Smart and talented people need to work.

Wealthy people don't.

Obviously the angle the GP is talking about is that you’re so smart and talented that most work feels like child’s play and hence isn’t work

I haven't read everything here but Harvard students probably play signaling games where one might also want to signal that they are wealthy enough to not to work for money.

The wealthy raise their kids so that they will naturally signal this.

The university is more like a playground to meet connections and signaling that you are not focusing on work but socializing may be beneficial.

They imagine themselves as an aristocracy of talent, whose brilliance let's them live the life of the aristocracy of bloodlines.

I believe you and the author are describing two different types of students. The author describes students who want to work and succeed but are unable to cope with "real-world problems rather than contrived academic examples," whereas you seem to point to students who want instead to luxuriate in their self-perceived social class.

> luxuriate in their self-perceived social class

Is it much different from Instagram addiction?

It would be ironic if he did work extremely hhard and gave you this perception of effortlessness.

He was also acting like a moron on purpose? Give the man an Oscar!

Sure there are people like you paint. But this is a wide psychological phenomena that comes up in all spectrums of privilege. Impostor syndrome, the “gifted kid” memes with chronic anxiety, and here students who start flailing once the non-structured life of adulthood creeps up on them.

Feels like an oversimplification. My peers at Stanford felt like they were genuinely grappling with issues like imposter syndrome.

Sprezzatura is the name for affecting this "certain nonchalance, so as to conceal all art and make whatever one does or says appear to be without effort and almost without any thought about it."

What percentage of Harvard students would you say got in through family connections vs worked hard? Why do you focus on the former?

wiki says:

> A 2019 National Bureau of Economic Research working paper by Peter Arcidiacono found that 43% of students admitted to Harvard College were either athletes, legacies, members of the "Dean's" or "Director's" lists of relations of donors or prominent figures

So mostly all the white folk.

It's not an either/or. Very few people have the connections necessary to get into elite schools with, say, a 1.0 GPA in high school (or an equally terrible performance on whatever your preferred measure of merit is). But Harvard is filled with merely moderately above average legacies who would have otherwise ended up at a good state school or equivalent.

As someone who had a low opinion of George W. Bush when he was president I found this article interesting:

https://www.keithhennessey.com/2013/04/24/smarter/