"Don't bother just to be better than your contemporaries or predecessors. Try to- William Faulkner.
be better than yourself."
Ambition is the driving force behind progression. Is that why we call those people that are attempting to create change "ambitious"? As an economist, I can tell you that one of the basic principles is that people respond to incentives. That is, people take actions based upon rational analysis, if the benefits outweigh the costs (an incentive) one will take an action, if the costs outweigh the benefits (a disincentive) one would not take the action.
Taking this assumption as given, I contend that people only value positive change highly if it is efficiently achievable. This is easily demonstrated using proof through analogy. A firm (pharmaceutical in this example) will only continue to research a cure for a disease if it can cover its costs with the future revenue, and still profit. Sadly, in the case of very rare diseases where there is little demand, this is not always feasible.
At this point, I will attempt to define two distinct types of progress.
- The first is societal progression. New technology, cultural & religious progression, etc. This type of progression applies to the population at large. I don't necessarily mean the world here, nor do I believe that a society is defined by borders. What I mean is a group of people united by a common interest (or, if you agree with my last post, a group divided from the population by a differing interest) whether that be a nation, a culture, or a population matters little to my argument.
- The second is individual progression. Fame, fortune, prestige, etc. Perhaps one could even construe spiritual journeys as an individual progression. Anything for personal (or familial) gain.
As an addendum to this distinction, oftentimes the two overlap one another, for example, one may be recognized for being a proponent of societal progression and thereby achieve individual progression. We can categorize this example as a causal relationship, but in other cases there still may be some correlation. (A feeling of self-fulfillment even if no recognition is offered, etc) I don't wish to investigate the psychology behind the subject.
My argument is that our drive to succeed, our "ambition", is often misplaced. Of all the people on the planet, only a few will change society in any manner, and of those few, a minority will actually have an affect upon our lives. So many young individuals are seen as bright and ambitious, ready to tackle the problems of the future...youth has a tendency to cloud people's judgments. We overestimate our abilities, underestimate the barriers.
My question, I guess, is what happens to the people who have the power and drive to succeed, but still don't? Maybe they're in need for a reevaluation of the costs and benefits of their attempts to create progress, or maybe there's a hidden element at play here. Maybe luck would have it that they don't succeed, regardless of their talents, strengths. Give me some input.
Maybe we just need to change our oh-so-prevalent values. Maybe progress isn't really so great?
