In Pursuit of Laziness

There's a difference between being perpetually unproductive, which is 'lazy', and having periods of productivity and rest, which is sensible, and what much of the rest of the world seems to have a better grip on than we do. People who expect that everyone else will do everything for them, without reciprocity, are lazy.

Personally, I find people with no work ethic to be boring, useless and even a distraction. Anybody around me who is lazy is going to be miserable.

Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

I'm not miserable.

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

"....there are also far too many people who believe that working hard is a virtue in itself, whatever/whoever you are working for."

All hard work is a kind of exercise, and exercise is good for you. It's also the case that simply keeping on top of things requires hard work for most of us. If your attitude is generally lazy, the implication is that you expect something else to do the work for you.

I do agree with the supposedly French cultural philosophy of spending a long time chilling out and working at being a good friend or family person, but that's the same as a philosophy of laziness.

So, yeah, I think thorough application in all things is a virtue. Especially thinking.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

Interesting topic. Without sounding too pretentious or melodramatic, there's a common little nugget of wisdom that I carry round with me daily. It's a common quote which I'm sure you've heard: 'On your death bed, the last thing you'll wish you'd done is spent more time at the office'. Now I believe that if you work mindfully at any task it can bring some sense of pride and joy. Sweeping a floor, when done mindfully and with dignity, can be a satisfying and enriching experience if customised to suit your standards. There's nothing destructive in this attitude. But, returning to the quote above, there's a point where certain cultural, political and industrial pressures begin to affect an indivdual in a negative way (using your 'captains of industry example above) and I think it's important to stop in one's tracks and abstain, take some time to remember what ultimately matters in life, and act accordingly. This is one reason why I'm shocked (sometimes) to hear of two-parent families rolling into nurseries in 4x4's, dropping 6 month old babies off. If I were to challenge that lifestyle (which I really have noright to) then I'd probably be classed as either jealous, lazy, unintelligent, or poor. :) But the truth of the matter is (thinking about the quote above again) those perceptions couldn't be further from the truth. So I'm conscious that hard work done mindfully and with pride is a day's recuperative meditation in itself, but there's a very blurred boundary marking the shift from positive to negative graft...something I think the 'captains' exploit incessantly.

Anyway, off to watch 638 ways to kill castro, on c4

A few more thoughts on this. if we regress to a time before the industrial revolution we worked in harmony with nature. The seasons dictated our pace and lifetstyle to an extent. The industrial revolution marked our departure from this and introduced technology which we were then required to keep up with. Although technologists were using scientific discoveries to make our lives more comfortable (light bulbs, etc) we were also faced with the problem of adjusting from the relatively slow pace of working in nature to the increased speeds that technology demanded. It's only been a mere couple of hundred years (just two and bit average lifetimes) since all this kicked-off and as technology has introduced even more new fangled contraptions into our lives, we find ourselves having to keep up with these synthetic speeds, which may not be harmonious with our nature. We get up in the morning earlier because we have light. We can jump in the shower, fix a brew and something to eat in a flash. Jump into a car which can travel over distances in less time, get to work and deal with all the machinery which demands we keep up with its increasing speeds. What may have at first appeared to be a Godsend with regards to making life more comfortable has since been exploited by the 'captains' to ensure that productivity increases, meaning: less time for leisure, more stress and work pressure.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

How 'hard' I work is directly proportional to how interested I am in the job I'm doing. But I can also be hard-working at mindless manual work it's things like routine data-entry or database management that make me 'lazy'.

"I think thorough application in all things is a virtue. Especially thinking"

Due to a brain injury, I have been left with significant cognitive impairment and my concentration is extremely fragile, so thorough application to thinking isn't possible any more. Never mind, I am unvirtuous but happy!

jude

"Cacoethes scribendi"
http://www.judesworld.net

I am lazy but I get bored very easily and find that, in a general sense, the busier I am the happier I am. At my previous job there were two of three occasions where I was paid, once for as much as three months, for coming in and doing nothing, just waiting for work. This was horrible, I hated it, and I became lazier doing it and I hate that. Nanowrimo has occupied all my free time for the last month, and I love it, I wish I could motivate myself to do that much work off my own back, but like I say, I'm lazy.

UnIlike Jude, I don't really care how interesting a task is compared to how important it is, a lot of my job is bugfixing which is drudge, and a lot of my previous job was basically data entry, but both needed to be done and I was happy to do it. In contrast, no matter how interesting a task is, if I don't believe it's of any value I can't motivate myself to do it at all.

(Warning! Please prepare yourself for what is probably my longest post ever...)

Would the word “idleness” be preferable to “laziness”?

I recently wrote a piece for my blog, called “Breaking the Chain of Guilt,” which speaks of this idea that we should not be idle if it means others have to do our work – rather than going through the unnecessary toil of repeating myself, I shall provide the link here… http://www.pepsoid.wordpress.com/2006/10/30/breaking-the-chain-of-guilt/

Regarding my argument in general (and that of the likes of Tom Hodgkinson in “How to be Idle”), I shall also provide a link to Bertrand Russell’s essay, “In Praise of Idleness,” whose sentiments I believe in wholeheartedly (it was written around the 1930’s, I think, but I feel it is largely still relevant today)… http://www.geocities.com/athens/oracle/2528/br_idle.htm

For those who don’t want to read the entire piece, however (which admittedly does occasionally have a tendency to rattle on a bit and repeat itself), I shall herewith pull out a few quotes…

(I’ve managed to get it down to about a third of what it was… honest!)

...

From the beginning of civilization until the Industrial Revolution, a man could, as a rule, produce by hard work little more than was required for the subsistence of himself and his family… Modern technique has made it possible for leisure, within limits, to be not the prerogative of small privileged classes, but a right evenly distributed throughout the community. The morality of work is the morality of slaves, and the modern world has no need of slavery.

…

The conception of duty, speaking historically, has been a means used by the holders of power to induce others to live for the interests of their masters rather than for their own. Of course the holders of power conceal this fact from themselves by managing to believe that their interests are identical with the larger interests of humanity.

…

Modern technique has made it possible to diminish enormously the amount of labor required to secure the necessaries of life for everyone. This was made obvious during the war. At that time all the men in the armed forces, and all the men and women engaged in the production of munitions, all the men and women engaged in spying, war propaganda, or Government offices connected with the war, were withdrawn from productive occupations. In spite of this, the general level of well-being among unskilled wage-earners on the side of the Allies was higher than before or since. The significance of this fact was concealed by finance: borrowing made it appear as if the future was nourishing the present. But that, of course, would have been impossible; a man cannot eat a loaf of bread that does not yet exist. The war showed conclusively that, by the scientific organization of production, it is possible to keep modern populations in fair comfort on a small part of the working capacity of the modern world. If, at the end of the war, the scientific organization, which had been created in order to liberate men for fighting and munition work, had been preserved, and the hours of the week had been cut down to four, all would have been well. Instead of that the old chaos was restored, those whose work was demanded were made to work long hours, and the rest were left to starve as unemployed. Why? Because work is a duty, and a man should not receive wages in proportion to what he has produced, but in proportion to his virtue as exemplified by his industry.

This is the morality of the Slave State, applied in circumstances totally unlike those in which it arose. No wonder the result has been disastrous. Let us take an illustration. Suppose that, at a given moment, a certain number of people are engaged in the manufacture of pins. They make as many pins as the world needs, working (say) eight hours a day. Someone makes an invention by which the same number of men can make twice as many pins: pins are already so cheap that hardly any more will be bought at a lower price. In a sensible world, everybody concerned in the manufacturing of pins would take to working four hours instead of eight, and everything else would go on as before. But in the actual world this would be thought demoralizing. The men still work eight hours, there are too many pins, some employers go bankrupt, and half the men previously concerned in making pins are thrown out of work. There is, in the end, just as much leisure as on the other plan, but half the men are totally idle while half are still overworked. In this way, it is insured that the unavoidable leisure shall cause misery all round instead of being a universal source of happiness. Can anything more insane be imagined?

…

In America men often work long hours even when they are well off; such men, naturally, are indignant at the idea of leisure for wage-earners, except as the grim punishment of unemployment; in fact, they dislike leisure even for their sons.

…

Owing to the absence of any central control over production, we produce hosts of things that are not wanted.

…

If you ask him [the ‘average’ worker] what he thinks the best part of his life, he is not likely to say: 'I enjoy manual work because it makes me feel that I am fulfilling man's noblest task, and because I like to think how much man can transform his planet. It is true that my body demands periods of rest, which I have to fill in as best I may, but I am never so happy as when the morning comes and I can return to the toil from which my contentment springs.' I have never heard working men say this sort of thing. They consider work, as it should be considered, a necessary means to a livelihood, and it is from their leisure that they derive whatever happiness they may enjoy.

