Articles like this are valued not based on how noble is the protagonist but based on how truthful is the account. The latter is of course not granted either but I would be even less inclined to believe a story of an airtight telemarketer.
In general I think it's very easy to _not understand_ people i.e. "how could you". The interesting part for me is when I do understand: "oh this is how". From that perspective I enjoyed this read quite a bit.
> In general I think it's very easy to _not understand_ people i.e. "how could you". The interesting part for me is when I do understand: "oh this is how".
“How could you” is a rhetorical question to which the asker already knows the answer they would be given, which is almost invariably “because I lack empathy”.
To reward positive stories that include crime, just because other people "might also be doing it" is ehhh. That's literally what criminals tell themselves, that everyone else does it.
For a liar and a cheater, it's basic modus operandi to tell you some of their lies to give themselves a veneer of honesty.
Agree with you in some sense, it is what it is, but why trust anything else they say to "rescue the story"? That's the game they play.
Is it not that we grant that person no reward, and instead take from their story lessons to our benefit?
The little in the story that speaks about the author, is necessary as a vehicle to narrate the experience.
The crux of the story is sales, and how it worked. The core point was the dehumanization, as well as the people who are the most effective in this era.
Also, I can appreciate someones shoes, while acknowlding they are a terrible person. Style isnt the causative factor for criminality or bad decision making.
> Is it not that we grant that person no reward, and instead take from their story lessons to our benefit?
I think that this is the way how most reasonable/average people will view it? Reading the article doesn't make me think: "Gee, I should swindle some people out of a lot of money for personal gain!" but rather feel happy that my own career doesn't put me in a spot where I'd need to do anything similar to that.
And even if someone does take that as a playbook, it's not like the article is advocating for that or that author would benefit from that (e.g. like the lifestyle gurus and self-proclaimed pros at anything, that are almost always selling courses, often coupled with a get rich scheme).
In general I think it's very easy to _not understand_ people i.e. "how could you". The interesting part for me is when I do understand: "oh this is how". From that perspective I enjoyed this read quite a bit.