R: Carpe Diem

Picture a modern American high schooler. He is aged sixteen, a bit scrawny, and currently in the midst of taking AP United States History. His grades are good enough that his teachers have prompted him to look at colleges early, but he lacks the drive necessary to elevate his application to the next level. One day, the principal calls him into the office. If you exert just an iota of extra effort, he says, you could achieve great things—prestige, status, elevation. The student responds that those options do not appeal to his vision of happiness; he wants instead to pursue meaning through endeavors that do require less effort. The principal leaves the meeting disheartened at the student’s laziness—but should we judge the student as lazy? The central question of this debate centers around the dilemma between avoiding and embracing a certain level of mediocrity in our lives.

The affirmative believes that everyone with the capability to achieve should utilize that ability. If you have the intelligence to go to college, for example, you should feel not inclined, but obligated to attend and flourish. Life is undoubtedly short; to spend time pursuing activities that are not in some way productive is the definition of meaninglessness. If God tells us to be fruitful and multiply, we ought not to spend our days relaxing. In addition, mediocrity and leisure oftentimes act as a mask for deeper shortcomings of the human soul. One of the fundamental principles of conservatism is a belief in the importance of resisting the baser forms of our nature so we may achieve something more elevated, and few lifestyles are more elevated than those oriented toward achievement. In short, we who go or have gone to Yale must accept that ambition is necessary for the Good Life.

The negative resists this characterization of mediocrity as inherently sinful. Instead, it should be thought of as a virtue that is difficult to master. Accepting mediocrity serves as a sign of intellectual humility, as a person recognizes that their importance in the universe does not come from their worldly accomplishments. Living a good life does not come down to how much you can accomplish in the span of a century; it is a much deeper process of finding fulfillment. Those in the negative envision a life similar to that of the Hobbits, in which leisure, community, and moderation are the true indicators of happiness. While achievement itself is not sinful, the pride that often accompanies achievement certainly is, and as conservatives, we ought to temper our pride at all costs. Yale, the negative argues, should not be a place defined by those with an inordinate desire for success.

What does it mean to find meaning through mediocrity? How can we strike a balance between being a bum and being a workaholic? And is it necessary to seize your day in order to seize your life?