[azanar]

As for making your living by doing your calling, you either have to make some sacrifices or be very fortunate and have your calling happen to be something that's lucrative. Unless you work for a job that is minimally demanding, you most likely will only become very successful if you truly have some calling for it. Otherwise you'll probably tread water and have to find fulfillment in other parts of your life.

From the perspective of someone who's been on and seen both sides, is it worth making the sacrifices to live by one's calling if the work isn't very lucrative? Or is it more worthwhile to make sacrifices in what one does for a living to make it easier to find fulfillment elsewhere? Has your opinion on this changed between starting as an IB and where you are now as a software developer?

I ask because your thoughts above reminded me the number of different conversations I've had with people about comfort and fulfillment, and how much one can realistically hope to find either in what they do for a living. Some have even go so far as to suggest not doing one's calling for fulfillment, as they will likely have their passions crushed by some nameless corporate structure.

For perspective, my stance recently has been that aligning both is a worthwhile experiment, and that those who sacrifice other things in doing so will likely find those sacrifices aren't so painful in hindsight (excepting sacrificing things like food, clothing, shelter, etc). Just from the people I've known, those who have worked by their calling seem overall more fulfilled than those who looked elsewhere after-hours. But I'll admit my data set is pretty small, and am curious what others experiences have been.

[shimon]

I think there are some fallacious connotations to the word "calling", not unlike those for the word "soulmate". You probably don't have exactly one, unchanging calling; but there are probably some general themes about the world that excite you enough to try your hardest.

If you have identified those themes, you might be able to work at your calling in a large variety of roles. For instance, one theme I've come back to over and over again over many years is what I'll call, for the moment, "universal programmability" -- the ability of people to improve their tools and environment themselves, rather than simply using the tools and spaces that were previously established by a distant authority. I see ways to explore this theme in software, which is how I make a living. But I have also thought a lot about its implications in architecture, and I'm pretty sure that if I had decided to pursue architecture instead of software development, I could have served my calling in that realm. I also think this theme could work in a government career.

So what does that mean? I think it suggests that the meta-challenge in directing your life centers on learning about yourself, and developing an understanding of your own motivations that isn't necessarily framed in typical professional or academic terms.

On the other hand, it seems that some people can be very effectively motivated by fitting in and becoming the next great doctor/lawyer/investment banker. I'm not sure how much those people are motivated by a desire to prove their worth relative to some well-known societal benchmark, or if there are just a lot of people who find their calling in these fields. Articles like this one, however, suggest that many people pursue these widely-respected careers simply because they haven't found something feasible that they care about more. That search can require a lot of courage and passion, and might even be something that is made possible (or impossible) based on early childhood upbringing.

So in short: the balance that's right for you depends on your personality and circumstances. There's no general answer by definition; believing that there's a general answer may be the most widespread fallacy.