…

It will be said that, while a little leisure is pleasant, men would not know how to fill their days if they had only four hours of work out of the twenty-four. In so far as this is true in the modern world, it is a condemnation of our civilization; it would not have been true at any earlier period. There was formerly a capacity for light-heartedness and play which has been to some extent inhibited by the cult of efficiency. The modern man thinks that everything ought to be done for the sake of something else, and never for its own sake. Serious-minded persons, for example, are continually condemning the habit of going to the cinema [perhaps to be compared nowadays to, for example, playing videogames?], and telling us that it leads the young into crime. But all the work that goes to producing a cinema is respectable, because it is work, and because it brings a money profit. The notion that the desirable activities are those that bring a profit has made everything topsy-turvy… we attach too little importance to enjoyment and simple happiness, and… we do not judge production by the pleasure that it gives to the consumer.

…

The pleasures of urban populations have become mainly passive: seeing cinemas, watching football matches, listening to the radio, and so on. This results from the fact that their active energies are fully taken up with work; if they had more leisure, they would again enjoy pleasures in which they took an active part.

…

In a world where no one is compelled to work more than four hours a day, every person possessed of scientific curiosity will be able to indulge it, and every painter will be able to paint without starving, however excellent his pictures may be. Young writers will not be obliged to draw attention to themselves by sensational pot-boilers, with a view to acquiring the economic independence needed for monumental works…

…

Above all, there will be happiness and joy of life, instead of frayed nerves, weariness, and dyspepsia. The work exacted will be enough to make leisure delightful, but not enough to produce exhaustion. Since men will not be tired in their spare time, they will not demand only such amusements as are passive and vapid… Good nature is, of all moral qualities, the one that the world needs most, and good nature is the result of ease and security, not of a life of arduous struggle. Modern methods of production have given us the possibility of ease and security for all; we have chosen, instead, to have overwork for some and starvation for others. Hitherto we have continued to be as energetic as we were before there were machines; in this we have been foolish, but there is no reason to go on being foolish forever.

…

:-)

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

"A few more thoughts on this. if we regress to a time before the industrial revolution we worked in harmony with nature."

I think this is a very romantic view of the world prior to the Industrial Revolution. People didn't just sit around waiting for the harvest every year, and I doubt we have to work harder today to 'keep up' with machines. If anything, we've got more time for leisure time than ever, not to mention more ways of relaxing.

And yes, we have 'captains of industry', but they had landowners. There will always be people in greater positions of power who take the rewards of other people's hard work for themselves. People complain that we're manipulated into obedience today - sure we are, but in the middle ages they cured dissent in even more blunt ways. If the population were restless, you rounded them up and took most of them off to fight a war.

That's not to say everything is great today, and I don't think anyone would suggest the 9-5 life is healthy. It's also the case that machines don't appear to actually save us work, because expectations of productivity simply increase with technological advancements. But I don't think you can make a case for the idea that we have it harder now than ever. That's just 'grass is greener' logic. I think the raw truth is that a greater percentage of the population are able to relax and feel good about themselves than ever before.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

Russells' 'pins machine' example is really interesting, but his recommendation requires the kind of tight restrictions on capitalism that will will never be introduced as long as corporations have a say in it:

"In a sensible world, everybody concerned in the manufacturing of pins would take to working four hours instead of eight, and everything else would go on as before."

Assuming they get paid the same amount for four hours, instead of eight, the problem here is that there's competition in labour, and any manager of the above scenario will likely have no problem finding half as many replacement workers who will do twice the amount of hours each. Voila - he's knocked down half the company's expenditure on wages.

This is going to happen here and now, of course. Many professions will be outsourced to foreign countries in the years ahead, because the labour is cheaper.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

My deepest desire is to outsource myself to a Mediterranean country, after earning enough money to live a more leisurely life. Hmm, which restaurant should we eat at tonight? I will pay someone else a very generous wage to do all the housework for me. It *is* just a fantasy.

I don't feel I have *nearly* enough time to relax; work consumes the week, and weekends are spent catching up on all the domestic chores that have been neglected during the week. Four people can make a lot of laundry. Hence the desire to pay someone else very well to offload this burden. I hate the way life is lived in this society. I'm not rich enough to evade it, however...:-(

'I think this is a very romantic view of the world prior to the Industrial Revolution'

Yes, it was ill thought out. extracting from Peps' quote: 'There was formerly a capacity for light-heartedness and play which has been to some extent inhibited by the cult of efficiency.' I suppose I was reaching out towards this perspective.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

"Jesus did not believe in working hard"

Have you ever tried being crucified?

"I shall also provide a link to Bertrand Russell’s essay, “In Praise of Idleness,” whose sentiments I believe in wholeheartedly"

Russell's rose-tinted and profoundly historically innacurate view of life before the industrial revolution ultimately led him towards similarly misinformed and ridiculous support for unpleasant communist regimes in later life.

Orwell is quite good on machines in the The Road to Wigan Pier. That's worth a read.

Phew! I feared for a minute people would be scared off by my gargantuan quote. As they haven’t, however…

…

JC: “If anything, we've got more time for leisure time than ever, not to mention more ways of relaxing.”

The point BR was making, and I think it still applies today, is that we should have more leisure time than ever, but in fact we don’t. This is as a direct result of the “work ethic” and has nothing to do with how much work needs to be done.

JC: “I think the raw truth is that a greater percentage of the population are able to relax and feel good about themselves than ever before.”

“raw”? Really? Do you really think people are happier today than at any previous point in the entire history of the world? Obviously I don’t know, as I’ve only lived for 34 years, and even during those I haven’t had a direct link to the happiness level of every living human being, but it does seem pretty unlikely.

Bukharin: "Have you ever tried being crucified?"

Oddly enough, no, but I wouldn't say Jesus pursued crucifixion as an act of work.

…

Generally speaking, my point is that although we would have an enormous mountain to climb in reversing the oppressive capitalist tide (pardon the mixed metaphors), we will never do so unless we stop believing that work is, in and of itself, a virtue. Things need to get done – food needs to be made, children need to be raised, etc. That’s obvious. But unless we dispense with this culture of guilt surrounding how much we should be “contributing” to the system, we will never allow ourselves to even consider that we deserve to have more work-free time, in which to do the things which will have a positive spiritual (in the general sense) benefit to the world, never mind actually making the first moves towards changing how things are.

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

"The point BR was making, and I think it still applies today, is that we should have more leisure time than ever, but in fact we don’t."

Well, he's wrong. Of course we do. There are entire industries that operate off the back of our free time. We have an abundance of it. The 9 to 5 working day is nothing compared to the hours people used to work. Jeez, Peps, we even have leisure time *while* we work - every post you make in this forum is effectively done at your leisure!

What makes us stressed is the fact that we spend most of that free time fretting about what we're doing with our lives, and fill the vacuum with more and more personal goals and concerns. Previous generations simply didn't have time for these pursuits, unless they were relatively wealthy.

"Do you really think people are happier today than at any previous point in the entire history of the world?"

Any comparison is pointless. People are frequently unhappy today because they compare themselves to other people, or because they have a distorted idea of what happiness entails. I don't think there was anything like the *expectation* of happiness in the distant past - people just had to do whatever was needed to live, amid much resorting to drink.

I will say this though - people are content these days to the extent that there is zero chance of any kind of revolution or uprising in this country. Those kind of things only happen when most of the population are desperately miserable and afraid for their future - note, then, how previous centuries are littered with them.

"Generally speaking, my point is that although we would have an enormous mountain to climb in reversing the oppressive capitalist tide (pardon the mixed metaphors), we will never do so unless we stop believing that work is, in and of itself, a virtue."

We can believe that work is a virtue and still reject the core ethic of capitalism, which is that the free market is the best thing for everyone. We can also reject the driving force behind capitalism - the belief that greater material wealth equals greater achievement equals greater sense of self-worth.

It doesn't have anything to do with whether or not you think hard work is a virtue.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

JC: “Jeez, Peps, we even have leisure time *while* we work - every post you make in this forum is effectively done at your leisure!”

My employer doesn’t give me that time… I steal it back off them! I allow myself to do this, because I don’t feel guilty that I am not “contributing” enough.

JC: “I will say this though - people are content these days to the extent that there is zero chance of any kind of revolution or uprising in this country.”

Content or oppressed? Could it be that people don't revolt, because they don't feel it would do any good?

JC: “We can believe that work is a virtue and still reject the core ethic of capitalism…”

Well maybe the “work ethic” doesn’t absolutely equate with capitalism, but it certainly helps to perpetuate the oppressive nature of such.

