# 5 Ways to Distinguish Your Calling From Your Ego by Shelley Prevost



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

I have found an interesting article called "5 Ways to Distinguish Your Calling from Your Ego" by Shelley Prevost. This might be helpful for anyone searching for a career path.

The five points are summarized as follows:

1. Ego fears not accomplishing or acquiring something, while a calling regrets not expressing or being something
2. Ego feeds on constant anxiety, while calling needs peace
3. Ego's side-effect is a burn-out, while calling manifests as a fulfillment
4. Ego stresses on the success or failure, while calling focuses on the learning process
5. Ego wants to create and manage your identity, while a calling is about understanding yourself with respect to others

What are your thoughts or opinions? Thank you for reading.

Read the article here:
5 Ways to Distinguish Your Calling From Your Ego | Inc.com


----------



## Lord hemmingway.. the 3rd (Dec 29, 2013)

Interesting, I think it makes a lot of sense.
It's something I debate over a lot in my head. I study engineering but I'd rather be a photo journalist. It's my dream job, on the other hand the world is filled with aspiring journalists and other art majors who can't find a good job...so I stick with engineering


----------



## Razare (Apr 21, 2009)

Pretty good, I think.


----------



## sarek (May 20, 2010)

I am wrestling with exactly this problem. Being a physically incarnated being, its extremely difficult to discern a clear path in life without being sidetracked by Ego in its million treacherous guises. 

I am an INFP, a healer. But is that an invention of Ego, or is there a deeper motivation? Is it merely feelgood stuff? Is it fear of not being otherwise found worthy of love? Is it a need to be needed?

Or is it a genuine calling?

I do hope these five points will help me find clarity.


----------



## Carmine Ermine (Mar 11, 2012)

People who say "everyone is selfish" are essentially saying "ego is all there is".

There is a thought experiment that can prove ego and selfishness is not all there is, though, which I call "meta-cascade":

So you want to accomplish or achieve something? Is that your ego? Is it a "calling"? Do you only *think* it's a "calling" because then your ego feels like it's being good?

First you ask yourself, do I *genuinely* want to do this? Is it not just a feeling of having to do it because of ego? If I say yes, am I just tricking myself into thinking it's genuine, when really it's just ego?

Then, to go onto the next highest "meta" level, you ask yourself, do I genuinely *want* to genuinely want this? Now, this becomes further detached from the ego and is an easier question to ask yourself. Hmm, even if I don't *genuinely* want this achievement, I might genuinely *want* to genuinely want it... and that might not be just my ego...

Then if you're still not convinced, you can go to the higher level and ask yourself, do I genuinely want to genuinely want to genuinely want to accomplish this? Then you've gone even deeper. When you truly believe "yes, I genuinely want to genuinely want to genuinely want to genuinely want this, after all!", then this self-knowledge can "cascade" down to the lower level. Then you can *actually* genuinely want to accomplish the thing you wanted. Then it's not just an ego thing 

@_sarek_


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Sparky said:


> I have found an interesting article called "5 Ways to Distinguish Your Calling from Your Ego" by Shelley Prevost. This might be helpful for anyone searching for a career path.
> 
> The five points are summarized as follows:
> 
> ...


Wow. A word for what it is. 

I've known my calling for five years. I knew my ego as a wordless intent which this past couple of years has a name:

*My Calling is Art-*- Illustrations, painting, drawing, creating, in this way. For a time, I considered being a concept artist, or an animator, based on this. I know that this is something I could do everyday and not get tired of it. The only thing. But, it's useless. It's delible, it has no lasting worth, no promise, no success, no accomplishment. It's purely self-indulgent... I just _know _it will nag at me if I go for it. I won't be _truly _satisfied, deep down. I will always be wishing I was doing something more. I feel I don't have a right not to be productive, not to do something for the world's progress, for education, for intelligence itself and a love of learning. I want to help change ideas about education and knowledge-- I want people and children to be able to think of school and learning institutions as places they _want _to be in.

