If you had the opportunity to choose one of the following, and they were mutually exclusive, which would you choose and why?
Prominence: You do something people admire so much that you become a household name. Even years later, people will remember who you are. However, once you die, almost nobody knows who you are anymore, and the thing everybody admired you for is forgotten as well.
Permanence: You do something that signficiantly changes the world in a way that is important to you. This change endures beyond your own lifetime, and it continues to affect future generations in a positive way. However, almost nobody knows you were the one who caused the change, and you will never be associated with it.
I’d choose #2, because I have an idealistic streak in me, but I really don’t feel comfortable with being the center of intense attention. The personal satisfaction of having made a lasting change for something I care about would make me far happier than if people knew who I was. I’d get a kick out of seeing evidence of that change in the world, knowing I was the one who created it. So I can’t exactly claim to be low ego in this scenario–just that I would rather feel good about it in private.
I’m with you; I think I’d feel much more satisfied knowing some good was done for future generations. While it’s tempting to want to be a household name, so many people who’ve had 15 minutes and then disappear I almost feel a perverse sense that they’re pathetic, with no real substance, regardless of the reason for fame. So my vote is 2 also.
I would choose #2 as well. I simply don’t care what the general public thinks and being famous sounds like a nightmare to me. The best thing I could do to be proud of myself is to discover something influential and take personal pride in it. The people that I care about would understand it eventually.
I am not really idealistic, that is just the way I think. I like personal accomplishments even if no one else ever knows about them.