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

There is more free time because we're squeezing all our activities into a shorter working day. Previously, people were up with cock and in bed as soon as cows come home. Alot of people in the middle-ages simply couldn't afford to keep tallow blazin' after dark. But the pace of life was slower. People most definately didn't do the night shift, except for your community guards, thieves and prostitutes. We can capitalise on the evening because we have good street lighting, etc. whereas previously, people were considered nuts for leaving home after dark. Oh yeah..things have definately improved. But, as peps rightly said, the 'work ethic' is a nasty little shit...and it aint been laid down by the good masses!

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Indeed people were “up with cock (!) and in bed as soon as cows come home” in days of Yore, Mr Yan, but there was apparently more time for leisure between those hours – for long lunches, lying about on hillocks chewing grass, etc (Tom Hodgkinson (my hero of the moment, as you might have guessed) speaks of such things, btw – have you made purchase of “How to be Idle” yet?). This is because before the industrial so-called “revolution,” there was less of a concern with working a particular number of hours and more with producing a particular amount of whatever you were producing. Certainly not the case nowadays! Putting aside for now the argument as to whether we technically have more or less leisure time, what is particularly oppressive about the present “system” is the inability, amongst the vast majority of workers, to apply an output-based flexibility to one’s work/leisure ratio. In most office jobs, if you work you socks off to get those invoices posted in half the normal time, what is your reward? Half a day off with full pay? Not likely! The reward for hard work is often more hard work…

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

Peps."Generally speaking, my point is that although we would have an enormous mountain to climb in reversing the oppressive capitalist tide (pardon the mixed metaphors), we will never do so unless we stop believing that work is, in and of itself, a virtue."

Okay...reversing the oppressive capitalist tide? Here is an example of a glittering generality, proclaiming how horrible something is and that it has to be changed...but as usual...the standard leftist vocality doesn't really specify a better solution.

It may be possible that there is no need for revolution or general revolt because the capitalist system has provided a better approach to social equity than any other political/social format available. Please sir, take my property and give it to somebody else, and here, take the money I've saved and give it away, and oh...btw...I don't need this job I worked so hard to get, I'd rather operate a mechanical rice picker. Ahhh, I'm much better now! Oh...may I have my ration of gruel?

C'mon peps...you're resorting to psuedo-babble with no valid alternative as an explanation. It's more like destroy it for the sake of destroying it, who cares about alternatives that work.

Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

I’m not really making a political point here, Radio. The reason I’m not saying, “Destroy capitalism” and “Replace it with communism” (for example) is that I will concede that the political system behind the sort of pro-work oppression I am referring to is perhaps irrelevant. In some of the bits of Russell’s essay I didn’t quote (well you didn’t want me quoting the whole darned thing, did you?) he speaks of how communist (supposedly) systems experience similar anti-idle problems, and then he goes on to propose potential solutions. Whether it is within capitalism, communism or whatever-ism, my point is that the “work ethic” that so many people of all sorts of political leanings believe in is misguided and exploitative. There is (as far as I am aware) not one type of existing political system in which the “work ethic” is inherently absent. Therefore in order to be free of this virtue of work (if, that is, we decide that we need to be free of it), we need not to necessarily replace one political system with another, but rather replace one value with another – which is perhaps a trickier and less clear-cut prospect!

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

"My employer doesn’t give me that time… I steal it back off them! I allow myself to do this, because I don’t feel guilty that I am not “contributing” enough."

Your employer gives you that time by merit of not demanding more work from you, or overseeing you with a whip. It's still leisure time.

"Content or oppressed? Could it be that people don't revolt, because they don't feel it would do any good?"

Doesn't make any difference. If you don't think a revolution would do any good, you're plainly not miserable or desperate enough. Rebellions happen when you feel *anything* would be better than the present situation.

"Well maybe the “work ethic” doesn’t absolutely equate with capitalism, but it certainly helps to perpetuate the oppressive nature of such."

Only if you let it. It's an individual choice. Hard work for me has nothing to do with serving captains of industry. Likewise, you don't have to have a guilt complex about not 'contributing'. I don't think that's a very pervasive feeling in this society. Most people are quite happy to take advantage of holes in the system - some to a piss-taking extent.

"The reward for hard work is often more hard work."

Well, this is exactly what you want! If you reward people for hard work, that's as good as teaching people hard work is a virtue. The pay-per-hour system is surely what you're after if you're against working hard, as it rewards people for their time, rather than their industriousness.

"but as usual...the standard leftist vocality doesn't really specify a better solution."

Functional laws that prevent corporations from murdering and enslaving people in pursuit of profit would be a start. The French working ethic is, by all accounts, far superior to the Anglo-American one.

"Please sir, take my property and give it to somebody else, and here, take the money I've saved and give it away, and oh...btw...I don't need this job I worked so hard to get, I'd rather operate a mechanical rice picker."

The richer you are, the better you are able to generate more wealth. It's absurd to suggest that this spiral of hoarding constitutes a fair accumulation of property. There's nothing more stupifyingly prattish, more likely to inspire revolt, than a rich man making the claim that his wealth corresponds to the hours he has put in, or his intelligence, or any virtue.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

'Indeed people were “up with cock (!) and in bed as soon as cows come home” in days of Yore, Mr Yan, but there was apparently more time for leisure between those hours – for long lunches, lying about on hillocks chewing grass, etc '

Yes, peps. Work life and community life were very closely integrated so work didn't necessarily 'feel' like work. Jack the Blacksmith had no opening hours pinned to his door. Him and his family would spend the day socialising whilst working and they didn't take 'lunch breaks' and such because there weren't really any clear cut divisions. Definately a slower, more leisurely pace to the working day.

I don't know how everyone feels about the government's plans to increase school leaving age to 18 and increase the retirement age to 70 (eventually). It looks as though we've all collectively done ourselves proud by managing to live longer but gov. are now pushing the 'life plan' they have laid out for us along a notch or two to compensate for our increased longevity/productivity. There goes the extended retirement we should have rewarded ourselves!

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

JC: “Hard work for me has nothing to do with serving captains of industry. Likewise, you don't have to have a guilt complex about not 'contributing'. I don't think that's a very pervasive feeling in this society. Most people are quite happy to take advantage of holes in the system - some to a piss-taking extent.”

I refer the learned gentleman back to my own “Breaking the Chain of Guilt” (http://pepsoid.wordpress.com/2006/10/30/breaking-the-chain-of-guilt/).

JC: “Well, this is exactly what you want! If you reward people for hard work, that's as good as teaching people hard work is a virtue. The pay-per-hour system is surely what you're after if you're against working hard, as it rewards people for their time, rather than their industriousness.”

No, no, no! You misunderstand me! I don’t expect to not have to do any work. But when I do work hard, I want to be rewarded for it, because I have given my time to do this thing which I don’t want to do. I want to be rewarded with leisure time. I want to be appreciated for the quality of my work, rather than the quantity of hours I put into it. How is it right that if I do 16 hours worth of work in 8 hours, I am paid the same as someone who does 4 hours worth of work in the same time? As I am neither rewarded with time or money for working hard, but with more work, I consequently don’t work as hard as I could in my job. I steal back what time I can. The pay-per-hour system encourages people like me to be “lazy”! As it is so engrained within the western way of doing things, however, it is seen as being right. Perhaps not overtly so, but how many people, do you think, if asked, would say it is wrong?

...

Regarding increased retirement age... pft!!

(not heard about the later school-leaving age thing... How will that work then? Will kids just spend more years in school? Or will they start school later as well? If not , will they learn more (allegedly) or just spend longer doing what they would’ve done anyway?)

...

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

I don't know, peps. Maybe kids'll start school at 2 weeks. :) That should please the 'career parents' lol

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

JC>"...Functional laws that prevent corporations from murdering and enslaving people in pursuit of profit would be a start. The French working ethic is, by all accounts, far superior to the Anglo-American one...."

You aren't studying corporate law are you Jon?
"all accounts"...that pretty much includes everyone, for whom I surmise you are now speaking.

JC>"The richer you are, the better you are able to generate more wealth. It's absurd to suggest that this spiral of hoarding constitutes a fair accumulation of property. There's nothing more stupifyingly prattish, more likely to inspire revolt, than a rich man making the claim that his wealth corresponds to the hours he has put in, or his intelligence, or any virtue."

I would agree with the first part of that statement.

The rest is cock-doodle spoken like a true Englishman Jon. So, it is better for the industrious to work their ass off and then have the slackers divy it up? I suppose it is better to be born into wealth, but the "wealthy people" I know have earned it, not stolen it nor had it given to them. They start with nothing and build it to something and take some others along for the ride.

Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

Peps said: 'But unless we dispense with this culture of guilt surrounding how much we should be “contributing” to the system, we will never allow ourselves to even consider that we deserve to have more work-free time.'

Couldn't agree more with this statement. A Word like 'revolution' in a thread regards 'taking it little easier' is a little ott, but I do think we need to get in-line with Europe for starters. How many people receive those emails marked "Urgent" and it's something so not urgent that it's laughable? I think it's that kind of attitude that needs to be stamped out. Someone up top pushing someone below who in turn starts flapping and pushes someone below them and something so ridiculously trivial becomes "urgent!" This all reminds me of the Jamaicans in the Bicardi advert.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Just found this website...

http://www.slowdownnow.org/content/view/14/23/

...which has the quote...

The Ancient Greeks understood that we work in order to have leisure.

...which is it in a nutshell!

Working is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

Also on the same website is the following animation...

http://www.slowdownnow.org/component/option,com_wrapper/Itemid,31/

...which is apparently based on the American experience, but can apply, with one or two adjustments, probably just about anywhere in the "first" (irony) world... Surely no one can believe that this is the way things should be!

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

Very wise words, peps.

Another path of the Axial period not mentioned here yet (and I'm surprised because it deals extensively with this issue) is Tao and wu wei (the art of doing nothing).

“In the practice of The Way (that is what “Tao” or “Dao” means) every day something is dropped. Less and less do you need to force things, until finally you arrive at non-action. When nothing is done, nothing is left undone”.

One of the guiding principles of Taoism is that of “wu wei”, which roughly translates into “effortless action”. Taoism says that all things that are in accordance with Tao do what they are supposed to do without any fuss, and they think not of doing anything that is “unnatural” for them to do. A tree sways with the wind. A plant grows out of a seed naturally. The wind blows this way, then that way. A bird flies, looks for food and propagates. The earth turns, and moves around in the universe.'

Many of the fat little laughing geezer ornaments you see so much of in 'new age' stores are often mistaken for buddha when in fact they're Tao sages. The uncarved block - sheer simplicity brings bliss.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

I googled Tao and the first result was...

http://tao-group.com/

... gaaahhhhhh!!!

But then the second result was...

http://www.thetao.info/

... Phew!

Read a book about the Tao.

The Tao is...

.
.
.
.
.

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

"The pay-per-hour system encourages people like me to be “lazy”!

Yes. And you started off this thread saying how important it was to be lazy. What's your problem?

"So, it is better for the industrious to work their ass off and then have the slackers divy it up?"

That's hardly the obvious alternative to the reality. How about the industrious get paid according to the time they put in, rather than finding that a few cunning hand-me-down tricks here and there leads to their getting more for less? It doesn't take much work, or much of a brain, to work out, for instance, that if you can afford a buy-to-let property in the present climate (in Britain) your bank balance will boom. And hey, once you can afford a financial advisor you don't even need to do any thinking.

"the "wealthy people" I know have earned it, not stolen it nor had it given to them."

Classic mistake that all rich people make - assuming that, having not 'stolen' the money or had it given to them as a gift, they *must* have earned it. Save it. When wealth generates wealth - when you have to work less and less the more you acquire - this notion of 'earning' goes out the window. If more wealthy people could get their head round this relatively simple idea, they might understand why people are so pissed off at them, instead of constantly hiding behind an egotistical delusion and crude caricatures of their critics.

It wouldn't be so bad if money didn't make people into such pricks.

As for this Taoism business, the West has always had an infatuation with religions that seem to offer an easy solution to the happiness problem. If that's your bag, fine, but I think it's pretty self-indulgent. There are serious problems in the world, and in everybody's life, that require a thorough application of thought and time and labour. Of course, every problem has a simple solution, and that solution is usually wrong. I'd rather work hard to get something right than lie back and let it go wrong.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

"It doesn't take much work, or much of a brain, to work out, for instance, that if you can afford a buy-to-let property in the present climate (in Britain) your bank balance will boom."

To be fair, all the people I know who have done this have not done all that well by it, in fact one may be yet to see a penny profit after two years (not even counting the initial investment). Standing on the other side of the equation myself (the sdie that pays rent rather than receives it) I find it hard to see how this is possible, but far be it from me to doubt the words of my friends and family.

That said, I agree with the principle, it is much much easier to make money with money.

Maybe they mean by 'profit' that they haven't paid off the initial mortgage yet. I dunno. When I worked in mortgages it was clear that everyone who rented out properties charged a heck of a lot more for rent than they had to pay in mortgage on the property, and all the work they have to do is occasionally visit or get a plumber round. That's if they're *good* landlords.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

No, they refer to the running costs plus mortgage payments. I can only take their words for it. I suspect the succesful landlords are the ones that A. are relcutant to pay for any damn thing, and B. don't get shafted in turn by the letting agents.

Oh yeah, letting agents cream off loads. Man, if they're not making money month to month, something's going awfully, awfully wrong.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

Well anyone who charges you £40 to write a bloody letter is obviously a little anxious to justify their worth.

---Incidentally i read the other day of a man who wrote his bank a letter and invoiced them £20 for it, they paid up.---

JC>"Classic mistake that all rich people make - assuming that, having not 'stolen' the money or had it given to them as a gift, they *must* have earned it. Save it. When wealth generates wealth - when you have to work less and less the more you acquire - this notion of 'earning' goes out the window. If more wealthy people could get their head round this relatively simple idea, they might understand why people are so pissed off at them, instead of constantly hiding behind an egotistical delusion and crude caricatures of their critics."

Sorry dude, your statements don't hold water. Though you are entitled to your opinions you defeat your own arguments with gross generalizations and ignorantly make assumptions that you convert to convenient facts.

You're glossing over a lot of things with very broad strokes of your imaginative contempt. "ALL rich people" make the same mistake? I fail to see the logic in that statement. Obtaining wealth by ones own efforts is hardly a mistake. Making money to invest is not a mistake, investing it poorly is a mistake It is those investments that continue the process and provides a source of income for others. Lets say I am rich and own a very successful photography studio, I invest my profits back into the studio, expanding the scope of my business, I may then employ another photographer...a job that may not have existed had I not. There is nothing wrong with investing money to make more money. It doesn't sit in a vacuum if invested, it is put to work driving the economy and creating/greasing the machines that provide employment. The simple fact that you have a disdain for wealth is okay, but making blanket statements that "ALL" wealthy people are the same is stupidity. Wealthy people are just like everybody else, they suffer from the same problems and same personality characteristics as the rest of society. What they are probably not (on average) is stupid or lazy. It is more likely that you have a disdain for a stereotype that is etched in your mind from god knows what source, and less likely that you actually know anything about it.

Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

As for this Taoism business, the West has always had an infatuation with religions that seem to offer an easy solution to the happiness problem. If that's your bag, fine, but I think it's pretty self-indulgent. There are serious problems in the world, and in everybody's life, that require a thorough application of thought and time and labour. Of course, every problem has a simple solution, and that solution is usually wrong. I'd rather work hard to get something right than lie back and let it go wrong.

It's all well and good to dismiss the ideas of Taoism as being overly simplistic, but how can a life spent working in a job you at best tolerate to buy tonnes of goods that you don't need, be a better philosophy? For self-indulgence I think the west wins hands down.

You assume that by working hard things will go right but quite the opposite can be the case. The idea that lying back will necessarily lead to things going wrong is also an assumption. Many people spend most of the day working and their 'leisure' time catching up on chores. I seriously doubt that they have ever laid back and let things happen.

Greetings, slothful! ;-)

Occams’s Razor: the simplest solution is usually right…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

'Many people spend most of the day working and their 'leisure' time catching up on chores. I seriously doubt that they have ever laid back and let things happen.'

You know what would happen if I just 'laid back and let things happen'?

The kids would have nothing to eat. When they did, it would be from dirty pans.
They'd walk around in skiddy underpants and filthy clothes.
We'd enjoy our leisure time amongst the mud, straw, and guinea pig shit tracked in from the garden, much like they did in the leisurely Middle Ages.

Feh! Surely this kind of argument is only valid for singletons, childless people, or those who have someone else there, doing the chores for them. Usually a woman.

You know what would happen if I just 'laid back and let things happen'?

Feh! Surely this kind of argument is only valid for singletons, childless people, or those who have someone else there, doing the chores for them. Usually a woman.

It's not an all or nothing proposition though. Of course some amount of chores are necessary as is some form of income or self-sufficiency to sustain our lives and families. Some household chores can be enjoyable. I for one love doing the washing and hanging it on the line so much so that I do not consider it hard work. Many of the things we consider necessary chores are unnecessary and result from our anxiety about others seeing us as lazy as though being lazy was an inherently bad thing.

