The ideaspace of ambition is largely underexplored and, crucially, undermapped.

Underexplored: there is likely much more to ambition — much more that it can encompass, describe, allow, empower, etc. than most people understand.

Undermapped: For however much ambition is or has been explored, it is definitionally less mapped. And the mapping is what is most legible and immediately useful (and thus impactful) to most people. Exploring and then mapping, and most importantly then widely disseminating that map, is what makes the ideaspace — the full ideaspace — of ambition inhabitable to many more people.

So it is a responsibility, a gift to the commons, to humanity, for people inclined to explore this ideaspace, to also map it and publish those maps to the wider public.

Ok so, exploring:

Ambition is typically understood as relating to career, job, money, etc. But ambition can be a descriptor of a person’s posture & in almost any realm. Art, parenting, friendship, community, neighborliness, thinking, communicating, philosophy, etc. etc. etc.

Perhaps ambition could be best understood as the animating force of a person. Someone who exudes aliveness — who is irreversibly animated toward a purpose — maybe that person necessarily has ambition.

Does this mean that ambition is a necessary precursor to aliveness, to an animated life? Maybe. If so, I do suspect that there is no requirement that a person be conscious of that ambition — perhaps they even self-identify as “not ambitious” because they view ambition through the co-opted lens of career, material wealth, etc. that the word broadly evokes.

So, why does this even matter? Is there benefit to be had by revising our societal understanding of what ambition can be? I suspect yes, because many see ambition as having a very positive connotation. If we can broaden the scope of what ambition might imply, then we can get people to apply that positive connotation to a wider range of net-good behaviors that will lead to an increase in human flourishing.