Naval's "lies"

In recent years, Naval Ravikant has unexpectedly gained popularity.

Actually, California has always had a tradition of producing motivational wisdom. Coupled with the technological and investment elements of Silicon Valley, Naval has constructed a modern gospel about wealth, happiness, and self - actualization.

He promises a universal path to success, which is built on solid and actionable principles such as leverage, responsibility, and "specific knowledge".

What makes Naval's wisdom so appealing is that it simplifies the complex and chaotic world into a clear set of personal action rules. It seems that as long as one follows these rules, anyone can take control of their own destiny.

However, behind this widely - popular success philosophy lies a profound and dangerous fallacy - a "lie".

The popular tagline of Naval's core concept - "How to Get Rich Without Getting Lucky" - may constitute the most profound misinterpretation of the essence of wealth creation.

This promise carefully constructs a myth about personal struggle while deliberately erasing those decisive and non - replicable elements of success: luck, structural advantages, and historical contingencies.

The attractive slogan "Get rich without getting lucky" is more like a communication strategy than an honest description of the real world.

1

First of all, Naval's own rise is a powerful example of the "ovarian lottery" theory.

Naval was born in New Delhi, India in 1974 and immigrated to New York, the United States with his family at the age of 9. He had the opportunity to receive a good education:

As a teenager, he entered Stuyvesant High School, a well - known high school in New York;

Later, he was admitted to Dartmouth College, an Ivy League school, majoring in computer science and economics.

It's imaginable that such a starting point in intelligence and education provided him with a stage to showcase his talents.

If he had been born in a poor area where basic education was hardly guaranteed, or if he hadn't had the opportunity to immigrate to the United States, even with great talent, he might not have been able to give full play to it.

This initial "lottery ticket" in life is invaluable and laid the foundation for all his subsequent struggles.

As Warren Buffett said, "I'm very lucky to be born in the right place and era... I'm extremely lucky that my parents, genes, and the market economy I'm in have all given me huge advantages."

The so - called getting rich without getting lucky is like what famous top - tier universities in the United States claim, "We don't focus on standardized test scores." The subtext is not that standardized tests are unimportant, but rather "this is just the most basic default prerequisite".

A significant part of the returns from elite schools comes from issuing a limited - edition ticket, increasing the probability that their graduates will join a circle with better luck.

2

Naval's success is also deeply marked by the era and geography, which represents luck at the macro level.

From the late 1990s to the early 2000s, humanity experienced an explosive revolution in the Internet and technology industries.

Naval embarked on entrepreneurship and investment during the golden age of the most magnificent technological wave.

Shortly after graduating from college, he went to Silicon Valley - the center of "Extremistan" where global innovation and capital are most concentrated, and wealth opportunities follow a power - law distribution:

Only a very small number of projects will achieve far - above - average success.

In 1999, he co - founded the review website Epinions and received up to $45 million in financing from top - tier venture capitalists during the dot - com bubble.

Although his first entrepreneurial attempt was full of twists and turns, he established connections in the Silicon Valley network.

Subsequently, the projects he invested in and founded were in line with the historical trend:

In 2010, he co - founded the angel investment platform AngelList, contributing to the startup boom;

He made early investments in Twitter, Uber and other unicorn companies that would later change the world.

It can be said that the talent, topics, and capital around him were all at the fat - tail end of the era's wave.

Such an environment greatly increased the probability of encountering a "black - swan" - style major opportunity.

If it had been a different era or location - for example, if he had stayed in India or missed the window of the Internet's great development - even with the same intelligence, it would have been almost impossible to replicate his achievements.

As Bill Gates once sighed, if he had been born in an era without computers, he might have just been an ordinary person instead of the founder of Microsoft.

This is not to deny personal effort but to recognize the luck bestowed by the macro - environment: Only when there is a tailwind can one soar into the sky.

Naval's success is closely linked to a specific time and space background, which is a form of macro - level luck.

So, his success was not a counter - attack but a smooth ride.

3

Ironically, the venture capital (VC) industry that Naval is deeply involved in is actually a systematic game of leveraging "luck".

There is a famous quote from Peter Thiel in the VC circle: "In a successful fund, the best single investment often outperforms the sum of all other investments."

