"What compliments do you dismiss? When we’re inherently good at something, we tend to downplay it. “Oh, it was nothing,” we say — and maybe it was nothing to us. But it meant something to another person, which is why they’re thanking you. Notice these moments: They can point to strengths that you underrate in yourself but are valuable to others."

I kinda like this paragraph, the most, out of all text.

to be honest though, ultimately, I didn't like the text at all. Not that it is bad, no, but I just disagree with it very profoundly. first of all, it kinds of implies that a person has to live for other people - a thought that can be traced in all religions, all philosophies, etc, but I just disagree with it, I don't want to live for the sake of the past generations (as in, to live trying to not let them down, or to not dishonor them by my weakness/ bad behavior, etc), nor do I want to live for my contemporaries, nor do even want to live for the future generations (as do people that believe in scientific progress and who value said progress, do live). I only want to live my life for me personally and not for others - unfortunately there is no philosopher except maybe Epicurus who preached and practiced such philosophy.

and also, what if I am (or want to be) a multi-talented person, a Renaissance man of sorts, what if I resemble (or want to resemble) a Swiss knife, as opposed to a hammer? What if I'm a "Jack of all trades"? the the society wouldn't give ay FUCK about me, because I'm not useful to it.

Baltassaro Castiglione (or at least the way I interpret him) wanted his ideal courtier to be good in multiple skills/talent, but not be a specialist.