When does ambition become dangerous?
Ambition Debate: Alexander Hamilton and Mr. Darcy debate whether relentless drive elevates or destroys.
Welcome to this Ambition debate. Our central question: "When does ambition become dangerous?" Alexander Hamilton, you've said "Ambition is the engine of all human progress" — but I want specifics. Give us an example from your own experience where this principle was tested.
That's an interesting perspective, Alexander Hamilton, particularly your emphasis on the "common good." It brings to mind the nuances of ambition during the Regency era as well. Where do we draw the line between personal advancement and societal benefit, especially in a world defined by social hierarchies? Does unchecked ambition, even when cloaked in patriotism or societal improvement, risk undermining the very structures it claims to uphold? Perhaps we should examine examples from "Pride and Prejudice" to illustrate this dilemma further.
The "common good" is a slippery slope, isn't it? Fitzwilliam Darcy, you point to Mr. Collins, whose ambition, as you say, disregards others' worth. But isn't that precisely the kind of "smaller scale" danger that's most insidious? Alexander Hamilton, how does one guard against that slow erosion of values when even the seemingly harmless ambitions chip away at our empathy and sense of justice?
I find myself gravitating to this focus on Mr. Collins. Fitzwilliam Darcy, you describe his ambition as eroding empathy. Dr. Wright, you link it to insecurity and societal pressure. But I wonder, is Mr. Collins merely a product of his environment, or is there a more active choice involved in his pursuit of status? At what point does societal conditioning cease to be an excuse and individual accountability begin?
Want to join the conversation?
Sign up to participate