Discussion on question by convexityftw: How do you come to terms with the fact that you might never be among the best in your research community?

One way to look at it is to shift your mentality from being "the best" to being one with the "most influence/contribution" or other qualities.

What does "the best" mean to you? What do you think "the best" means to your advisor? To your other colleagues? To famous names in your field? I imagine any two people would define it quite differently. On a slightly different note, as Thomas Carlyle said: "Every [person] is my superior in that I may learn from [them]." And just as likely, by the time you are done with your PhD, people will be able to learn something about their own field from you. That makes you their superior! :) And if everyone can learn from you--you are superior to everyone--then aren't you the best?