*My Ego is Science/Mathematics*-- Biology, biotechnology, becoming a PhD professor, teaching others, maybe adding to our collective knowledge. Inspiring students, getting to be on stage and present a new idea everyday, taking the same material and spinning it around to be more fun, exciting, and easier to understand. I'm good at teaching complex concepts, and I enjoy this. I love the idea of being admired, looked up to, and sought after. Being an expert. All I've ever wanted is to be able to _do _something-- To achieve mastery in something, _finally, _without failing, or losing attention or interest. And even if I do, at least _finish, _at least know enough about something to be authoritative on the subject. Achieving mastery can be shown with a simple PhD paper. How will I know I've mastered it, unless everyone acknowledges it? Discovery, a nobel prize. As idealistic and unrealistic as a lot of this is, I admit, that's what goes through my head.

The ego is stronger than the calling, at this point. In either case, I know I'll be happy.


----------



## saturnne (Sep 8, 2009)

Word Dispenser said:


> Wow. A word for what it is.
> 
> I've known my calling for five years. I knew my ego as a wordless intent which this past couple of years has a name:
> 
> ...


Um. But this is exactly me. Haha...

Except I thought I was actually gonna go with my Ego. I don't know what to do! I've always been a creator...artist... But I'm scared to go with it. A big obstacle right now is my mother, who says I'm a big science person, blah blah. I'm just good at art, though...


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

saturnne said:


> Um. But this is exactly me. Haha...
> 
> Except I thought I was actually gonna go with my Ego. I don't know what to do! I've always been a creator...artist... But I'm scared to go with it. A big obstacle right now is my mother, who says I'm a big science person, blah blah. I'm just good at art, though...


I'm also thinking of going with my ego. Leaning pretty heavily that way, anyway. I'm sort of helpless to the inevitableness of my direction.

I _did _go to school for my calling. I just never followed through because I moved to a foreign country. At this point, thinking of going back to school and following my ego.

See my proudest moment for details: http://personalitycafe.com/intp-forum-thinkers/173371-your-proudest-moment-2.html#post4468763

I was 'just good' at art, too. It's time spent, m'lady. Time spent, effort, and interest.

www.conceptart.org (BONUS LINK)

If I can prove it to my dad, you can do so for your mom. Be stronger than I am, follow your calling. Good luck. :wink:


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

guess I'm less egotistical than I thought


----------



## boblikesoup (Nov 26, 2011)

Robert Greene's book Mastery says that you should look back to when you were a young kid.

At that time you were most true to yourself and you had the most clear picture of what you wanted to do with your life.

I find it true that when I am acting like I did as a kid I am happier


----------



## William I am (May 20, 2011)

Sparky said:


> I have found an interesting article called "5 Ways to Distinguish Your Calling from Your Ego" by Shelley Prevost. This might be helpful for anyone searching for a career path.
> 
> The five points are summarized as follows:
> 
> ...


This is all based on a misunderstanding of the word ego. There is nothing inherently bad about ego. It's simply your sense of self.


----------



## Kwestin (Nov 3, 2013)

William I am said:


> This is all based on a misunderstanding of the word ego. There is nothing inherently bad about ego. It's simply your sense of self.


Agreed, @William I am. To further that thought, the ego, as it is generally defined, doesn't even exist as an independent object inherent within itself, nothing does. It depends on the senses, where once it has experienced anything, over time a "sense of self," is revealed, which is, essentially, a flow of thoughts and emotions based upon experiences through space and time. No one owns these thoughts or emotions, they just happen according to our conditioning relative to our "personal" and "collective" experience here on earth. We, of course, experience this phenomenon as it were tangible, this sense of self, and for all intensive purposes it is neither existent nor non-existent. "Things are not as they appear to be, nor are they otherwise," as stated in the Surangama Sutra.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

William I am said:


> This is all based on a misunderstanding of the word ego. There is nothing inherently bad about ego. It's simply your sense of self.


The "ego" in the article appears to share the definition as defined in the book, _A Course in Miracles_:

A Course in Miracles/Text - Wikisource, the free online library


----------



## associative (Jul 1, 2013)

Sparky said:


> The "ego" in the article appears to share the definition as defined in the book, _A Course in Miracles_:
> 
> A Course in Miracles/Text - Wikisource, the free online library


Cliffs? For those of us who don't fancy wading through it.