This industry follows the power - law rule:

Only a very small number of extremely successful projects contribute most of the returns, while most projects either fail or have mediocre results.

Investors adopt a "barbell strategy":

They allocate most of their funds to numerous high - risk startups (one end of the barbell), expecting that about 60 - 70% of the companies will have almost no returns, 20 - 30% will barely have 1 - 5 times the returns, and only about 5% will bring 10 - fold, 50 - fold, or even 100 - fold returns.

They have to accept the reality that the vast majority of projects will fade into obscurity, just waiting for those extremely rare positive black - swan events at the other end of the barbell.

The entire industry is based on the principle of "small - probability, big wins", and the distribution of success shows obvious heavy - tail characteristics.

In other words, the main source of wealth comes from those unpredictable rare miracles.

A study shows that the returns of more than 1,800 early - stage projects on an angel investment platform follow a power - law distribution. Less than 1% of the successful investment projects achieved more than 22 - fold returns.

The returns of the vast majority of projects are far below this level. Only a very small number of outstanding investments drive the returns of the entire portfolio.

This fully demonstrates that venture capital is a dance with luck: Capturing those extremely rare but game - changing opportunities.

Imagine, in a field where the core strategy is to embrace and bet on "lucky accidents", if someone claims that one can get rich "without getting lucky", it is undoubtedly a logical contradiction.

4

There are two main attractions of Naval's philosophy:

1. Everyone has the opportunity to achieve great success;

2. As long as you do the right things.

In modern society, any form of success is not purely the result of individual merit.

The idea of a "level playing field where everyone has equal opportunities" is a myth. The social system is designed to replicate and perpetuate existing advantages.

Michael Sandel pointed out in his book The Tyranny of Merit that meritocracy - the idea that a person's social status should be determined by their talent and effort - is flawed even in the most ideal situation.

Because it inevitably divides society into "winners" and "losers", and makes the winners develop a moral arrogance, believing that their success is entirely the result of personal struggle, thus looking down on those who have not succeeded.

This mindset erodes social empathy and unity, making the successful "care less and less about the fate of those less fortunate than themselves".

The core problem of meritocracy is that it equates success with moral value.

Under this logic, wealth and status are not only proof of ability but also rewards for virtue.

In a sense, Naval's philosophy is the "ideological operating system" of meritocratic elites.

It provides a complete set of discourse systems and moral justifications for the successful, enabling them to attribute their achievements to personal choices, unique thinking models, and extraordinary execution abilities with a clear conscience.

When Naval emphasizes "taking full responsibility", he is actually strengthening the idea:

Your situation is entirely the result of your personal choices.

This logic perfectly serves the psychological needs of meritocratic winners but is too harsh and even cold - hearted towards the "losers" in society.

The reality is not so. Many intelligent and hard - working people may not achieve worldly success.

Even from a probabilistic perspective, even if everything is fair, only a few can achieve great success in the end - this is an iron - clad mathematical law.

5

The theory of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu reveals the hypocrisy of meritocracy at a deeper level.

He believes that the inter - generational transmission of social inequality is not only accomplished through economic capital (money and assets) but also relies on other forms of capital, especially cultural capital and social capital.

1. Cultural capital. It refers to the knowledge, skills, educational background, and familiarity with mainstream culture that an individual possesses.

It exists in three forms:

Internalized, such as speech, taste, and thinking habits;

Objectified, such as books and works of art;

And institutionalized, such as a university diploma.

2. Social capital. It refers to the social network that an individual has, that is, "connections".

These relationships can be mobilized to obtain resources and opportunities.

Bourdieu believes that the education system is a key place for social reproduction.

On the surface, it is a merit - based system for fairly selecting talents, but in reality, it tends to recognize and reward students from advantaged families with rich cultural capital.

Children from elite families are exposed to certain values from an early age. Their "habitus" - the tendency in thinking, behavior, and taste formed in a specific social environment - is highly consistent with the cultural norms promoted by schools, giving them an edge in the educational competition.

In the past two years, when I was helping my child apply to American universities, I learned a little about this.

For example, many students who get into elite universities owe a lot to the support of their families.

Once, when chatting with a friend, I asked if Ivy League schools were unaware that some families were "cheating reasonably", such as using incredible resources to "package" their children's university application projects.

