Choosing your life's calling

[Phineas]

How do most of us get a job? We apply where our friends or relatives are already working, or we answer a mass cattle call. Such jobs are relatively easy to get, don't pay very well and aren't very satisfying.
Others read an article in some magazine, and then ask our equally clueless friends if this would be a good fit.
I still l remember when 'cowboy' no longer worked for me. Then, in junior high we wasted time on an interest survey. I still haven't been able to monetize eating Chinese food or sleeping in on rainy mornings.
Some authors with better writing ability than reasoning powers tell us to do what you love and the money will follow. The problem here is that you may love something, but have no real talent for it.
Knowing your talents may be the key. Most of us never learn what our talents are; maybe just one or two, and maybe we confuse skills training with talent. Yet, if we were in a career where we could use most all our talents, work life should be a cruise.
So, how do we figure? There are groups called aptitude testing agencies. As in any human endeavor, some are worth the money, and some not. After they determine your talents using actual puzzles, and scenario work-thrus , they will provide a list with your unique talents, and a list of jobs and careers best fitted to these.
Next is to do a personality assessment such as Meyers-Briggs as a selection filter. Are you a big picture person, or are the details more important ? Lastly, go to a workplace that uses these jobs. One of my possibilities was mechanical engineering. I went to such a place for an information interview. Imagine a large room filled with 200 cubicles. Engineers sit at desks all day. I thought this was hell

[urgud]

Your second ever post!

Honestly, I understand the impulse to succumb to the notion of a "calling", but the odds of actually achieving and sustaining your life's calling are rather slim. I recommend you hedge your bets and extract different kinds of meaning from the different spheres of your life (family, friends, hobbies, nature, job, exercise, what have you).

As you point out, many things are not profitable/monetizable. The only kinds of "careers" where I can imagine someone being truly fulfilled and utilizing all their talents are non-wage labor jobs: independent contractors, farmers, small business owners, and it's not even a given for these people. They get to "own" most of the processes and direct their own work, but they still have to participate in the marketplace.

Wage labor is alienating in one form or the other. Either make your peace with it, pick a different route or reduce your dependence on regular earned income. Suck as it may, I think it's good to remind oneself that formal wage labor is reserved for the top ~1 billion richest humans on earth. Working life for people who don't have access to salaried jobs is even more precarious and cruel: seasonal farm laborers, day laborers, storekeepers, street vendors, gig workers (delivery, taxis), etc.

[J_]

My life’s calling?
Calling and Choose are contradictory, I think.
Perhaps it is better (if you relate it to paid jobs) to speak about choosing work what suits you, what fit with your skills and hopefully with your caracter.

Life‘s calling has a more esoteric meaning I think. The overarching meaning-level of life.

I do not know if I have clearly heared such call in my life.
I have a notion however that ere-style living add to wellbeing of more-than-the-human-kind. Perhaps you can name such a calling.

[Phineas]

I may be using calling differently than most; my fault. What I meant was get a job, any job, that uses a great many of your talents. This way you will keep working and excelling so you can build your stash more quickly. You can't depend on any skills training you may already have because you haven't yet trained in your aptitude driven work.
Yes, character is important as it relates to the job. Are you a big picture person, or do you like to examine details? Are you intuitive, or do you like reason and logic? The career needs to fit you. Otherwise, life is quiet desparation
Working on other areas needs to come a bit later. Yes, family, spiritual, etc are important, but if you try to address too many at once you will fail in most all. There's only so much time and energy. Do one at a time, get it established and then work on the next
You may have passions for various areas. This doesn't mean you will be effective in them, at least not at first. These are better saved for hobbies and avocations.
The meaning of life? It seems to be reproduction, and getting enough to eat.

[ertyu]

Way back when, I did a career test through my university's career center. The test's purpose was to generate an outcome along the lines of, "people most similar to you are most happy in such and such career and least happy in such and such career." The career it produced for me was community college instructor. At the time, I took one look at the results and thought, "yeah right, like someone would hire a non-citizen for that." I was right - you can do the job with a MA degree and it's not particularly short of candidates such that a university would fuck around with applying for and paying for a work visa for a non-citizen.

So, I did something else that allowed me to save and I was the most miserable fuck that ever miserabled doing it. I was hands down not right in the head. Reading my first forum posts and journal posts I made here, it's easy to see that's not a sane person talking.

Eventually, I saved some. Will it be enough, who the fuck knows. What I do know is that I can't go back to my previous line of work.

