Just a random thought to share:

Something about humanity that I find pretty amusing is how people are always looking for the 'best' of things - when the 'best' of anything is relative. To the starving child, a pop tart may be the 'best' thing they've ever tasted; while the socialite wouldn't dream of eating anything so base or mundane. Which is better? Star Wars or Star Trek? Well, to the non-sci fi fan, they both suck.
(on a side note, I love them both, and refuse to pick a favorite)

Yes, striving for better than what you have, than what you know, is admirable, and pushes humanity forward. But the notion of always being 'best', or always having the 'best' is moot. It reminds me of the argument that if one religion is right, all the others must be wrong. Why, because the 'right' one is the 'best' one, and with that argument, all the flaws in the 'best' religion are excused, even when the same flaws in other faiths are used to deny, condemn, and ridicule.

The Fourth Agreement says to Always do your best; but it recognizes that your best is going to change from moment to moment, depending on your health, your circumstances, etc... which means the 'best' is a moving target. Something to strive for, that can momentarily be grasped, before it races away from us again. It's an eternal game of chase, played against a childlike notion that you can ever gain the best, and hold it forever.