Scroll through Skool and you’ll see dozens of formulas for success. Post daily. Build personal brands. Create urgency. Focus on community. Focus on offers. Focus on mindset. Focus on systems.
They can’t all be universally true—and they aren’t.
Most success formulas are retrospective stories. People look back at what worked for them, remove context, and turn it into advice. What’s missing is timing, privilege, network effects, and luck.
Skool amplifies this because it favors simplified narratives. Nuance doesn’t perform well in fast-moving environments. Clear promises travel faster than complex truths.
Another issue is survivorship bias. You see the people for whom the platform worked—not the many who tried, followed the rules, and quietly left. Their stories aren’t visible because silence doesn’t rank on leaderboards.
Success formulas also conflict because success itself isn’t universal. Different people want different outcomes: money, meaning, stability, freedom, and recognition. A formula optimized for one goal often undermines another.
The danger isn’t that gurus exist. The danger is believing there is one correct path—or that failure means personal inadequacy rather than misalignment.
Skool doesn’t create this problem, but it concentrates it. When many confident voices speak at once, certainty feels louder than truth.
Add comment
Comments