I think the thing with chores, similarly with clutter and life in general really, is that one should always, where possible, look to simplify. How many of these chores are strictly necessary? Of those that are, how can I spend a little less time on them, do them a little less frequently or delegate to those who perhaps do a little less than they could (e.g. children)? If one can shave little bits of time off here and there, one can find delightful little nuggets of time one didn’t realise one had!

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

"The simple fact that you have a disdain for wealth is okay, but making blanket statements that "ALL" wealthy people are the same is stupidity."

OK, you got me on that. It's a generalisation. But wealthy people, being human, are defensive when criticised, and that inevitably leads, in many cases, to the irritating assertion that their wealth is somehow 'deserved'.

I'm not saying that it's a mistake to invest it. But to say their wealth is 'deserved' implies they have somehow put in more hard work, or been cleverer, than people who have less money than them. This is pretty rich, pardon the expression. Few, if any, wealthy people have put in more hours, or been more imaginative than a great number of people less wealthy than them. The difference is, usually, that these people have put a greater part of their time and resources towards the specific goal of generating money.

There has to be a point where the state, in the service of the people, puts its foot down on the rampant acquisition of property, because the inevitable result of the minority pursuing wealth with more fervour is the minority owning everything, and believing that they deserve to, despite the fact there are people in the world who work far harder than them throughout the course of their lives and end up owning next to nothing. We're not too far removed from that situation now.

"It's all well and good to dismiss the ideas of Taoism as being overly simplistic, but how can a life spent working in a job you at best tolerate to buy tonnes of goods that you don't need, be a better philosophy?"

What you describe isn't a philosophy at all to the people who end up going down that route. It's just the natural result of a cycle of Wanting and Getting. Our industries and governments like to reinforce it, because it suits their interests that other people live by those rules, but no one would ever claim consumerism as a guiding idea for their own life.

Peps, Occam's Razor is surmised as:

"All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one."

But it only applies if all possible solutions are equal. 'Do nothing' is a crap solution to most real problems. Taoism is a crap solution to most real problems. There are demonstratably better ones that people avoid because they require more effort. Instead, they pursue simple solutions for the same reason they play the lottery - because they hope that there's a shortcut to what others have to work for.

This 'let's be as lazy as possible' argument is pure decadence. Any kind of justice and equality in the world, even among a small community, requires hard work. People have given up their lives to improving other people's quality of life. It isn't something that just stays once it's there either - the natural tendency is towards selfishness, is for the rich and powerful (and the cunning) to cheat everyone else wherever possible to further improve their lot. "The wind blows this way, then that way" simply will not do. Neither will "Everyone's selfish, so if I do whatever I want, I'm no worse than anyone else."

The only thing that stands against your 'capitalist tide' is people being prepared to make an effort, rather than blithely accept the world for what it is.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

Taoism is an approach to solving problems, not a solution to problems (except perhaps for the problem of problem-solving)… subtle difference!

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

An approach to solving problems whose guiding principle is 'shit happens'? Useless. The only thing this sort of stuff works for is personal stress levels and health. In that respect, it's only as good as any relaxation regime.

Zen Buddhism is better, depending on the way you interpret it.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

"...the inevitable result of the minority pursuing wealth with more fervour is the minority owning everything, and believing that they deserve to, despite the fact there are people in the world who work far harder than them throughout the course of their lives and end up owning next to nothing. We're not too far removed from that situation now."

Um, this is the way it's been for a long, long time. Not agreeing with it, not saying it'll never be changed, but it's certainly not something we're moving towards....it's a constant.

The factories never 'went to the people' in 1917. Child poverty hasn't disappeared since 1997. Many (most?) world leaders are still fucking their people up the arse.

Go out and try and fix it by all means, but don't claim the phenomenon or the 'resitance' are new or emerging.

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

But it only applies if all possible solutions are equal. 'Do nothing' is a crap solution to most real problems.

Have you ever tried it? I have and many worries seem to often resolve themselves naturally with little effort on my part or anyone else around me.

Taoism is a crap solution to most real problems. There are demonstratably better ones that people avoid because they require more effort. Instead, they pursue simple solutions for the same reason they play the lottery - because they hope that there's a shortcut to what others have to work for.

Taoism has little in common with playing the lottery. What do you think are the better and more hard-working solutions to problems?

This 'let's be as lazy as possible' argument is pure decadence. Any kind of justice and equality in the world, even among a small community, requires hard work.

How does being idle or lazy lead to immorality or an inferior state? I would think an idle 'live and let live' philosophy would promote justice and equality.

Hard work leads to a mentality of resentment...'I work harder than so and so thus I deserve more than them'. How do you see hard work promoting justice and equality?

Wu wei is often misinterpreted. Here's an extract that **hopefully** sums it up better:-

Wu Wei - Doing nothing. Action through Inaction. More like doing nothing which is of no use. . In the Tao Te Ching it is to solve problems while they are small and manageable. I think “Doing Nothing” is more a metaphor - doing the right things early, to apply the greatest leverage.

Of course “Doing nothing” can be applied literally as well. How many times is it better to let an event run its course, and resolve itself, rather than be engaged? Willfully doing nothing is a choice as well, together with responsibilities.

I had an episode at home recently which serves as a counter example. We decided to do some landscaping at the spur of the moment. What we had in mind turned out to be a much bigger job that we first thought. Because it wasn’t planned, I found that there was a lot of extra shuffling around that needed to be done.

If I had planned, I would have realized the enormity of the job I was taking on. I would have planned the steps that needed to be done, and the job would have gone much smoother, with less effort, in less time.

The Taoist can lead a life that can seem effortless because it is well ordered. He can appear to be spontaneous because he has a solid framework in which to live.

- Sonshi.com.

"Wealthy people are just like everybody else, they suffer from the same problems and same personality characteristics as the rest of society. What they are probably not (on average) is stupid or lazy."

Well said, rd.

I don't think any religious way advocates sitting around on your ass doing nothing, but deal with approaches to life that yield maximum benefit for the individual.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

"Um, this is the way it's been for a long, long time."

The point is that there is more at stake now than ever. Better technology allows people to own more than they ever actually see or know they own, through corporations and the like. Third World Debt can potentially wreck more lives than slavery.

"Have you ever tried it? I have and many worries seem to often resolve themselves naturally with little effort on my part or anyone else around me."

I used the phrase 'real problems' to try to eliminate purely psychological issues. Doing nothing only works if the problem is part imagined. I'd like to see your resolve a severe lack of funds, a broken washing machine, a local crimewave or a moral dilemma by leaving things to 'resolve themselves naturally'.

"How does being idle or lazy lead to immorality or an inferior state? I would think an idle 'live and let live' philosophy would promote justice and equality.

Well, you're completely wrong. 'Live and let live' means exactly what it says - that you're doing nothing to promote justice and equality, or anything else - you're simply doing what suits you best. You let people get away with immoral acts as long as they aren't directed against you. You look out for number one. You don't concern yourself with other people's problems.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

"The point is that there is more at stake now than ever. Better technology allows people to own more than they ever actually see or know they own, through corporations and the like."

People have always said that things are worse in their time. And I don't agree that things are any worse now in terms of the 'reach' of ownership. British empire? Roman empire? Lots of profiteering out of distant lands then, too, no?

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

I see you did not answer all my questions Mr Cade. I would love to hear your thoughts on the ones you omitted...

I used the phrase 'real problems' to try to eliminate purely psychological issues. Doing nothing only works if the problem is part imagined. I'd like to see your resolve a severe lack of funds, a broken washing machine, a local crimewave or a moral dilemma by leaving things to 'resolve themselves naturally'.

Well it happens that my washing machine did break recently so I've hand-washed since and I've realised I don't actually need a washing machine. It's much quieter without the whiney thing and an almost zen-like experience and the clothes actually come out cleaner.

Well, you're completely wrong. 'Live and let live' means exactly what it says - that you're doing nothing to promote justice and equality, or anything else - you're simply doing what suits you best. You let people get away with immoral acts as long as they aren't directed against you. You look out for number one. You don't concern yourself with other people's problems.

So tell me, how do you see hard work promoting justice and equality? Do you think someone who works 50+ hours per week and spends their leisure time shopping and catching up on chores concerns themselves with other people's problems or prevents people from performing immoral acts?

Well, the past is a foreign country, and I've already said on this thread that it's pretty obvious that Westerners have more wealth and luxury than ever before. So I wouldn't say it's 'worse'.

But there is more at stake. Technology does accelerate things. I don't believe there has ever been more impoverished people in the world as a whole, nor more people at risk from the disastrous mismanagement of resources that results from the greedy minority.

"The Taoist can lead a life that can seem effortless because it is well ordered. He can appear to be spontaneous because he has a solid framework in which to live."

