The question is not about being the best one can be based on their own personal assets and liabilities or being the best within a certain group or set, but being the undisputed best at something. Period.
Take skateboarding, cello playing or parenting, it doesn't matter what the "something" is, the questions still stands. Is it desirable to work towards being the best skateboarder, cellist or parent in the world?
I think the issue is not so much in the quest for being the best, but in the cost one is willing to pay in order to be the best. What is an individual willing to sacrifice in order to be the best magician, chemist or sales person in the world? During this kind of pursuit the usual items placed on the altar of this desire are:
- Faith, belief, conviction
- Personal life/time
- Friends/ social life/ community
- Spiritual development and growth
But wait, are we really to be content in all situations and circumstances? Are we to be content with:
- a life of untapped or unused potential?
- a marriage that is mediocre or poor?
- a view of socail conditions that looks are how things could be worse and not better?
- a low understanding of self worth or human value?
- a job where one is under employeed?
- a life that is trapped in a generational cycle of abuse, poverty or addiction?
- a perspective of sin that seeks only to comapre and contrast itself to others as a form of moral superiority?
It is acceptable and even desirable to be the best at something, provided a proper balance and perspective are maintained. The error is not in the desire to be the best, but in the sacrifice of equilibrium to achieve this desire. An "at all costs" mentality loses sight of everything but the goal itself. A sense of contentment must be held fast when one understands the goal is not achievable without the lose of balance and sacrifice of perspective.