One other thing I would like to add with respect to this article is that it reeks of a blog post designed to elicit a reaction by pitting two concepts with opposite meanings against one another. This sort of thing is useful when those concepts are concrete and discrete (lazy vs eager evaluation, for instance), but with something as fuzzy as success and failure you just make a mess by trying to place them in artificially constructed boxes.
This is in my view another prime example of people trying to think in binary in too many areas of their life. Success does not exist without failure, literally. Success is the absence of failure. They need one another to exist. Trying to write about how one is more important than the other is, IMO, a fool's errand.
One other thing I would like to add with respect to this article is that it reeks of a blog post designed to elicit a reaction by pitting two concepts with opposite meanings against one another. This sort of thing is useful when those concepts are concrete and discrete (lazy vs eager evaluation, for instance), but with something as fuzzy as success and failure you just make a mess by trying to place them in artificially constructed boxes.
This is in my view another prime example of people trying to think in binary in too many areas of their life. Success does not exist without failure, literally. Success is the absence of failure. They need one another to exist. Trying to write about how one is more important than the other is, IMO, a fool's errand.