So in other words, Taoism actually advocates hard work in the present as beneficial in the long term. Do Taoists, like Zen Buddhists, also believe there is something to be gained from applying yourself to even the most mundane task?

I find this attitude a lot more admirable than the view Peps seems to share with the very Capitalists he's against - that we should only work for immediate material reward, and when we've got enough, we should sit around and congratulate ourselves for having removed the need to work.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

slothful said: 'It's all well and good to dismiss the ideas of Taoism as being overly simplistic, but how can a life spent working in a job you at best tolerate to buy tonnes of goods that you don't need, be a better philosophy? For self-indulgence I think the west wins hands down. '

Too right. There's more to life than 'things' and the more 'things' you own the more time and money you have to spend maintaining them because 'things' just end up breaking. Life may appear to become easier but technology introduces so much superfluous junk into our lives that we have to work harder to keep it good. 'Things' are like caffeine - they lift you up temporarily and then drop you and leave you wanting more. Begin again! Round and round and round. Enter the wisdom of many religious paths. Focussing on the inner you rather than reaching outside of yourself for 'things' in the mistaken belief that they will provide lasting happiness.

'So in other words, Taoism actually advocates hard work in the present as beneficial in the long term.'

I wouldn't say that Taoism advocates 'hard work' specifically but encourages people to hop and skip over life's worries, dealing with them mindfully as they occur and being aware that many problems, as you said, are illusory. Shit does happen and some people, in a perpetual pursuit of happiness, make life harder for themselves by treating life's downs as unfair or unjust or underserving, and will end up making themselves miserable by trying to suppress the bad. Everything (all the bad and good) should be embraced equally and dealt with mindfully. The vineager tasters sums tao up perfectly. Here is it:

The vinegar they are tasting represents the essence of life.

The first man has a sour look on his face, the second wears a bitter expression, but the third man is smiling.

Why the difference?

To Confucius (left), life seemed rather sour.
He believed that the present was out of step with the past and that the world would be a much better place if there were strict rules.
Confucius emphasized a strict order which ruled the affairs of all in his land.
Anything that did not fit into the established order was considered bad.

The second figure (middle) in the painting - Buddha - considered life on earth to be bitter.
He saw this world to be filled with attachments and desires that led to suffering; a setter of traps, a generator of illusions and a revolving wheel of endless pain.
In order to find peace, Buddha maintained that it was necessary to transcend this world.
The Buddhist sees the path to happiness constantly being interrupted by the bitterness of this world.

Lao Tzu is the third man (right) in the painting.
According to Lao Tzu, the world was governed by the laws of nature, not by those of men.
He maintained that the more man interfered with the natural order of things, the more out of balance the world became.
As things became unbalanced, trouble followed.

Lao Tzu is smiling because sourness and bitterness comes from the interfering and unappreciative mind.
Life itself, when understood and utilized for what it is, is sweet.
That is the message of The Vinegar Tasters.

I suppose this is where some of the 'idler' philosophies come from.

Out of all the eastern ways, tao was one that was never embraced fully in the west. The reason why? Because it offered no ultimate reward! (no afterlife, no nirvava, etc.) Which says alot for the west...lol

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

"But there is more at stake"

What is at stake?

It is enough of a challenge in life to reconcile oneself to ones *own* actions, without running round 'saving the world'. What arrogance!

Get your own shit together first, innit. Fix up, look sharp!*

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

*none of the above was directed at any individual in particular.

"What is at stake?"

People's lives.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

"Do Taoists, like Zen Buddhists, also believe there is something to be gained from applying yourself to even the most mundane task?"

I think they both would agree that there is nothing to be gained from such application. Which is exactly why it is worthwhile. You do things for the pleasure of doing them, not for what you gain from them.

I think if we would apply ourselves lovingly to all the little tasks of our own lives (and I include in these our interactions with others) we would forget our obsession with the 'problems of the world that we have to fix'. Often these problems are just in our minds.

If you are wondering where these 'new' people are coming from then this link will explain all:

http://www.idler.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1610

Hmm, slothful refers to Jack Cade as a cunt. Not such a nice chap after all, is he?

Hmm. Coming back from that forum, I repeat:

Feh! Surely this kind of argument is only valid for singletons, childless people, or those who have someone else there, doing the chores for them. Usually a woman.

I like it. I have enough trouble keeping up with this thread, now I've got to nip over to idler too :) Suppose I'd best nest-in... :) Could someone fetch Henry the horse

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

And Dr. Heckle, you need to take my picture off your page, right fucking now.

Wu We - I want one of those for Christmas if I can't have a PS3

jude

"Cacoethes scribendi"
http://www.judesworld.net

Yeah, here's what some kid over there has to say:
"Why the fuck would you want to have more than enough you stupid cunt?"

It's another case of 'I never said that'. I said that I admired the ethic that working on anything, no matter how mundane, whether or not for a reward, is worthwhile, rather than working just for material wealth. I've spent a good deal of this thread objecting to people who grab more than they need and defend that activity on the basis that they've 'earnt' what they have. You've got to be pretty stupid to conclude that I'm arguing otherwise.

But that fits because most of what's said on that other forum's thread *is* pretty stupid.

"I think they both would agree that there is nothing to be gained from such application. Which is exactly why it is worthwhile. You do things for the pleasure of doing them, not for what you gain from them."

Well, the 'pleasure' could be seen as the gain, but basically, I think we're on the same ground here. Working for working's sake is a positive attitude that has nothing to do with keeping us enslaved. Consumerism is driven instead by the ethos of 'working for money so you can buy things and feel good'.

Pepsoid's attitude is exactly what a capitalist government wants from its people - the desire to stop working and rest on your laurels, preferably with toys and games and other distractions that must be purchased. So the message is "Work hard for us and then you will have that as your reward. Work and you get to buy. Work and you get to retire,"

Such a message is ineffective if you work because you believe working is a good thing, rather than for the promised 'reward'.

So, Peps, you've got the whole thing the wrong way round.

"I think if we would apply ourselves lovingly to all the little tasks of our own lives (and I include in these our interactions with others) we would forget our obsession with the 'problems of the world that we have to fix'. Often these problems are just in our minds."

Often, but not always, by any means. There are many practical and real problems that should not be forgotten.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

'Working for working's sake is a positive attitude that has nothing to do with keeping us enslaved. Consumerism is driven instead by the ethos of 'working for money so you can buy things and feel good'.'

Jack, I agree with this. I might add the stipulation that a certain amount of work is driven by material necessity (and by this I mean paying the rent and having food on the table); however, one can approach this pragmatically without becoming overwrought about the evils of consumer enslavement.

I think this is what the Taoists on the thread are saying, as well. There has to be a balance between 'work' and 'not work'; it's not a question of 'do nothing'; it's a question of 'doing' with a balanced attitude.

"Often, but not always, by any means. There are many practical and real problems that should not be forgotten."

I think you're right, we are on the same ground. And the zen approach to these problems would be to just take care of these problems rather than pretending that they don't exist. The classic of Hinduism, 'The Bhagavad Gita' has a good perspective on this. One should do what needs to be done. but at the same time, one not be attached to the rewards.

I'm not quite sure what if any disagreement is going on on this thread. It seems like it has something to do with work ethic. Those words seem to have a stigma attached to them, reminding one of the puritan American blindly labouring away, turning the pristine country into a theme park, and threatening to do the same to the rest of the world.

Maybe there is a certain responsibility to consider whom one's work goes to serve. Some work is better not done like market research or corporate law,
But it is dangerous to generalise even about that.

To summise:

I don't think anyone is saying that working 9-5 is great and healthy, that consumerism or capitalism is tip-top, or that people who relax and enjoy life are idle. No one is saying we should suffer more. That's for certain. I think everyone here would want what AG calls "'doing' with a balanced attitude'.

Some people are arguing *against* this particular straw man though - chiefly the people from the other forum - because they're polarised and see everyone who disagrees with them as being at the opposite end of the scale.

The argument Pepsoid put forward is that believing hard work to be a virtue strengthens and supports capitalist dogma, and is a device used by 'captains of industry' to try to extract more productivity from us.

The opposite argument, which, it seems, both Taoism and Zen thinking are in favour of, is that work for work's sake is a healthy attitude, that we can enjoy application as much as relaxation.

Personally, I think we do need a work ethic in this country that places more emphasis on home life. It's absurd to think of people's jobs as the only work they have to carry out, and as such, I think most employers squeeze far too much. It does verge on nightmarish in a lot of jobs. It's shit. It doesn't help the planet either.

