12/18/2014
Dan Frankenfeld
PSCI 298: Ambition and the Vocation of Leadership
Doug Casson
Final Reflection
Over the course of the semester, we have reviewed, analyzed, and interpreted everything from
authenticity, virtue, and vocation to ambition, authority, democratic leadership, and contemplated how
to respond to the question posed by Leading Lives That Matter: what should we do, and who should we
be? There is an undeniable difference between merely living and living well; I think that difference is a
combination of both meaning and significance. However, it also raises the question: How do ambition,
vocation, and leadership play a role in generating meaning and significance for me?
Leadership, Vocation, and Ambition – A Landscape
My understanding of leadership at the beginning of the semester was fairly self-serving. It was a
definition of leadership that comprised taking risk, reflection, and resilience. To a certain extent, those
concepts are still relevant and can be very beneficial in developing leadership and an identity. However,
throughout the semester, a divide has developed between a somewhat romanticized and expansive
view of leadership and a more selective and elitist view of leadership. Both notions have certain
appealing qualities, but I’m not sure if one of them is more appropriate, pervasive, or, ultimately,
correct than the other. I am inclined to believe that my earlier definition of leadership (risk, reflection,
resilience), although developed with an expansive view of leadership in mind, falls more closely in
tandem with an elitist conceptualization of leadership. I believe everyone has the capacity to be a
leader and to perform acts of leadership, but other scholars (such as Aristotle, Montaigne, Homer,
Machiavelli, etc.) might suggest that only virtuous men or men of great character have the ability to take
such risks while maintaining and applying Epicurean “powers of philosophy to dispel false beliefs” such
as the draw of fame, glory, or the corrupting effects of holding power (Macht).
Ambition is portrayed in positive as well as negative ways throughout history (and our readings).
Personal ambition often accompanies lofty ambitions for society (de Tocqueville), and America has
developed a culture of democratized ambition – so that it is pervasive, but not inherently ambitious
ambition. Insofar as we are ambitious about our lives and the things we do, I am inclined to think that
ambition is tied directly to our circumstances and the people around us. Additionally, our circumstances
relate directly to calling and also to privilege. Of the many concepts of vocation discussed in Leading
Lives That Matter, several of them include the notion that we must respond to our calling – whether it
be a religious calling or “where our passion meets the world’s great hunger.”
To this extent I think that calling to work is predicated upon a certain level of economic stability,
and a calling to serve can in some respects infringe on the autonomy we claim to have and value on our
lives. One concept not treated directly in Leading Lives that Matter is the notion of privilege. I know
that I lead a very privileged life, and to a certain extent, certain philosophers in LLTM suggest that
privilege (as understood as economic stability and access to resources that likely manifest in greater
skills, characteristics, or qualities) in and of itself is a calling to great things. Most of the time, it has
been a requirement to become involved in politics. I think this is an interesting perspective not only
because it is relevant to the economically and socially stratified nature of the United States, but also
because it is predicated on a comparison of those who are worse-off than us, not comparison to those
who are doing better or who have received more help/benefits than us.
My perception of vocation, work, and calling have all changed in the past semester. At one
point, I very seriously thought that vocation could be effectively defined as the work to which we attach
meaning. To a certain extent this is functional, but it is too expansive. I side with Lee Hardy, who
suggests that we can have multiple vocations and that “vocational choice…[which is] choosing a
particular occupation in which we will exercise our gifts…” is perhaps one of the best mechanisms to
achieve meaning in our calling. That being said, I am also very strongly drawn to Meilander’s treatment
of vocation, in which he emphasizes the importance of valuing friendship: “A world in which vocation
has become central must be a world in which preferential bonds like friendship become increasingly
remote from large stretches of our life.”
Recent Reflections on Living Well
Many of these readings have led me to question the limits and qualities of my own ambition, my
perception of vocation, my understanding of leadership – not to mention trying to determine how to
lead a life that matters, the difference between meaning and significance, and, ultimately, pondering
the meaning of life itself. For me, there is a difference between living and living well, and the life I ought
to live should be ambitious, significant, and meaningful.
I consider myself quite ambitious, and some of the readings have given me cause to be cautious
and wary of those ambitions. I have considered running for President, as I’m guessing many political
theorists have as well, though I’m not entirely sure I aspire to that level of power/authority,
responsibility, and critique. I am more drawn to having influence and maintaining the ability to effect
change – which I believe will likely be in some way, shape, or form related to money. In that regard, I
suppose I aspire to be virtuous and magnificent (in the Aristotelian sense of the word), but we can only
plan out so much of our lives…we are byproducts of our circumstances and the people around us.