I'm a "lecturer" now - at a 4-year program in a developing country, teaching intro classes in econ and accounting, no research or publication requirements -- so, essentially, a community college instructor. My American MA in Econ seems to make them happy. The salary doesn't pay enough to afford any meaningful savings, but it's comfortable in local terms. It's not what I'd answer if anyone asks what my "calling" is but I am alright at my job and am capable of working it without my brain screaming like a banshee. So I'm coasting doing that.

[conwy]

I take a fairly deterministic view on particular careers or "callings". Luck seems to play a big role for most people. Who your parents were, what they knew, what they taught you, your schooling, your town/city, your time/place in history, age, genetics, etc. It's sometimes possible for a person to transcend their circumstances with great effort. I'm trying to do this right now by learning college math.

When it comes to paid careers the attitude toward one's work seems more in one's control. There, what makes a "career" isn't outward recognition such as a job title or a prestigious employer but more a kind of inner passion for the work, demonstrated by consistency, dedication and continuous improvement over a long period of time. That passion can be cultivated especially by continuous learning and refining. The inner enjoyment and curiosity is more substantial than outward factors which can wax and wane.

Over time I've found that certain employers and colleagues can pick up on that "intrinsic motivation", even from just looking at your CV or talking to you. So if you can find those people and work with them, then you can get closer to doing quality work that you enjoy with like-minded people. Then the line between work and play begins to blur and your colleagues become less co-workers and more a kind of club.

But stepping outside of the world of paid employment - now that's my truest excitement in early retirement! I would like to try to compose some classical music (I have some interconnected musical ideas I would like to build into a symphony). Also to try building a video game, writing a book and building an app or two.

I don't know which of these (if any) might end up being a "calling". For the musical project I feel most passionate but least capable. For the book and/or apps I feel least passionate and most capable. Video game is somewhere in between. I guess the hardest part is getting started. Once I've got a few "life chores" out of the way I should just dive in.

[Lemur]

Assuming that we had some epiphany about a life's calling, I don't think most choose their life's calling. They fall in to it. Just like how most seem to fall into their future jobs/careers. It would take a lot of foresight to plan that out.

SD could come into play here. Its possible that choosing your life's calling can only happen at tier 2+ levels.

Tier 1: Your life's calling is chosen for you...

Purple - My life's calling is to serve my family & tribe. Life is circle. We're called upon to keep this cycle going.
Red - My life's calling is to dominate, vanquish my enemies, and accumulate status & power.
Blue - My life's calling is to serve the higher authorities, God, or gods, and collectively agreed upon moral and ethical values.
Orange - My life's calling is to be the best at [insert specialization, career, skill], optimize, and live the good life.
Green - My life's calling is to serve humanity by treating all others equally and with respect even if it means sacrificing parts of my own life for the greater good.

Tier 2: You choose your life's calling...

Yellow - ????
Turquoise - ????

Question marks because well...a life's calling is sort of vague. At tier 2, we'd have to come up with our own calling and that takes a lot of trial and error and think-work. Like in tier 1 there are a lot of details and a lot of known variables. These callings are defined by the paths that society develops and we fall into.

Tier 2...a lot of known unknowns. Possibly even unknown unknowns.

[jacob]

I think these need to be modernized a bit. The value memes determine what motivates people to do the things they do. The vMemes are still with us. Even if they do not explicitly manifest in conquering our enemies or worshiping the gods, the same human values manifest in other ways that still find a contemporary outlet, some more easily than others.

• Purple - Taking care of the family. Work in the family business. Picking the same trade as parents and the parents before that, because it's tradition. Carrying on the tradition.
• Red - Loyalty to a specific person. Impulsive choices without guilt or concern for consequences (only sorry when caught). Corruption, fraud, and other criminal activity where concern for others don't matter. A prison sentence (for those who are caught)
• Blue - Working because it's everyone's duty to work. Being a productive member of society. Working tireless in serving the role that was chosen at some point in life. Sticking with it. Hard work is its own reward. Forty years with the same company.
• Orange - Choosing a career in pursuit of personal success as measured by money, fame, and/or power. Working smart, not hard, playing the game of negotiating rewards and positions. An impressive resume!
• Green - Seeking consensus while subordinating the self for the group and working together in service to others. A sense of belonging and connection with others.
• Yellow - Focused on making a difference that makes a difference. Solving big (systemic) problems by selectively tweaking effective points of leverage. Being well-known amongst those in the know.
• Turquoise - Gurus, sages, and visionaries. Guiding individuals and communities towards a higher and more encompassing level of consciousness. Harmony with the world.

[7Wannabe5]

Naomi Klein's "Doppelganger" is a chilling read for anybody who identifies themselves as VMeme Yellow or maybe just anybody who lives in the internet age. What if your identity somehow becomes severed from your own ideas and values and the more you struggle to fix this problem the more trapped you become?

