do well.

If you were black in the 19th century - you will not do well.

If you are poor in the 21st century - you will not do well.

If you die before you get anything done - you will not do well.

Luck > determination - always has been - always will be.

You can increase your chances at success but don't lie to people and say
success is by hard work alone - that's a lie.

~~~
nickpinkston
While we must all acknowledge the crazy amounts of luck we've been privy to -
it's not super useful except as a salve for your lack of success - which could
totally be due to luck, or to temper your success.

Luck and work on dependent - we need to acknowledge that. I've had some damn
lucky moments that I had to work my ass off for. Where's the utility in
knowing that much is left to luck? The only way I can think is optimizing for
luck - networking a lot, giving talks, giving help, etc. all, as some HNer put
it "expands your luck surface area" - an apt term

~~~
ZeroGravitas
Reading about the 1920s stock market crash recently it struck me that many men
ruined themselves because they were unaware that their previous success owed
more to luck than to their mastery of the situation.

~~~
nickpinkston
I think a public stock market is a hard game to "good" at - far more luck
based than other things. I mean it's a pretty efficient market with really
high incentives to get information, and hence pricing, reflected in your
positions.

Whereas - a person opening a construction company just has to beat all the
super-flakey contractors that already exist and of course sell like hell. This
is far less luck than the stock market is.

------
keithpeter
"For both rich and poor teenagers, certain family characteristics predicted
children’s maladjustment, including low levels of maternal attachment, high
levels of parental criticism and minimal after-school adult supervision."

'maladjustment' seems quite a strong word, but I have seen this pattern with
some teenagers I teach, including the ones whose parents have bought them
cars, iPads, clothes &c, but don't seem to _spend time_.

A handful this year decided _not_ to go to University (UK: 18 year olds) but
to get jobs or training positions in a different city. Sounds hopeful.

------
Tichy
I'm probably too paranoid, because first things I think about are
"appeasement": reading that article you can think "ah, it was just my laziness
that made me fail, hard work still brings success even to poor people" and
"even rich kids fail because they have callous parents". At the same time, a
lot of people don't have to work at all, and probably sponsor articles like
this to keep the working population calm.

------
inthewoods
As a parent, I find these kind of books, well, silly. They generally leverage
a series of small studies and then provide a handful of examples to reinforce
their thesis. Now, maybe this book uses larger studies, but they are pretty
hard to come by.

So what we're left with is essentially nothing new - poor children don't
succeed, and rich kids can go off the tracks. Is this news? Is it news that
perseverance matters?

I would love a book on parenting that is based on a large enough data set to
make it relevant, and then provide some suggestions based on those studies -
anyone know of any?

My guess is that anyone that reads this kind of book is already likely a
decent parent - but I would need to look at the data. :)

------
sown
What do you do when your most determined best effort is still inadequate?

~~~
tagawa
As harsh as it sounds, I'd probably re-read Taskstrike's comment above.

EDIT: On a more practical note, I find reading biographies of those who've
succeeded in the face of adversity gives me motivation to "press on". Dyson's
autobiography is a good example.

~~~
sown
OK, so what do I do when my most persistent determined effort fails? I.e., if
I never win and never give up?

~~~
tagawa
This is difficult without context, but first I'd replace "never win" with
"haven't won yet". And even if you haven't won yet, you've surely learned
something along the way (even if it's what not to do). Can this knowledge be
used to try again more effectively, or to try something similar in a different
field with a higher chance of success (or less risk)?

------
twelvechairs
It maddens me when they use 'success' in such narrow terms. There are other
kinds of success than a poor kid achieving a university education (as great as
that might be).

------
taskstrike
Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not;
nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not;
unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full
of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The
slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human
race.

-Calvin Coolidge

~~~
tikhonj
I know too many people who work too hard but accomplish too little to believe
that. Sure, some persistence may be _necessary_ but it is by no means
_sufficient_!

Put another way, I'm sure as many determined people fail as talented,
intelligent or educated ones do.

~~~
chernevik
Persistence often fails, even among smart people, because people don't know
how to work productively. They think because they work hard, and are smart,
they deserve some particular outcome.

They aren't try to produce, they are trying to earn a result. It isn't until
people focus on trying to produce and create things of value to other people,
rather than "earning" success, "doing the right things", that they begin to
succeed. You have to take responsibility for your failures, no matter how
unfair they may seem, look for the lessons in them and learn to be more
effective.

Or at least that is how it seems to me.

The distinction here is very subtle, and possible to miss entirely. I think
that subtlety may explain a great deal of confusion.

