[tyrael71]

The article is well written, but the comparison is made on a false premise. People do not choose ambition over relationships, or vice-versa.

These terms are much more abstract than people think. The underlying denominator should be purpose, or rather definiteness of purpose. What I mean by that is, the arbiter of whether you should invest resources in your 'ambition' or your 'relationships' is the purpose with which you choose to live. If my self-determination and calling is to colonize mars and build self-driving cars to better humanity, I will position myself to do so, be it through relationships or allocation of other resources.

The problem is most people do not have a purpose, ambition can be interpreted both ways, as with everything. If I am defined by egotism and vanity, I might do almost anything I can to feed my vices, whether by buying cars, houses or spending money poorly. People would characterize me as ambitious, and they would be right, but it would be irrelevant, my purpose is built on a flawed foundation, a psychological need to prove myself to others.

TL;DR: We shouldn't be comparing terms without considering the purpose through which we choose our everyday actions.

[normloman]

You can be ambitious and have relationships. But let's not kid ourselves. People sacrifice relationships for their ambitions all the time. There was an article on HN two weeks ago about a game studio during a death march. How do you have time to bond with friends when you're at work 7 days out of the week and sleeping in a cot in your cubicle? (Even if you have friends at work, they probably aren't your best friends, and doing a death march isn't exactly quality time.)