But I think the whole 'importance of being idle' argument is part of the problem. The people who are laziest are the ones who end up in most danger of being absorbed into the system, because they'll only put the minimum amount of effort in. In this country, the minimum amount of effort, in the case of the middle classes, usually equates to doing a low responsibility 9 to 5 office job and occasionally tidying up. You consume with the money you earn, and you keep doing it til you retire. You put up with your job, and you enjoy the evenings and weekends...mostly.

I think generally the more industrious, hard-working people are the ones who are more likely to end up doing jobs they believe in, or want to do, or even working for themselves, because they're prepared to do far more than the minimum. Doesn't always hold true, but as RadioDenver illustrates - anyone who feels they enjoy a good balance of work and leisure also feels they got there because they put in more work than the slackers.

Edit/caveat:

On examination, it looks like there's only two people posting from that forum, and 'slothful' is the only one who seems polarised. So I apologise for my generalisation.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

'the minimum amount of effort, in the case of the middle classes, usually equates to doing a low responsibility 9 to 5 office job and occasionally tidying up. You consume with the money you earn, and you keep doing it til you retire. You put up with your job, and you enjoy the evenings and weekends...mostly. ... generally the more industrious, hard-working people are the ones who are more likely to end up doing jobs they believe in, or want to do, or even working for themselves, because they're prepared to do far more than the minimum'.

Ooo, Jack, I was going to disagree with this, but then you said:

'Doesn't always hold true'.

Certainly doesn't. Sometimes there really is no other option, even for the hardest-working. Not when one has two kids in primary school, for example. I'm one of those people in a 'low responsibility 9 to 5 office job', when really what I'd like to be doing is a 'job [I] believe in, or want to do', which is public health programmes in Africa. But when one is faced with the choice of doing best for oneself, or doing best for one's kids, there's not really much of a choice, if one wants to be a good parent. I'm just not willing to sacrifice my children's wellbeing on the altar of my idealism. There are all sorts of reasons people 'settle' for less than what they want, and it's not always about minimum effort.

Yeah, that was precisely why I added 'Doesn't always hold true'! I looked it and though, "Ugh. That could be read as a rule of thumb, which is not what I mean."

No, I'm very much aware, as per the Uni dicussion, that there are people who work incredibly hard and still end up doing one of those jobs, and also people who want nothing better than that sort of work (though I think they're few and far between).

But what I would say is that idlers will gravitate towards these kind of jobs. In your case, you do it because your priorities are rightly elsewhere, leaving little energy for hunting down better job opportunities (and little room for risky job-hopping), but in theirs (this is awful generalising again, but hopefully people will follow my point) it's because they just don't believe in applying themselves to *anything*.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

'Idle hands are the Devil's workshop'.

k, we all done in here? peps - wanna start another topic? hehe

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Well there we are...

That was fun!

Since I have now been officially “outed” as an idler, may I proceed with the formal introductions? (better late than never, as “they” say)

Idlers... meet ABCtalers.

ABCtalers... meet Idlers.

I hope you will forgive my small act of subterfuge in introducing my idlechums into the fray. I assure you it was meant with the best of intentions!

Right, what’s next?

[ Catherine Tate’s on tonight... :-))))) ]

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

Aye! And Buzzcocks at 10. Don't think Bill Bailey is gonna last long with the new set-up, though.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

And Simon Amstell is gay! Never would've thought it...

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

Goes to show dunnit.

Why do all orifices have a signature smell - except for ears?

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Mr Cade I hereby apologise if my comment on the Idler forum caused you any ill-feeling or distress...it was mainly for comic effect and a bit of melodrama... I believe good rational arguments, if taken in the right spirit, can expand the mind and help us all find some truth in life.

OK, apology accepted. I'm sorry about flying a bit off the handle about it as well. What tends to work me up most these days is being totally misread, and the idea that restless acquisition and hoarding of wealth is a good thing is about as far away from my views as possible!

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

Lovely! :-)

I do prefer us to all be friends!

:-)))))

What pot of controversy can I stir up now...?

?
?
?

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

Jack Cade said:

"...restless acquisition and hoarding of wealth is a good thing...[in]...my view...."

God I've been bored since I finished NaNoWriMo.

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

Well, no need to 'out' me as I am a proud devotee of idling, bludging and skiving! Some of the comments which disparage laziness were deeply troubling...servile brown-noses who reveal their lack of substance by selling their souls to filthy lucre and rampant consumerism. I feel profound pity for those of you who embrace the yoke of the corporations...

Hey I'm sleeping in tommorow, judge me if you want lol.

"selling their souls to filthy lucre and rampant consumerism."?!

Well of all the.............!!!

.........er......how much are they paying, anyway?

Re: rampant consumerism - selling of soul thereto...

I don't think anyone here's actually *that* bad, Bludger (Mr Wallace, perchance?)... although I'd have to re-read the whole thread to confirm, and I don't think I'll ever have the energy to do that.

I think the beauty of this kind of discussion, if conducted in the appropriate manner (as I think this has been, generally) is that what appear initially to be opposing viewpoints tend to veer magnetically closer to each other, such that one realises that intelligent, thoughtful types, be they “idlers” or otherwise, often share (pretty much) fundamental beliefs, and only really differ on semantics and minor details. By way of illustration...

The so-called “work ethic”...

It is portrayed in Tom Hodgkinson’s “How to be Idle” (a book I may have mentioned once or twice - read it!) as the insidious psycho-social tool of moral control with which the capitalist oppressors keep the average working folk in check and believing they are working - in their offices, behind their computer screens, surrounding by stress and plastic cups of coffee and piles of invoices - towards some sort of vague notion of “the common good.” This is true, to an extent. This is, in my opinion (and probably that of just about any self-professed “idler”), definitely the sort of “work ethic” we should be fighting to destroy (or at least not allow ourselves to be ruled by).

On the other hand, as has been demonstrated by certain “non-idlers” above, there is another kind of “work ethic,” which is more closely related to a sort of Taoist idea of work, that being that what may otherwise be perceived as being soulless and mind-destroying can actually, if approached in the right manner, be soulful and mindful (or something like that). I refer here to the kind of work that can perhaps not be avoided - cleaning the house, looking after the kids, making dinner - which can be performed in a miserable, trudgy manner, but which can alternatively, with a flip of perception, be undertaken with a quality of Zen-like, almost spiritual calm. If in the right mood, cleaning the bathroom can be the most beautiful thing in the world!

(If any “non-idlers” are interested, I started a conversation about the more positive aspects of “work” here... http://www.idler.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1387&postdays=0&postorder=a... ...so I’m not just a work-shy lazy git!)

I would hope I can conclude (again), therefore, that we (the majority of the above) are not so different after all...

:-)

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

"Some of the comments which disparage laziness were deeply troubling...servile brown-noses who reveal their lack of substance by selling their souls to filthy lucre and rampant consumerism. I feel profound pity for those of you who embrace the yoke of the corporations..."

There's no need to feel pity. You're far more likely to have to bear the yoke of corporations, and to sell your soul for lucre and comsumerism, however grudgingly, because your own laziness will prevent you breaking free of such servitude. Hard-working people are more likely (though as we've already said, not by any means guaranteed) to end up doing jobs they'll enjoy, or feel are important, maybe even working for themselves. Slackers are fated to man the phones and booths for murderous banks all their lives, and buy tonnes of junk to console themselves. Your attitude is the heart and soul of rampant consumerism.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

There's no need to feel pity. You're far more likely to have to bear the yoke of corporations, and to sell your soul for lucre and comsumerism, however grudgingly, because your own laziness will prevent you breaking free of such servitude. Hard-working people are more likely (though as we've already said, not by any means guaranteed) to end up doing jobs they'll enjoy, or feel are important, maybe even working for themselves. Slackers are fated to man the phones and booths for murderous banks all their lives, and buy tonnes of junk to console themselves. Your attitude is the heart and soul of rampant consumerism.

This smacks of ingrained work ethic and utter snobbery. There are plenty of hard-working people manning the phones and booths...and plenty of slackers managing them. People who buy into this propaganda are entirely at the mercy of the corporations because they perpetuate the myth that hard-work elevates you from the wretched masses. Your good engineering jobs and the like are just as meaningless as those positions you deem lowly and meaningless. The only difference is that they pay a little more...for now.

Far from preventing you from breaking free from servitude it will only yoke you to it more through the lure of the rewards of perceived power, perceived control, wealth and status. Plus the more you put into the system the harder it is to escape from it...'my job is my life' as opposed to 'it's just a job'.

As for consumerism, it stands to reason those with the most income spend the most money...unnecessary home renovations, holiday properties, decadent holidays, electronic gadgets by the bucket-full, every manner of extra-curricular activity to instill the work-ethic and a competitive advantage into their children, new cars, indulgent feeding at restaurants...need I go on.

