But I see your argument being repeated a lot, especially by successful people and the owner class, basically the people we think of as the top 10% and the 1%.
There are a couple of fallacies with your argument:
The first is that you view the unsuccessful as not hard-working enough. This goes back to the dawn of civilization and notions like republicanism (that some are endowed by the creator to be superior at handling matters of power, finance and government so their vote should take priority over the vote of the plebeian/proletariat) and continued up through feudalism and slavery. We still see it today in gerrymandering, voter suppression and the return of nationalism. It's a way to rationalize inequality by focusing on the individual instead of the system.
Which brings us to the second fallacy, which is that a person's situation is mostly dependent on individual effort. There are numerous studies indicating that upward mobility is falling in the US and around the world:
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/social-...
So that the primary indicators of success today are being born into wealth or living in a wealthy community.
Personally, I think we're past a tipping point where wealth inequality is now too large to contain and we're in danger of losing democracy, which could lead to violent revolution and possibly world war III. Short of that, we're looking at the decline and extinction of all threatened species by the end of the century. Concentrated wealth is IMHO the number one threat to civilization and leads to the great problems of our time like underemployment and the failure to address externalities.
That said, I do agree that it's better to persevere than to give up.
Most non-inherited wealth --- not all, granted --- is deserved. (Inheritance of massive wealth is a problem because it grants unearned power to unproven people.) I think if we'd strictly applied the principles you invoke, our species would have never left the trees.
If success means creating something unique, new, and amazing that is known and loved by millions, whether that be a company, piece of art, or scientific innovation, then yes, it's unlikely you'll get there without an enormous amount of hard work, and unlikely you'll get there even if you put in that work.
If success means happily living with your partner in the suburbs of a flyover state in a moderately-sized house with a big backyard for your kids, you don't need to tie your life to your career.
Most people might get moderate success, and if they take than with good grace and leave space and time in their lives for their community and their health we will all be better off.
This anxiety surrounding advice advocating more self-awareness bc would-be influences might suddenly get lazy is ridiculous.
Or perhaps, a scenario that will be familiar to many in tech and I know I have personally witnessed, that some corporate cultures are so completely full of narcissism, and they sweep people up until they think this sort of beast is normal, having a toll on mental health.
"Success comes from perseverance, not idleness or detachment."
Beyond the false dichotomy, how are you defining success? By discovering/developing breakthroughs that earn a place in history? Given how few those people really are, it's a pretty good argument against not bothering to even try.
It's a very real phenom.
Also - consider that most 'extremely hardworking' bankers and lawyers are not creating jack (!) rather, they're competing with one another for customers and status. If they all chilled down none of us would notice in terms of lower value creation.
A few days ago, there was an article from some CEO claiming that you don't need to work hard to succeed. Today, we have an article from HBR cautioning about becoming too invested in one's work. This sentiment is dangerous. It's harmful to teach young people to be cynical, indifferent, and lazy, because the vast majority of progress really is made by the passionate and dedicated genius, not the detached crank-turner that HBR writers want impressionable young people to become.
Have a few people succeed without trying? Sure. They were stupid and lucky. Are you one of these people? Almost certainly not. Look at the history of science and innovation: the truth that emerges is that breakthroughs come not from relaxation, but from a combination of passion and hard work.