> Technical merit, good management, and intelligent business deals aren't
> good predictors of success. If they were, and if those things were
> accurately and reliably quantifiable (which they must be to have any
> substance to them) then predicting success would be incredibly more common
First of all, there is a middle ground between things being completely random, and completely predetermined by known factors. Second of all, a lot of the most important predictors of success are things that we haven't learned to quantify yet.
Warren Buffet has articulated his stock market strategy many times. Do your research; only invest in things that you understand; invest for the long term.
> Now, hard work and fair play may lead to personal fulfillment. Maybe
> that's more important than any kind of economic wealth.
Is personal fulfillment "accurately and reliably quantifiable"? If not, by your own argument, it has no "substance" to it. Or maybe, just maybe, science hasn't learned to quantify a lot of the most important things in life.