[Lemur]

Thanks @Jacob.

At least from what I remember anyone who has a life calling that is predominately coming from a place of one color (lets say Yellow) has to be able to integrate any colors before it. For instance, Yellow can't make a difference and solve big systemic problems without grokking Purple-Green. Interestingly, I thought of the colors in terms of human time scales (like Purple - Hunter Gatherers, Red - First agricultural civilizations, Blue - Crusades, Orange - Period of Enlightenment / Industrialization, Green - 21st Century Progressive Values) almost in a linear fashion where it is assumed it will always just keep going up. But we can look around the world today and still find societies pre-dominated by vMemes across the color spectrum.

Individually speaking, most of us are a mix of these colors - being overdeveloped / underdeveloped and/or health/unhealthy in some areas. For instance, I might have a very healthy competitive red spirit (I won't physically assaults my opponent if I lose a tennis match lol) or maybe an undeveloped Orange one (I might harbor resentments of the way my employer is structured without fully understanding why it is structured the way it is).

For life's calling - I definitely remember that job survey in high school. I think almost any person in a Western Country did that Survey the OP mentions where you answer 100 questions on things you like, your personality type, etc. and it spits out a top 10 list of jobs you'd most likely fit in. To me, that is very Orange. And your life's calling or how you think about your life's calling gets shaped from that early on (career focus).

I don't think we were ever given a survey that determines which global issues we want to tackle when we grow up. Makes me wonder how things would be different if our culture took on a focus like that.

ETA:

Naomi Klein's "Doppelganger" is a chilling read for anybody who identifies themselves as VMeme Yellow or maybe just anybody who lives in the internet age. What if your identity somehow becomes severed from your own ideas and values and the more you struggle to fix this problem the more trapped you become?

Adding to my never-ending book list....but my first thoughts are that the internet age, if anything, allowed me to become more un-trapped and escape the minimum wage poverty the rest of my family is seemingly stuck in. Thank heavens for FIRE/ERE ideas...I wouldn't have grown without it. Too much serendipity occurs when one focuses on personal growth to make a ton of money to escape lifestyle systems they don't like. And also just generally discovering other possibilities.

On the other hand, our identities to some degree get shaped early on by choices that we don't get to choose anyway (who our parents are) and what country we're born in. I think the struggle to fix whatever problem you currently have leading to being more trapped is caused mostly by getting to a point where you're stuck at certain level of ego development. Maybe not a diminishing return...more like it gets tougher and tougher to climb higher - and possible that individually we've ego development ceilings? That ceiling being mostly* determined by child development...and how well you were able to steer your life from then on from whatever starting point.

* Internet age I theorize allowed some of us to get a higher ceiling then we otherwise never would have.

ETA again: I really like this question . Were our identities ever our "own" to begin with? Most of my ideas and values were adopted, borrowed, or learned from others...and then mixed or coalesced with my own unique interpretations of those and experiences gained over the course of my life. Also the question brings to mind that scene in Anger Management where Jack Nicholson's character keeps asking Adam Sandler that question on who he is and he has trouble answering it...or rather he answers with his job, his personality, or other things he expects the receiver to accept.

[jacob]

At least from what I remember anyone who has a life calling that is predominately coming from a place of one color (lets say Yellow) has to be able to integrate any colors before it.

Nononono...

It's the posit of SD that societies go through a specifically ordered process of building on each color before it. Each new vMeme is a [breaking point] reaction to the one that came before it AND builds on what was. Purple's stifling tradition begets Red's initiative. Red's destructive violence begets Blue's rules. Blue's stagnancy begets Orange's achieving. Orange's lack of compassion begets Green's inclusiveness. Green's group-think begets Yellow's competent pragmatism.

However, an individual does not go through the same evolution growing up as their society did historically. They adopt the vMeme(s) of the environment they're born into often without even being aware of how the culture of their society evolved (not really taught in school at a societally self-aware level). Individuals do NOT relive the cultural history (from shamanism to tribal warfare to crusades to the renaissance and industrialism to romanticism to computing ... ) of their culture as they grow up. They're just exposed to remnant bits and parts of those ideas, but overall, they just learn the single vMeme of their environment. For Tier1: That vMeme is the water the fish swim in.

The only thing that makes Tier2 different than Tier1 is that Tier2 is sufficiently consciously evolved to be able to understand and work with other vMemes instead of dismissing other values as evil, weird, or ignorant. IOW, Tier2 is capable of taking a cultural third person perspective. None from Tier1 automagically do that. Indeed, perhaps the main distinction with Tier2 people is their tendency to always think in third-person: Everything is a model or an observation to them. They can distance themselves and tell the difference between object and subject (including themselves).