_EDIT_: I think I got it. It would be the "specialness" vs "love" distinction, Ch24.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Course_in_Miracles/Text/Chapter_24

So in this context an egoic career would be driven by satisfying ones own needs directly, with self-centered reasons; whereas a "calling" would be driven by platonically ideal "love" - the needs of the Self and Other are considered and fulfilled at the same time.

So the philosophical standpoint:
Specialness = Ego = philosophy of difference.
Love = Postegoic = philosophy of unity.

Did I get that right? If so then it makes sense that someone would choose their "calling" over their "ego" as the ego fights context, whereas calling (in this sense) embeds itself in context.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

associative said:


> Cliffs? For those of us who don't fancy wading through it.
> 
> _EDIT_: I think I got it. It would be the "specialness" vs "love" distinction, Ch24.
> A Course in Miracles/Text/Chapter 24 - Wikisource, the free online library
> ...


The ego is a delusion, and you can find a definition of the ego in Chapter 3:



> Consciousness, the level of perception, was the first split introduced into the mind after the separation, making the mind a perceiver rather than a creator. Consciousness is correctly identified as the domain of the ego. The ego is a wrong-minded attempt to perceive yourself as you wish to be, rather than as you are. Yet you can know yourself only as you are, because that is all you can be sure of. Everything else is open to question.
> 
> The ego is the questioning aspect of the post-separation self, which was made rather than created. It is capable of asking questions but not of perceiving meaningful answers, because these would involve knowledge and cannot be perceived. The mind is therefore confused, because only One-mindedness can be without confusion. A separated or divided mind _must_ be confused. It is necessarily uncertain about what it is. It has to be in conflict because it is out of accord with itself. This makes its aspects strangers to each other, and this is the essence of the fear-prone condition, in which attack is always possible. You have every reason to feel afraid as you perceive yourself. This is why you cannot escape from fear until you realize that you did not and could not create yourself. You can never make your misperceptions true, and your creation is beyond your own error. That is why you must eventually choose to heal the separation.


A Course in Miracles/Text/Chapter 3 - Wikisource, the free online library

You can also find a paragraph about egocentricity, in Chapter 2:



> One of the ways in which you can correct the magic-miracle confusion is to remember that you did not create yourself. You are apt to forget this when you become egocentric, and this puts you in a position where a belief in magic is virtually inevitable. Your will to create was given you by your Creator, Who was expressing the same Will in His creation. Since creative ability rests in the mind, everything you create is necessarily a matter of will. It also follows that whatever you alone make is real in your own sight, though not in the Mind of God. This basic distinction leads directly into the real meaning of the Last Judgment.


http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Course_in_Miracles/Text/Chapter_2


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

That makes sense. I think my ego involved wanting some kind of fame with creative endeavors like I used to want to be a novelist but I am not a novelist. Really. I have no capacity for writing three hundred pages of fictional blah blah. Even when I wanted to cook, I wanted to be a chef who made fancy cakes, not just a cook. 

I am pretty sure my calling involves something with the outdoors and animals though because I will take care of the environment and animals without being paid, I feel so happy doing unpaid volunteer work that I wish it was my job.

I just have to make sure to approach it from the right angle though. There are four kinds of park rangers (I have already ruled out environmental science and environmental law, I will leave that to the academes) ....and I am certain I don't want two of those, which are law enforcement and fire science/fire fighters...there are natural resource and cultural managers, and there are foresters. Foresters work out in the wilderness and with logging companies and do park or preserve planning. The other position is less manual labor but involves interaction more with guests to parks and park management. My volunteer work currently resembles the latter. It's actually two different degrees, forestry or recreation management.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

boblikesoup said:


> Robert Greene's book Mastery says that you should look back to when you were a young kid.
> 
> At that time you were most true to yourself and you had the most clear picture of what you wanted to do with your life.
> 
> I find it true that when I am acting like I did as a kid I am happier


It's not that simple. When I was three, four, I spent time singing and dancing on the coffee table. In my twenties I was an exotic dancer, but I have no inclination to be a dance teacher now. My yoga hobby kind of fills that void.

