Wild that people think only very specific human beings could have done this, there were multiple people working on the same problems, one of them was going to invent the thing, he wasn't the only genius around.
So much so there were plenty of others coming on his wake, creating and contributing even more to the field.
"Greatness" and "repels people so hard that nobody wants to work with him" are not the same thing. Greatness does not require being that abhorrent to others.
Look at the picture, you can notice who's shockley by just observing their facial expression. The cold-and-smart-than-you shockley in the middle. Shockley's personality becomes his mortal enemy, but that personality is also ncessary for his achievement.
If strength cannot become your weakness, than it's just mediocrity.
I think it’s a balance. You do need to be an asshole sometimes to get things done. But you don’t need to be an asshole all the time. It’s an easy excuse to say you need to be a prick because otherwise you cannot do your great achievements. It’s a false dichotomy. Even Einstein had friends.
The picture is great. The senior manager on the right has a bit of a grimace in realizing yet again he'll need to smooth over Shockley's antagonism. The guy on the left has more of a smile and nod, and everything will be okay, type attitude.
Hopefully by now everyone knows the "crazy feminist lady" picture, which was a still frame from a pretty normal conversation where she wasn't even really supporting the feminist side that much, but got spread around the Internet by anti-feminists for years.
It's just that ordinary human do not really rewards genius.
For the man being different, he probably can be Gorden Moore, who just noticed a pattern, and then become monumental figure.
Populous rewards popularity, not genius. And being ignored by them is not a failure, it's a necessity of greatness.
reply