It is probably tempting to associate social skills w/ the vacuous talking heads of the world, but that's not what GP is saying, I don't think.

I think the text was meant to be read "If nothing else, and before anything else, be a good person to be around". Because that will open so many doors for you.

I dont think the poster was suggesting social skill/emotional control are an exclusive requirement, more that these are a prerequisite for any other skills even being fairly useful. at the very least, emotional control gives one the ability to improve other skills that may be lacking as they move through life.

I thought about possible interpretations, but aren’t they pretty clear in the first sentences.

If no, I don’t understand this position then. Having social skills doesn’t magically create learning skills (unless we postulate that learning is social) or real world skills, I mean real world that doesn’t hear you out when you command.

At the very least it should be put together with reality changing skills, not first. Because in the first place it creates talking heads which only change perception temporarily (aka lying).

You're thinking of a certain type of bullshitter that everyone likes to hate. I will circle back to that.

The basics of emotional control are things like not immediately interjecting when you disagree with someone in a conversation. But also, having some limits to procrastination, eg when you are studying. Or a bit of resilience when life treats you harshly.

Social navigation is understanding other people. Why is this person who arrived at the party alone looking down at the floor? What is a compliment that this person will appreciate? What do people here think, and where does it differ from what I think?

A friend of mine is insanely good at the social part, it's almost like magic. He saw a guy looking at him in a bar, goes over, says "hey man, you're a secret service agent, right?". He wasn't wrong, and he's friends with the guy now.

Now, back to persuasion. People who are actually good socially don't get caught bullshitting. The best people will acknowledge their faults. "I was thinking we could all do {this project}, but I'm not the techie here and you guys might have some input". People appreciate that over "trust me, we can totally do this guys, one team one dream".

It's actually the people who aren't good socially who seem to make progress initially, because at least they aren't anonymous, but they can't actually build the support they need and people start resenting their style.

Thanks for explanation, I understand your idea better now, but still disagree. I don’t think that the described is actually commonly lacking and, back to the original point, that it is first and foremost related to some form of success. There are lots of social people, at least they are the majority at meetings. And barely a quarter of them are that high on that beaten success/thrive ladder. (And it may be just post-factum confidence in disguise). While social is important, as in “don’t be socially disabled”, I find this importance barely meaningful for what was an initial point of subj, cause it’s in no common lack-of category.

I guess that’s where we see it differently.