^ maybe so, but it makes sense mathematically. Popularity, success, and wealth are more observed and have greater interactions with more more people than isolation and failure. It is logical.

^

it is illogical because it assumes that you base your view of reality from a limited sample size...

if you look around at rich people and feel bad because you're poor but don't take note that half the world lives on less than $2.50 a day, (not adjusted for PPP, yadda yadda) it's because you're a moron

if you're comparing yourself to physically gifted (but perhaps mentally not so much) athletes at the gym but not taking note of the 7 out of 10 people who rarely exercise, then it's because you're an idiot

if you feel that your friends have more friends than you... you have to consider if that popular person is even really your friend in the first place... all people only have time to maintain so many quality friendships, therefore the more popular a person is, the less likely they are to spend time with you to develop a meaningful friendship

it's much more important to have meaningful friendships/relationships than a litany of superficial ones isnt it?

same goes with relationships... some dysfunctional person who's dated 20 people doesn't have any more practical experience than someone who's had 2 good relationships

what is success anyways? succcess in one field often results in sacrificing another... if raw quantity is your definition of success, yep, you're stupid


this article is not about a mathematical paradox but rather the tendency of people to be myopic and pessimistic by oversimplifying the world from a limited awareness instead of objectively assessing reality