I also wrote a lot as a kid and still do. It doesn't make me Stephen King. However, my communication skills probably will help me with environmental work in regards to reaching or teaching others.

I also preferred stuffed animals to dolls as a child and was always outdoors.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

And yet as spiritual sounds that sounds, it is the Buddha, a spiritual master, founder of the religion Buddhism, who said "what we think we become." So a 17 year old has been getting straight As for the last three years, looking at the big leagues, because when you get straight A's opportunity opens up. Now is that 17 year old selfish and thinking about ego? Because, that 17 year old is clearly thinking about himself/herself. Why not not think about self, and go to high school parties, do sex, drugs, drink lots, oddly this would be living in the moment which is the spiritual non ego path. Let's say the 17 year old rejects parties, completes senior year straight A's, goes to University of Virginia, a fine school. First day meets with a counselor, sets up a academic program, and let's say they want to be a Doctor. Well to be a doctor, you need to get into med school, so, now the 25 year old has gotten outstanding merits and has graduated with honors. They apply for med school, but they take a year or two off, just traveling the world. This person has always wanted to be a doctor, at the same time, they know that their calling needs to be gainful employment. Is it egotistical of them to think how will I pay rent? How will I put food on the table? We're basically thinking. A person can only think with their ego. I guess what I'm saying, is, that these self help gurus paint with broad brush strokes in making all these things very separate good and bad, when they are more likely intertwined. I think. 



Sparky said:


> I have found an interesting article called "5 Ways to Distinguish Your Calling from Your Ego" by Shelley Prevost. This might be helpful for anyone searching for a career path.
> 
> The five points are summarized as follows:
> 
> ...


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Brian1 said:


> And yet as spiritual sounds that sounds, it is the Buddha, a spiritual master, founder of the religion Buddhism, who said "what we think we become." So a 17 year old has been getting straight As for the last three years, looking at the big leagues, because when you get straight A's opportunity opens up. Now is that 17 year old selfish and thinking about ego? Because, that 17 year old is clearly thinking about himself/herself. Why not not think about self, and go to high school parties, do sex, drugs, drink lots, oddly this would be living in the moment which is the spiritual non ego path. Let's say the 17 year old rejects parties, completes senior year straight A's, goes to University of Virginia, a fine school. First day meets with a counselor, sets up a academic program, and let's say they want to be a Doctor. Well to be a doctor, you need to get into med school, so, now the 25 year old has gotten outstanding merits and has graduated with honors. They apply for med school, but they take a year or two off, just traveling the world. This person has always wanted to be a doctor, at the same time, they know that their calling needs to be gainful employment. Is it egotistical of them to think how will I pay rent? How will I put food on the table? We're basically thinking. A person can only think with their ego. I guess what I'm saying, is, that these self help gurus paint with broad brush strokes in making all these things very separate good and bad, when they are more likely intertwined. I think.


Yes but I was talking with a man today who manages stock brokers, he went for more money, and told me that he admired me for choosing something meaningful, that he was surrounded by people who had chosen wealth, and in the egotistical fashion that too much money is never enough.

Many people choose things because of things like wealth, prestige, or fame. Of course money matters but if you chose to go into law just for money or prestige, and not a form of law you had passion for, then yes you probably chose with your ego. The same can be true for medicine. There are people who are doctors via their calling, and some who just wanted to say I am a rich doctor.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Like for example I used to know a woman who was really talented in chemistry and went to med school, and she now performs gynocological services and abortion to women in impoverished inner cities. She did not choose medicine for money or prestige. Of course it doesn't have to be that extreme, a person could be called to be a family practitioner in the suburbs and love their work. Contrast those examples to the wealthy plastic surgeon who gets sued for malpractice, on the extreme other end of the spectrum.

Being a novelist was probably Dostoevskys calling. I just think I liked the idea of being immortalized for my words.

Or how about the actor who loves acting, versus the hack who just wanted to be famous. Let's say Jodie Foster versus Meghan Fox.

Now money making jobs can be utilized to finance the calling. It's all in what you do with it.


----------

