In search of proof

[PaulMaster]

Hi, can someone please prove/reason that working "for the man" at some regular job is or is not the best course of action in today's modern world?


Thank you

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

What's your criteria for defining the "best course of action"?
Who says there's such a thing?

 

[PaulMaster]

What's your criteria for defining the "best course of action"?

The course of action that is superior to all others in as many ways as possible.

 

[PaulMaster]

I've never been able to buy in to this whole thing...I suspect I never will. Must we trade the hours of our lives for the benefit of those unknown plus a few dollars? How in the world did they corral us into this absurd, soulless system?

 

[ummidk]

Whose 'the man'?

The course of action that is superior to all others in as many ways as possible.

This depends on what you value. For most people its the easiest course of action to provide necessities for oneself and family.

 

[Frankie]

Consider:
'The man' set up an enterprise to provide a solution to a problem or to satisfy a need. That enterprise requires that a group of people work on different stages of the problem to bring about the solution. You are interested in this problem as a whole or (a) particular stage(s) in the process. You have sense of purpose when contributing to the process of providing the solution. (You have spent hours, months and years practicing to be able to contribute to the process, through education.) You don't gave the resources to set up your own organization that deals with the problem.

What is your best course of action?

 

[TheManBeyond]

What's your criteria for defining the "best course of action"?
Who says there's such a thing?

u are like a copy of sinny? if that's u in ur avatar lol

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I've never been able to buy in to this whole thing...I suspect I never will. Must we trade the hours of our lives for the benefit of those unknown plus a few dollars? How in the world did they corral us into this absurd, soulless system?

Hi, can someone please prove/reason that working "for the man" at some regular job is or is not the best course of action in today's modern world?


Thank you

Remind me again how modern capitalism is not feudalism 2.0.

 

[PaulMaster]

Consider:
'The man' set up an enterprise to provide a solution to a problem or to satisfy a need. That enterprise requires that a group of people work on different stages of the problem to bring about the solution. You are interested in this problem as a whole or (a) particular stage(s) in the process. You have sense of purpose when contributing to the process of providing the solution. (You have spent hours, months and years practicing to be able to contribute to the process, through education.) You don't gave the resources to set up your own organization that deals with the problem.

What is your best course of action?

You have captured the essence of this dilemma well. My problem is that line 4 does not hold true for me and I'm not willing to accept line 6 as true. Yet I know of no other option than to play along...

 

[PaulMaster]

Remind me again how modern capitalism is not feudalism 2.0.

Because they are spelled differently.

 

[Frankie]

Try this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W-ONEAcBeTk

 

[Analyzer]

People who find dull jobs unendurable are often dull people who do not know what to do with themselves when at leisure. Children and mature people thrive on dull routine, while the adolescent, who has lost the child's capacity for concentration and is without the inner resources of the mature, needs excitement and novelty to stave off boredom. - Eric Hoffer

Spoiler

There seems to be a general assumption that brilliant people cannot stand routine; that they need a varied, exciting life in order to do their best. It is also assumed that dull people are particularly suited for dull work. We are told that the reason the present-day young protest so loudly against the dullness of factory jobs is that they are better educated and brighter than the young of the past.

Actually, there is no evidence that people who achieve much crave for, let alone live, eventful lives. The opposite is nearer the truth. One thinks of Amos the sheepherder, Socrates the stonemason, Omar the tentmaker. Jesus probably had his first revelations while doing humdrum carpentry work. Einstein worked out his theory of relativity while serving as a clerk in a Swiss patent office. Machiavelli wrote The Prince and the Discourses while immersed in the dull life of a small country town where the only excitement he knew was playing cards with muleteers at the inn. Immanuel Kant’s daily life was and unalterable routine. The housewives of Konigsberg set their clocks when they saw him pass on his way to the university. He took the same walk each morning, rain or shine. The greatest distance Kant ever traveled was sixty miles from Konigsberg.

The outstanding characteristic of man’s creativeness is the ability to transmute trivial impulses into momentous consequences. The greatness of man is in what he can do with petty grievances and joys, and with common physiological pressures and hungers. “When I have a little vexation,” wrote Keats, “it grows in five minutes into a theme for Sophocles.” To a creative individual all experience is seminal – all events are equidistant from new ideas and insights – and his inordinate humanness shows itself in the ability to make the trivial and common reach an enormous way.

An eventful life exhausts rather than stimulates. Milton, who in 1640 was a poet of great promise, spent twenty sterile years in the eventful atmosphere of the Puritan revolution. He fulfilled his great promise when the revolution was dead, and he in solitary disgrace. Cellini’s exciting life kept him from becoming the great artist he could have been. It is legitimate to doubt whether Machiavelli would have written his great books had he been allowed to continue in the diplomatic service of Florence and had he gone on interesting missions. It is usually the mediocre poets, writers, etc., who go in search of stimulating events to release their creative flow.

