I'm convinced that conventional businessmen [1] have trained themselves to look in the mirror and see righteousness. Businessmen like this operate on a high level of abstraction, not particularly close to the work being done nor customers being served and oftentimes wholly out-of-touch with their own actions' secondary/tertiary impact – so they don't really know if they have a net-positive impact, if ABC action is net positive, if XYZ action is ultimately appreciated by the public. They just don't know. But they still need to feel a certain way about their life and behavior, so they've chosen a generous outlook: what they do is righteous, everything they do is righteous. After all, aren't they "leaders"? It's a bit circular, and entirely irrational, but I can imagine it would be hard to be human at such an abstraction level without developing some sort of similar delusion.
This is based on my own exposure: the businessmen I meet genuinely believe that they have the solutions to problems they hardly understand. They assume that their own action is in the right direction, with near-zero evidence supporting that assertion. To me, that's incredible.
[1] – Yes, Marc Andreessen now sits within this category of "conventional businessmen," having himself defined and proliferated many of the current conventions.
> They assume that their own action is in the right direction, with near-zero evidence supporting that assertion
Their success is the evidence. "I was made the right bets and became successful" morphs to "I continue
to be materially successful, and therefore I continue to be right" as if they are on a level playing field with the rest of humanity.
As a somewhat successful businessperson that has hit rough patches: yes, the rose-colored glasses of financial success are real, but you also have to account for the bias around these people: society (to say nothing of close friends, family, partners, subordinates, social acquaintances, etc) is biased favorably towards people that a) act, and b) produce results. This is more easily seen when you lose some of that success: it isn't necessarily that people like you less (or kiss your ass less), it's also (mostly) that they take you less seriously.
In a lot of circumstances, action itself (the courage to take it, the risk tolerance to deal with the outcome) is an outlier act. By definition (or selection bias) successful entrepreneurs are more likely to take action and deal with the results. What does it say about a society (or an era) that this is all we have left? that action/initiative itself carries such risks (financial, social) that our heroes (and villains) are quasi-psychopathic risk-taking billionaires because they are the only ones left willing to step up?
> because they are the only ones left willing to step up?
I don't know that it was historically different though. Such folk have been lauded for at least since the industrial revolution, and I can think of places to look for earlier examples.
I think that when we get memorable politicians or union leaders or protestors it's because circumstances came together at the right time for them to effect change. For example, post war democratic socialism happened at the same time in a bunch of countries, even though the politicians that enacted it in each are seen as the ones who stepped up.
These business people are, for the most part, not any kind of visionary. They are capitalist investors, and they control money to make all kinds of bets. When some of those come to fruition they seem to think they were a genius, but I really doubt the person made the difference.
Conversely I feel like it's nearly impossible to reach success at the level of most self made billionaires without having this "skill" of self delusion. How else can you go forward with 110% energy if you aren't 110% convinced you are right?
Self doubt in life is a healthy thing in moderate doses, but in the upper reaches of capitalistic "success" it's a downright hinderance.
Just another systemic flaw in the way we award status in our modern world.
This is based on my own exposure: the businessmen I meet genuinely believe that they have the solutions to problems they hardly understand. They assume that their own action is in the right direction, with near-zero evidence supporting that assertion. To me, that's incredible.
[1] – Yes, Marc Andreessen now sits within this category of "conventional businessmen," having himself defined and proliferated many of the current conventions.