Society obviously also contains mixes of vMemes. For example, Red/Blue is "violence with rules" as seen in sports and the military. Our society considers pure Red sociopathic (and dangerous). As such Red is only observed in gangs, trailer trash, anonymous internet trolls, and rich assholes with enough money and lawyers to get away with it. Still, it exists! You do find the Red attitude(*) in many athletes: If you ask them if they would take an illegal but undetectable performance enhancing drug if it would ensure their win, a surprising number of athletes demonstrate a lack of Blue ethics. On the other hand, a culture without any Red outlets is a pressure cooker waiting to go off. "Fight Club" is not a bad idea. Blue essentially solved the Red problem by channeling it into controlled forms (either using it for its own ends (to fight against other nations, nationalism is a Blue idea) or prison). Conversely, Green still struggles with a solution from dealing with Red: "How does one form an inclusive consensus with someone who just wants to dominate?" (One does not, but it's inconceivable for Green to see that this is impossible).

(*) There's more to Red than being competitive. Orange, too, is very interested in winning. What makes Red different is that it's more important to Red that the loser acknowledge that they lost than achieving a win. IOW, Red is not in it for the trophy but to have others acknowledge their dominance.

A Yellow solution to cultural issues would certainly insist on understanding and incorporating all the vMemes in a culture. (The Spiral Dynamics theory is itself Yellow), whereas an Orange solution to cultural issues would be to invade the country and install free markets and democracy. Tier2 meets cultures where they are with the constraint that some evolution is required. Tier1 clobbers existing culture and replaces it with their own. A Green solution might be to provide medical aid and food to a war zone ... and proceed to be surprised when Red burns it down to prevent the enemy from having it.

Individually, a Tier1 person holding a later vMeme is not necessarily more "evolved" than someone with an earlier vMeme. Yes, the ideas are more advanced. For example Green's postmodernism is more philosophically advanced than Red's "might makes right", but that doesn't mean that the Green guy truly understands his culture or everything about his vMeme. More likely, he'll just be repeating a bunch of slogans and misunderstandings like "everything is a narrative, so I can think whatever I want, deeeeerp". Not every Blue person who attends church has a spiritual understanding of religion. Not every Orange person is skilled in logic and reason---most are bad at math but they do trust in technology and they do admire rich people over poor people.

In conclusion: I do think it is useful to know your predominant vMeme as well as the predominant vMeme in your place of work/living/etc. because this is basically what is meant by a "good fit". It's not like a bad fit can't work, but it'll be an uphill struggle for so many reasons. Indeed, each vMeme has their own preferred way of working. Blue respects a hierarchy. The boss tells you what you do and you do it because he's the boss. If you're Blue that is just the natural order of things, but if you're not, it's not! Orange offers the possibility to become the boss, but you have to figure out how to win the secret game to become the boss; a Blue person wouldn't even realize this! Whereas a Green person would very much dislike "being told" via a hierarchy. Conversely, an Orange person would grow frustrated with Green always having to talk about all kinds of things that seem irrelevant to work (emotions and check-ins) in order to reach a consensus. And so on. The Green desire to "open up a dialogue" would not work in a situation where violence of action is required.

[7Wannabe5]

Were our identities ever our "own" to begin with? Most of my ideas and values were adopted, borrowed, or learned from others...and then mixed or coalesced with my own unique interpretations of those and experiences gained over the course of my life.

Yeah, I'm currently semi-obsessed with the notion that the 5% of us who read 95% of the books published are fairly predictable on just the basis of our reading history. For example, there is and there isn't something quite self-referential or chicken and the egg about the eventuality of 1) recognizing that something akin to V-memes exist and 2) somehow happening upon a reference to Spiral Dynamics in your reading or in conversation with other readers.

Another example of this would be that I placed "Passionate Marriage" (which I read and discused in a forum much like this around 20 years ago) by David Schnarch at Level 6 in Sexuality Wheaton Table. Then just a couple days ago, I had the notion to research influences on David Schnarch's writing/theory/practice and, guess what, up popped Murray Bowen, the human who invented the notion of Family SYSTEMS Therapy. It's like I had about as much agency over eventually becoming a systems thinker as a maggot has over eventually becoming a fly.

[Henry]

Were our identities ever our "own" to begin with? Most of my ideas and values were adopted, borrowed, or learned from others...and then mixed or coalesced with my own unique interpretations of those and experiences gained over the course of my life.