It may be true that work on the assembly line dulls the faculties and empties the mind, the cure only being fewer hours of work at higher pay. But during fifty years as a workingman, I have found dull routine compatible with an active mind. I can still savor the joy I used to derive from the fact that while doing dull, repetitive work on the waterfront, I could talk with my partners and compose sentences in the back of my mind, all at the same time. Life seemed glorious. Chances are that had my work been of absorbing interest I could not have done any thinking and composing on the company’s time or even on my own time after returning from work.

People who find dull jobs unendurable are often dull people who do not know what to do with themselves when at leisure. Children and mature people thrive on dull routine, while the adolescent, who has lost the child’s capacity for concentration and is without the inner resources of the mature, needs excitement and novelty to stave off boredom.

 

[PaulMaster]

People who find dull jobs unendurable are often dull people who do not know what to do with themselves when at leisure. Children and mature people thrive on dull routine, while the adolescent, who has lost the child's capacity for concentration and is without the inner resources of the mature, needs excitement and novelty to stave off boredom. - Eric Hoffer

Spoiler

There seems to be a general assumption that brilliant people cannot stand routine; that they need a varied, exciting life in order to do their best. It is also assumed that dull people are particularly suited for dull work. We are told that the reason the present-day young protest so loudly against the dullness of factory jobs is that they are better educated and brighter than the young of the past.

Actually, there is no evidence that people who achieve much crave for, let alone live, eventful lives. The opposite is nearer the truth. One thinks of Amos the sheepherder, Socrates the stonemason, Omar the tentmaker. Jesus probably had his first revelations while doing humdrum carpentry work. Einstein worked out his theory of relativity while serving as a clerk in a Swiss patent office. Machiavelli wrote The Prince and the Discourses while immersed in the dull life of a small country town where the only excitement he knew was playing cards with muleteers at the inn. Immanuel Kant’s daily life was and unalterable routine. The housewives of Konigsberg set their clocks when they saw him pass on his way to the university. He took the same walk each morning, rain or shine. The greatest distance Kant ever traveled was sixty miles from Konigsberg.

The outstanding characteristic of man’s creativeness is the ability to transmute trivial impulses into momentous consequences. The greatness of man is in what he can do with petty grievances and joys, and with common physiological pressures and hungers. “When I have a little vexation,” wrote Keats, “it grows in five minutes into a theme for Sophocles.” To a creative individual all experience is seminal – all events are equidistant from new ideas and insights – and his inordinate humanness shows itself in the ability to make the trivial and common reach an enormous way.

An eventful life exhausts rather than stimulates. Milton, who in 1640 was a poet of great promise, spent twenty sterile years in the eventful atmosphere of the Puritan revolution. He fulfilled his great promise when the revolution was dead, and he in solitary disgrace. Cellini’s exciting life kept him from becoming the great artist he could have been. It is legitimate to doubt whether Machiavelli would have written his great books had he been allowed to continue in the diplomatic service of Florence and had he gone on interesting missions. It is usually the mediocre poets, writers, etc., who go in search of stimulating events to release their creative flow.

It may be true that work on the assembly line dulls the faculties and empties the mind, the cure only being fewer hours of work at higher pay. But during fifty years as a workingman, I have found dull routine compatible with an active mind. I can still savor the joy I used to derive from the fact that while doing dull, repetitive work on the waterfront, I could talk with my partners and compose sentences in the back of my mind, all at the same time. Life seemed glorious. Chances are that had my work been of absorbing interest I could not have done any thinking and composing on the company’s time or even on my own time after returning from work.

People who find dull jobs unendurable are often dull people who do not know what to do with themselves when at leisure. Children and mature people thrive on dull routine, while the adolescent, who has lost the child’s capacity for concentration and is without the inner resources of the mature, needs excitement and novelty to stave off boredom.

I can relate to this. Most of my day here (I only ever post at work) is spent reading/researching new things - or at least things that I'm not being paid to learn. The best part of my job is that its easy, I have long weekends, and I can read so much while I'm here.

 

[PmjPmj]

I read the title as 'In search of a poof', and then choked a little on my coffee.

 

[PaulMaster]

Mods: Can you please change the title of this thread to "In search of a poof"?

Thank you very much.

 

[Analyzer]

I can relate to this. Most of my day here (I only ever post at work) is spent reading/researching new things - or at least things that I'm not being paid to learn. The best part of my job is that its easy, I have long weekends, and I can read so much while I'm here.

What is the work?