I agree with what you wrote, Jim. Sartre talks about possessing a degree of consciousness about one's ideal goal and cites the drunkard as having a higher degree of consciousness of this ideal goal. However, I think someone with a noble goal, probably not a leader of nations to be honest, but someone with an ideal goal will possess a higher degree of consciousness of that goal than the solitary drunkard.

I suppose the pragmatic question is, "Why did I post this if I don't actually agree with it?", and the answer to that is because I find it interesting to think about.

I couldn't possibly disagree more. Inactivity motivated by despair only yields apathetic lifelessness, and accomplishes nothing let alone anything noble or ideal. Substance cannot derive from inertia. Only purposeful activity motivated by noble goals results in approximations of the ideal, because only in meaningful activity can meaning be found.

“…for they discover at the same time that all human activities are equivalent and that all are on principle doomed to failure. Thus it amounts to the same thing whether one gets drunk alone or is a leader of nations. If one one of these activities takes precedence over the other, this will not be because of it’s real goal but because the degree of consciousness which it possesses of it’s ideal goal; and in this case it will be the quietism of the solitary drunkard which will take precedence over the vain agitation of the leader of nations.” (- Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness)

Quietism and despair take precedence over the vain agitation of the leader of nations