One of the most impactful things I've read was in the interview by Donald Knuth, shared here on HN some time ago:
"A person’s success in life is determined by having a high minimum, not a high maximum. If you can do something really well but there are other things at which you’re failing, the latter will hold you back. But if almost everything you do is up there, then you’ve got a good life."
Obviously he's an unpopular guy nowadays, but I often think about Louis CK's version of this:
I'm paraphrasing, but he essentially said he didn't try to make his best performances better, he tried to make his worst performances better.
That idea has been hugely impactful for me -- it's resulted in far less anxiety and self-flagellation in the pursuit of excellence, while still probably resulting in about the same overall improvement.
It's better to set one's own criteria for happiness. Can the criteria change? Sure! But, constantly trying to live up to someone else's standards is an easy way to make one unhappy.
Its not said, that it is about the standards of someone else. In the best case the high minimum comes intrinsic, if not why not get inspired by other's standards? I like this quote very much, thanks.
It's the core of what the article is espousing. Greatness is not achieved by a point-wise maximum, but by consistently strong delivery. Said another way, you're "only as strong as the weakest link."
"A person’s success in life is determined by having a high minimum, not a high maximum. If you can do something really well but there are other things at which you’re failing, the latter will hold you back. But if almost everything you do is up there, then you’ve got a good life."