Occupations

I often wonder if there's a moral obligation to do the very most you are capable of. If you are a supergenious, are you doing society a disservice if you don't work in the area you are most advanced in? Suppose you have a knack for problem solving, but you spend your time stocking shelves at a grocery store. Now you're depriving someone who has capabilities to do little more than that - say, a young adult making his way through college - of that position. However, doesn't that mean that you're forcing that young man to be more ambitious? Or are you pushing him into welfare? At the same time, you're depriving the world of your mind's potential - suppose you could be spending your time figuring out a way to end poverty, but you're busy putting Eggos in aisle 6. It's like you're creating two problems.

However, suppose you don't want to do that which you are most capable of. Suppose you're not very bright, but you're really, really tall, and would therefore be suited to handing nails to roofers without leaving the ground. Should you have to because that's the most you can offer society? What if you'd really rather lay floors, and you're not half bad at it, either - should you be obligated to spend your life not fulfilling your dreams just because you have a talent or gift in another area?