When it comes to the person that isn't interested in showing their work
publicly (“the writer that doesn't intend to publish their work” example), I
have a slightly different perspective that I only recently developed when
writing my book. These people that don't seem to have a need for showing
their work publicly actually have the largest egos of all. There are two
reasons why they would choose to do this:
1) The bigger the ego, the higher the barrier to showing your work publicly.
It's very risky to put your ego on the line when it is very
valuable/larger. *

Part of this is true, it's risky to put something of your own on the line
when it's very representative of you, but I think it has more to do with the
fact that it's “near and dear” to you than it does with the ego bit. I
think it's the ego, and the drive to grow one's sphere of influence and ego,
that drives the publishing of one's work. The barrier to doing this, I
think has more to do with the size of the sphere of influence, after all,
it's easier to show your mom something than all your colleagues.*

2) Their ego is large enough that they don't care about other people's
opinions. They create for themselves. They themselves are the only “Sphere”
they care about. *

This makes sense, which basically tells us that the fact that someone isn't
interested in publishing their works can't tell us much about his ego.
There are people that create/contribute for their own satisfaction and there
are those looking to create/contribute to increase their sphere of
influence, gain recognition, or do something important.*

A person's ego exists without having a Sphere of Influence. But it isn't
quenched without its respective Sphere. Stable people that aren't flitting
around doing different things have their Sphere of influence. These people
also seem to be the happiest as we've already said (they know they matter.)

*By definition an ego cannot exist without a sphere of influence. Perhaps
this person doesnt actually have a great deal of influence in the sphere
after all, but there needs to be a place for an ego to live. In other
words, someone needs to have a place towards which the are applying this
ego. Otherwise, to what does the ego refer? *

So here's the conclusions your comment brought me to:
A) The most applicable definition of Sphere of Influence: “our place within
our community.” (The full pretentious definition would probably be “our
place within the chain of being”.)

B)You could think of a Sphere of Influence as being a function of Ego and
Abilities. Abilities, what we're able to do, change how we express our ego
(publicly, privately, etc.). However, abilities also define what community
we're apart of, which also changes the nature of our Sphere. The greatest
painter may only paint for himself. The greatest communicator will likely
be a voice for people.

*OK, but I think the non-trivial case is the sphere of influence of which a
person chooses to be a part. Choosing to be a part of a community is
significant because it shows how you value your energy and demonstrates
where you want to spend your time.*

C) It is naive to think of an individual's Sphere as large or small, great
or superfluous. It is what it is: a place where the individual exerts their
influence within the chain of being.

*From what I've seen, the larger someone's influence grows in a given
sphere, the more that person is influenced by it, surprisingly. People
start to depend on that person for their contribution which often times has
a reinforcing effect. I think it's important to observe this because it
allows for one to take advantage of these social-influence-sphere forces and
dynamics to achieve the ends of one's wants.*

At the time, when the greatest painter paints only for himself, his sphere
may seem small. When his paintings are discovered buried beneath his house,
his Sphere may end up being the world over when his paintings bring awe to
everyone. But, the same goes for things we may consider less “important.”
We should hope a brick layer recognizes his Sphere. No one may ever know
who they were in our society, they aren't as influential over the minds of
the recipients of their work. But the recipients will benefit from the
integrity of the work when they walk through the brick layer's buildings.

Basically, it's worthless trying to examine a given Sphere when it's
isolated and extracted from the greater chain. Which is a bit
cliche/hippie-ish sounding to me as I write this, but I guess I never really
had it come into perspective until now.
Which comes back to what our intuitions told us, what is important is that
we create (fill?) these Spheres of Influence that make up this fabric of
being.

*This I agree with. There isnt much point in trying to evaluate things
youre working on in private and dont have greater goals for it. There's
simply no way to tell what it will do when/if it gets into someone else's
hands.
The more public cases are the interesting ones, I think, because they can be
manipulated in order to accelerate one's own progress in some given area. A
little pressure is usually good, and this is just another way to find it.
*

2) Their ego is large enough that they don't care about other people's opinions. They create for themselves. They themselves are the only “Sphere” they care about.

A person's ego exists without having a Sphere of Influence. But it isn't quenched without its respective Sphere. Stable people that aren't flitting around doing different things have their Sphere of influence. These people also seem to be the happiest as we've already said (they know they matter.)

So here's the conclusions your comment brought me to:
A) The most applicable definition of Sphere of Influence: “our place within our community.” (The full pretentious definition would probably be “our place within the chain of being”.)

B)You could think of a Sphere of Influence as being a function of Ego and Abilities. Abilities, what we're able to do, change how we express our ego (publicly, privately, etc.). However, abilities also define what community we're apart of, which also changes the nature of our Sphere. The greatest painter may only paint for himself. The greatest communicator will likely be a voice for people.

C) It is naive to think of an individual's Sphere as large or small, great or superfluous. It is what it is: a place where the individual exerts their influence within the chain of being.

At the time, when the greatest painter paints only for himself, his sphere may seem small. When his paintings are discovered buried beneath his house, his Sphere may end up being the world over when his paintings bring awe to everyone. But, the same goes for things we may consider less “important.” We should hope a brick layer recognizes his Sphere. No one may ever know who they were in our society, they aren't as influential over the minds of the recipients of their work. But the recipients will benefit from the integrity of the work when they walk through the brick layer's buildings.

Basically, it's worthless trying to examine a given Sphere when it's isolated and extracted from the greater chain. Which is a bit cliche/hippie-ish sounding to me as I write this, but I guess I never really had it come into perspective until now.
Which comes back to what our intuitions told us, what is important is that we create (fill?) these Spheres of Influence that make up this fabric of being.

I initially thought that these arenas/spheres of influence are most
important for maintaining an ego. You and I both know how powerful an ego
can be. When the going gets tough, and the tough are going, I think it's
the ego that keeps us moving. I wonder about the interdependence of the
“arena” and the ego themselves. Can one exist without the other? I think
everyone has an arena for which they foster an ego, even if it's only the
tiniest little bit. Some people's arena exists only to themselves. No one
knows that they expend much time and energy in this arena and for some this
is fine and enough to keep them going. They are internally motivated
without attachment to even future externalization (and by this I mean
allowing others to see, know, or be influenced by) of this arena. Examples
might be the poet or writer that never publishes his works nor intends. But
this example is on the far end of the spectrum.

On the other end, are people who keep their “arena” very visible and
public. Once someone has fostered their ego enough, he can move his arena
to become more open and public, which results in increased effort,
consciousness, and investment in maintaining his role as an *influencer* in
this given sphere. This is a useful thing to know about one's self. As
you've already discussed, a simple example of this is making public one's
own New Year's resolution. The stronger the ego you have, the further you
can push it into the public sphere and in return you are inherently
motivated to work even harder to maintain your position and ego. The risk
here is pushing it too far and damaging your ego, which would have the
opposite effect; although, I think for some people this isn't possible.

It all goes back to one of the fundamental desires most, if not all, people
want: the desire to be important.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on the relation to journalism…