See René Girard. All desires are mediated.

[Jupiter]

Maybe a bit of a tangent, but I recently played a video game called Chants of Sennaar. It is loosely based on the Tower of Babel myth. You play as a person trying to reach the top of the tower. Even if the game mechanics can be a bit clumsy at times, I found it had a really interesting underlying message, that could help in figuring out "how to choose your life's calling".

[Spoilers ahead.]

In the game, there are 5 levels, each representing a higher floor of the tower.

The first level is the abbey, where the people are deeply religious and want to climb up the tower to get closer to god. However, they cannot go past the abbey as intimidating guards won't let them pass.

The second level is the fortress, where the people are part of a military faction that sworn to protect the divine ones (the artists) by preventing the impure ones (the non-artists) from going up.

The third floor is filled with artists, who spend their days attending theatre plays and listening to music concerts while being served food and refreshments by servants. The artists are full of themselves and believe only fools will attempt to go up the tower, as a monster inhabits the tunnels leading to the next level.

The fourth floor is the scientific district, where alchemists, eating at the cafeteria, processing minerals from mines, studying at the library or experimenting at the laboratory, are on a dire quest to discover the transmutation formulae.

The last level, where technology as long been integrated into daily lives, shows individuals who aren't working together towards achieving an ideal, but rather are entertained on their personal VR screens, all seated separately.

The interesting part resides in the fact that no matter what they are explicitly seeking (god/the divine, loyalty, discipline & service, beauty, emotion and drama, an understanding of the universe, a distraction because everyone is bored out of their minds), they all implicitly want & need the same thing: connection. Connection with the universe, with something greater, with their own selves, with their traditions and culture... and with each other. They just use different means and value different things to feel a sense of connection.

Hence, the main game mechanics gravitate around how to communicate with people. It rewards seeking to understand everyone, and ultimately allowing people from different tribes to create connections with each other.

[End of danger zone.]

I think that if we keep in mind that a very human goal in life is to create deep, meaningful connections & relationships (through/with people, spirituality, an art practice, a movement practice, a quest to learn, a quest to become a better person, nurturing a family, etc.), then maybe that choosing your calling is all about recognizing what makes you feel engaged and connected with (one or many parts of) the world.

I like that there is no notion of talent/skill in this paradigm. We can even get rid of the categories that they made for the sake of having a discrete number of levels in the game. Your calling could be a set of activities/situations where you feel engaged, simulated, playful, focused, curious, valued and understood. It is where, with what, and with who you feel a great sense of connection.

[lillo9546]

Maybe there's more to life than what our culture defines. You can be either an employee, earning a salary from one employer, or an entrepreneur, earning income from multiple customers.

However, you can also be an "employee-entrepreneur," meaning you have a stable job while pursuing other ventures. For instance, instead of paying to go to the gym, you could work as a personal trainer there for a few hours. Instead of paying for swimming lessons, you could teach them for a few hours a week. Instead of just going on hikes or trips, you could organize them for others.

Turn your hobbies into jobs. While you can't monetize everything, focus on a few activities that you can count on your fingers. Instead of earning $100,000 from a single career and feeling unfulfilled, you could earn $50,000 from these diverse activities and feel truly satisfied. Do what you love.

[ducknald_don]

Turning your hobbies into jobs is a good way to lose interest in your hobbies.

Also being an "employee-entrepreneur" sounds like the worst of both worlds. Most of the people I know who run a business started it because they don't fit the corporate mould. For whatever reason they don't function well in that sort of environment and starting a business was a way out. That was certainly the case for me.

[lillo9546]

they don't fit the corporate mould

starting a business was a way out

Nowadays, having a business unfortunately also makes you aware that you still have to enter and operate as if you were in a corporate climate, but perhaps by personalising some things and making it more flexible. You can't escape from that.

[ducknald_don]

Nowadays, having a business unfortunately also makes you aware that you still have to enter and operate as if you were in a corporate climate, but perhaps by personalising some things and making it more flexible. You can't escape from that.

It gives you a distance from the corporate climate, you are an observer rather than a participant. Also you can fire your annoying clients at will which is near impossible when you work for someone else.

[lillo9546]

But I also see it differently. If before you were an "employee", that is, you were always there at work, you didn't have many benefits, etc., today the world of employee work is evolving with smart working, you work from home, you have more benefits, so we can say that the lifestyle has improved significantly compared to before for an employee, compared to someone who has a company.

[zbigi]

Whether you work from the office or from home, a job is a job and you're still dealing with mostly the same soul-sucking bullshit. Things like commute or loud open spaces are no longer a problem, but everything else remains.