A recurring theme in my philosophy practice centers on what I'll term "the vocation gap," which I will define as follows:
When sourcing a livelihood is misaligned with pursuing a vocation.
I will explore the available approaches, starting with the most glamourized one: go all in.
With this approach, a person endeavors to source their livelihood through a vocation. I referred to this previously as an “alivelihood,” something that makes one “come alive” while bringing enough money to support their life, which is contrasted to a “deadilhood,” an emotionally deadening job.
Some individuals find success through the "go all in" approach, and the counsel from those who have closed the gap this way becomes the default guidance many people receive regarding their vocation. There are many examples of this, such as the "do work you love" advice from Steve Jobs.1
Jim Carrey's 2014 commencement speech is an exemplar case in advocating this approach:
Carrey contrasts his father's vocational "failing" in being an accountant to his vocational success as an accomplished comedian. The moral of the lesson: If he's capable, then all of us have the potential. The issue with extending this advice to everyone is threefold.
Firstly, Carrey's father made a career decision under specific conditions, and his sacrifice for his family and his perceived failure might have been the catalyst for Carrey's vocational commitment. If Percy Carrey had pursued the same path and achieved the same success as his son, Jim Carrey might have remained a relatively unknown name. He could have ended up living in his father's shadow as a trust-fund baby, lacking the necessary motivation to attain similar success.
Secondly, counsel like Carrey's often overlooks the concept of "survivorship bias," a cognitive bias that occurs when people focus on the success stories or individuals who have "survived" a particular experience while overlooking those who did not. It leads to a distorted perception because it only considers the outcomes of those who made it. How many people went all in and did not succeed? We do not know because self-help books or motivational speeches do not mention their advice.
Thirdly, the indirect shaming of such advice is an underlooked phenomenon. Many individuals whom I have inquired with are uncertain about their vocation, possessing only a faint sense of what their calling is, or they have a clearer understanding but find themselves entangled in complex situations with responsibilities toward others, making the "go all in" approach seem both selfish and foolish. These individuals may grapple with a sense of shame resulting from hearing this advice, believing they are deficient in some inherent way.
This approach should always remain an option, but examining the available options is prudent before going all in. The art of closing the vocation gap is a practical philosophical concern for everyone, and it's crucial to acknowledge that aligning one's livelihood with one's vocation is not the sole approach to achieving this.
Beyond the "go all in" approach, I see six options for closing the vocation gap:
Accomplishing financial independence
Achieving "fuck you money."
Creating a "muse"
Making “small bets”
Having a financial benefactor
Being supported by "soul-safe" work
I'll explore these approaches in the next entry.
If you have any questions, insights, feedback, or criticism on this entry or more generally, message me below (I read and respond on Saturdays) …
“You’ve got to find what you love. And that is as true for your work as it is for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven’t found it yet, keep looking. Don’t settle. As with all matters of the heart, you’ll know when you find it.” - Steve Jobs