One view is: Of course they know. But this just proves that the student has the ability to mobilize resources, so the probability of their success after graduation is higher, and the possibility of donating to the school in return is also greater.

Ultimately, the education system transforms this inherited cultural advantage into a diploma that seems to be "earned by one's own ability", thus legitimizing social privileges.

In short, the "specific knowledge" that Naval advocates - knowledge that is not easily learned in school but has a high leverage effect - is an advanced form of cultural capital.

It is not just technical or business skills but also a profound understanding of the rules of the game, discourse systems, and thinking patterns of specific elite circles (especially Silicon Valley).

Mastering this "specific knowledge" is itself an embodiment of cultural capital, which can be effectively converted into economic capital (through entrepreneurship or investment) and social capital (through gaining recognition from insiders).

Naval advises people to "learn to build, learn to sell". From Bourdieu's theoretical perspective, this is equivalent to suggesting that people accumulate the specific cultural capital necessary to enter the technological elite class.

However, this accumulation process is undoubtedly much easier for those who already have a good educational background and family environment.

Therefore, when examining Naval's success story, we cannot view it as an isolated account of personal struggle. Every step of his is rooted in a pre - existing social field shaped by capital and structure.

The "luck" he obtained is far from a random chance but an inevitable result of the social system reproducing its own logic.

6

Since meritocracy is not fair and luck is so crucial, does it mean that personal effort is unimportant?

Of course not.

A more fair interpretation of Naval's ideas is:

What he teaches is not a magic spell to eliminate luck, but rather how to improve oneself so as to maximize the utilization of "luck" when opportunities arise.

In Naval's own words, it is about building a personal brand (reputation), mastering unique and irreplaceable knowledge and skills, and making good use of leverage (such as capital, technology, and human resources) to amplify one's influence.

The purpose of these practices is to increase the probability and upper limit of our success, which is equivalent to increasing the "surface area of luck".

As the old saying goes, "Fortune favors the prepared mind."

When we build a reputation and expertise in our professional fields, opportunities are more likely to come our way.

What Naval emphasizes by "getting rich without getting lucky" actually means:

Don't passively wait for good luck to fall from the sky, but actively build yourself and embrace uncertainty in an anti - fragile manner.

The so - called anti - fragility means not only being undamaged by shocks but also benefiting from them.

He hopes that people can build such an anti - risk personal system:

Even if the environment changes drastically, one has enough flexibility and resources to ride the wave. When the lucky wave comes, you won't be caught off - guard and knocked down. Instead, you'll already have a surfboard and the ability to ride the waves. In other words,

Naval teaches how to do one's best and wait for fate - do one's best within the controllable scope of human effort so as to seize the opportunity when it appears.

What he teaches is not a magic spell to "eliminate luck", but rather how to "be ready to embrace luck" to the maximum extent by building a personal brand, mastering unique knowledge, and making good use of leverage.

He teaches how to build a more "anti - fragile" personal system so that when the lucky wave comes, you won't be submerged but will have a surfboard and the ability to ride it.

These are old truths presented in a new way.

Moreover, it's hard to say how useful these ideas are for those who don't have an Ivy League diploma, aren't in the Silicon Valley investment circle, and haven't caught a good break.

However, the "get rich without getting lucky" slogan might actually mislead many ordinary people.

Finally

Naval's "lie" doesn't lie in the fact that what he says is wrong, but rather in that he carefully constructs a success formula that excludes key variables.

He gives us a beautiful map to financial freedom but deliberately tears off the vast areas on the map marked with "timing", "location", "access", and "probability".

Attributing all success entirely to personal design and control while ignoring the ubiquitous "invisible hand" of luck is not only a lack of humility in his own success story but also a dangerous oversimplification of the real operating rules of the world.

The deepest toxicity of this "get rich without getting lucky" success gospel is that it cleverly disguises a systematic probability problem as an individual ability problem and a moral problem of human nature.

It allows a small number of winners at the top of the pyramid to misinterpret their "luck" as "virtue" with a clear conscience, thus breeding elite arrogance;

At the same time, it makes the vast majority of ordinary people at the bottom of the pyramid blame their "ordinariness" on "stupidity", leading to endless self - blame