Another aspect of Leadership that has redefined how I think about and act as a leader, is the
concept of democratic leadership. On a grand scale, democratic leadership refers to the ability to be a
good leader in a democracy. That is all good and well, but the aspect of democratic leadership that has
been the most influential and beneficial for me has been the “reciprocal nature of leadership and
followership.” This year I have taken several “follower” roles, and I have learned as much about
leadership from those roles as I have from being in charge of a branch of student government. I’m not
suggesting that one is better than the other, but rather that an understanding of what it means to be a
good leader and a good follower should be a requirement for those who aspire to leadership positions,
and a good follower can be just as effective, and in some cases, perform greater acts of leadership than
the leader themselves.
Meaning and Significance
I have given a lot of attention and spent a lot of time pondering the concept of meaning and
significance in life, and I think I have come to an at least functional conclusion. To me, the meaning of
life is completely subjective. We attach meaning to the things that we do, and insofar as one is pursuing
a good life that has meaning, we can imagine that anyone who finds meaning in life has satisfied at least
a component of leading a good life. Whether or not a life is significant I believe to be predicated upon
the amount of influence you have, both during your life and after your death, on other people. Whether
or not significance is a necessary component of a good life is not for me to decide, but I think one could
make an argument such as this for it being included: insofar as I value and attach meaning to the
significance of my life, leading a more significant life will be a more meaningful life. Therefore, leading a
more significant life will be a better life. So, for me, significance is an undeniably critical facet of leading
a life that matters.
Significance seems to be the characteristic that is measurable on an objective scale of some
kind, whereas I believe meaning is subjective. This makes my attempts to think about the “meaning” of
life very complicated and murky, as the meaning of life itself is not an individualistic notion. Life is a
shared concept, and because it is shared the definition of the meaning of life should be expansive as
well as accurate. I like to define the meaning of life as “that which we want it to be.” Many would
object to this potentially “over-expansive” definition, but I am inclined to believe that functionally and
spiritually, the meaning of life is that which we want it to be. This notion allows for multiple “meanings”
of life depending on the person, and it suggests that any life can be meaningful. A life that is spent in
the pursuit of romantic love, a life spent in the fight for world peace, a life spent toiling in order for your
family to thrive, a life spent enjoying relationships with friends to the best of our abilities. For me, a
meaningful life is one full of relationships with other people and things.
That being said, a meaningful life is decidedly different from a life that matters, but I am inclined
to think a life that matters is predicated on significance – that is, influence or interaction with other
living things. And, insofar as significance is understood to be based off of meaning (as explained above),
we can logically conclude that meaning, and a meaningful life, is a necessary component of leading a life
that matters. This is perhaps a semi-Romantic notion, but I am inclined to believe it regardless, as belief
in and of itself is subjective and full of meaning.
How Will I Lead a Life That Matters?
I think the best way for me to lead a life that matters is to continue pursuing the things about
which I am passionate and continue to find and love relationships with other people – those that
critique me, love me, laugh at me, and sometimes mock me. I am of the shared opinion of Charles
Taylor – that we are dialogically formed creative beings. I think everything that happens to us shapes
our identity, and every interaction or event in our lives can be interpreted in a way that is beneficial. In
a way similar to Robert Frost, I think it is important to think carefully about the decisions we make, but
to love the consequence and to accept those consequences as part of our identity. I have thought about
some of the larger questions in life more honestly and vulnerably, and I have come to understand that I
can only begin to comprehend part of the world if it is in dialogue with other people. I must be open to
new perspectives and experiences, and I must have the ability to give and receive with grace.
So as I continue to lead a life that matters and ponder the large questions of life more honestly
and in dialogue with other people, I will be ambitious in my vocational aspirations. I will continue to
pursue leadership – because it has created (and continues to create) an incredible amount of meaning in
my life and has afforded me many relationships and opportunities that have been (and continue to be)
incredibly gratifying. I will think carefully about the decisions I make, and do my best to uphold my
moral code in a way that makes me proud of my identity – both individual and shared (i.e. family). I will
reflect on the mistakes and successes I have made and achieved respectively, and incorporate those
perspectives into how I see myself and interact with the world. I will continue to find meaning in the
relationships I have, and I will continue to search for (and find) meaning in new ways.