This takes me back to 1992. I'd left school and was making the most of the summer before starting college. There was a bunch of us, stoned, sprawled on the carpet of Nick's flat listening to Bongwater. Nick was paranoid about how his speakers were positioned so he kept crawling to them and adjusting their angles. He always got pride of place dead-centre of the stereo field. Guppy peers up every once in a while, clears the long hair from his face, looks at me with sunken eyes, a lazy smile and says, "hear that bass?" Guppy's a bass player and after a while he pipes-up, "I need a new bass. Might get some part-time work for a few weeks." Now you NEVER mentioned the words "part-time work" in Nick's flat. Last time that happened Nick dropped his pants, sat on the banister in the landing and shat onto the stairs below. He put a rolling pin through the t.v once because "everyone was milkin' Nirvana." Anyway, Nick hears this and he spins round on his arse and barks, "what d'ya wanna do that for? You're just an animal...like a cow." Guppy lifts his head, clears the hair from his face again, smiles and says, "right, but cows eat grass, yeh?"
"Right," replies Nick and spins back round to dead-centre stereo field.
Anyway, I watched as Guppy sat there for a while working things out in his head, then he peers up, red as beetroot, points to the speakers and says, "hear that bit?" And we both sat there nodding at each other and smiling for what seemed like minutes.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

LOL Yan...your story is delightful. I'd like a bunch of friends like yours...in fact I think I had some slightly less extreme ones during my university days. Unfortunately, after years of hard work in a good job and pointless overtime done in order to remain competitive I am left with a bunch of soul-sucked, mind-fucked acquaintances who incessantly drone on about their mortgage, the price of petrol, fluctuations in the share market, the tax advantages of leasing a car over buying it outright, and why so-and-so doesn't deserve a promotion to chief drone.

Ah, another Sunday session of melancholy with the impending week of misery in the gulag to contend with...even though I pulled 'a sickie' on Friday, the break has not been long enough...I cannot comprehend how some people love their jobs...how wonderful it would be to just follow any whim every day...

I think that it is more a matter your approach to buying than to working that determines to what extent you will be yoked to the corporate machine. Those who feel they must have the newest, the highest-tech, the most status fulfilling goods will always be the ones who are slaves to the whims of the corporations, Their pride will never allow them to go on the dole, or even live in the woods. They would rather steal than not fit in to their little society of geeky snobs.
The ones who answer to their inner spirit rather than peer pressure will always find the original solutions to living.

"Your good engineering jobs and the like are just as meaningless as those positions you deem lowly and meaningless. The only difference is that they pay a little more...for now."

I'm sorry, but this is *truly* worthy of pity, if we're going to go about pitying one another. The dogged assumption that the only thing that separates different kinds of jobs from one another is money. Money doesn't make people happy, to a broad extent. But people can find different kinds of work very fulfilling. Some people, for example, might want to work for charities and companies that work to make things better - helping other people can be pretty fulfilling, you know. Other people might find work in a creative field that doesn't make much money more fulfilling. Others might like work that involves travel. Others still might end up working for themselves.

Slackers don't get out of the system. They just prevent themselves from doing the work that they might get a kick out of by propogating the delusion that all work is exactly the same, equally meaningless and drab. And because they get no kick out of doing work, they will rely more on material objects for satisfaction - your games consoles, beer, DVD's etc.

Personally, at the moment, I get far more pleasure and enjoyment from working on my different projects than I do from buying things (except maybe comics). Yeah, sure, I like beer and games too, but I don't spend all day aching to get back to them, because I'm usually getting something (not just money) out of whatever I'm doing. I like relaxing too - definitely - but spending all day doing sweet FA makes me depressed (haven't you heard? Exercise produces endorphins) so I try to get a balance.

"Far from preventing you from breaking free from servitude it will only yoke you to it more through the lure of the rewards of perceived power, perceived control, wealth and status."

Nope. What you don't seem to get is that if you can find work you enjoy doing, you just aren't 'lured' by these things - power, control etc. - because doing the work is the reward itself. As I say, you slackers are far more likely to be tempted by the promise of these things, because they all scream 'more for less' and that's what slacking is all about. How much can I bleed from the system for how little effort?

I bet tonnes of company execs are slackers at heart. They're just clever slackers who've worked out that if they put in a bit of boot-licking work for a few years they can slack for cash, while hard-working people slave for them.

"As for consumerism, it stands to reason those with the most income spend the most money..."

Not necessarily. There's the example of a poor man spending more money on shoes because he can never afford to buy ones that last. But anyway, as I've already said, we're not talking about how much money you have - this is your blinkered assessment of what separates different jobs, and simply exemplifies why your attitude is the heart of consumerism - you just can't see anything beyond the money.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

"Some people, for example, might want to work for charities and companies that work to make things better - helping other people can be pretty fulfilling, you know"

I wanted to make this point yesterday, but didn't bother.

I work for a charity. I'm not front line, but what I do tangibly leads to people being helped in situations that may have seemed hopeless for them. I work hard, for the most part, and enjoy it. I get paid well, but nowhere near what I would be paid for an equivalent private sector job. However, the effort I put in, the end product, the decent holidays and not having to wear any kind of suit or uniform are good reward for me and I'm happy with the situation.

Since graduating and starting *proper* jobs (a career) I've only worked in the public and charity sector. It makes me happy for 2 reasons: 1. I feel like I'm doing something decent and 2. I feel I can bang on about the evils of jobs in marketing etc and take the moral high ground.

If I were jobless and skint, I would take any old job in order to pay the rent. Nothing wrong with that. But through choice, I would always do the kind of job I've been doing for the past six years.

I agree with almost everything JC has said in this case. Active engagement with what I am doing - be it working, writing, or yes, even just sitting around idly - keeps me happy.

Just because you work hard, it doesn't make you a part of the 'capitalist machine'.

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

This:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hello-Laziness-Hard-Work-Doesnt/dp/0752871862/sr...

is worth a read.

It could obviously have been a slightly better book if the author had put in a bit more effort but it is a good defence of laziness, as opposed to working enthusiastically in an unfulfilling job with a big corporation.

As Jack and Enzo point out, though, that kind of critique doesn't tell us anything much about the value or otherwise of working hard if you're in the position to work on things - either for money or pleasure - that you do think have some value.

I don't think anyone means to discredit working hard for what makes you happy. I think what people are attacking is the negative view of idleness that seems to prevail in our society. Those who refuse to join in the 'work force' are condemmed as lazy. Maybe some of them are but, many just want to enjoy life. These people don't feel they need a career to define themselves by, indeed they don't feel the need to define themselves at all. They just want to be. And this doesn't necessarily mean sitting at home drinking beer and watching telly.

If Henry David Throeau tried his Walden experiment now he would probably be laughed at and called a loser, unless he had a grant from the government and a publicity agent.

You are indeed an oracle xman...for me the entire Western conformist view leaves little for complete emancipation. To do as we truly wish...as long as others were were not hurt or harmed of course. In school we are conditioned with uniformity and conformity and then programmed to be easily absorbed into the insatiable fiscal monster which perpetuates the nightmare...you need the nice house in the nice suburb...you need the latest car...you need this and you need that...and you can become indentured to the banks as they will lend you the money to grab your niche in the land of milk and honey, and you'll need to kiss butt and do what you can to hold on to your dream job.

In the process one makes so many compromises that one gets lost in the fog...nah, I'd prefer to let the stampeding herd jockey for pole position and stress about mortgage rates, interest rates, petrol prices...I'll potter on at my own muddling pace and continue to observe the herd with bemusement...

Mr Cade you seem to be the one with all the pity. I was arguing that many people work hard and buy into the work ethic regardless of their job title or status. Whilst I would wager there are more people who work hard in jobs they do not love, I'm not denying that there are people who love what they do be it street sweeper or doctor. However, If one loves what one does it becomes a pleasure and ceases to be hard work. I think it was Confucius who said...

"Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life."

Laziness/idleness also fits into the picture in that it is very difficult, luck aside, to discover that love if one is always working hard.

You however appear to be arguing that anyone who doesn't work in a job they love is lazy. Choosing to discover what you love and then pursuing that love has more to do with courage than with industriousness.

Good points slothful! Mr.Cade, what are your views on 'sickies' ? Are you a workaholic?

I pulled another sickie today (which I won't be paid for unfortunately) and while i was lying in bed watching the cricket a rare event occurred...a thought flashed through my mind...why not offer philanthropic workaholics the opportunity to sponsor idlers? Brilliant! The benefactors could get little reports on what joys the idlers experienced instead of being in their purgatories...I am prepared to be the first idler to sign up for this...

Ooh! I like that idea Mr Bludger. I know quite a few people (including siblings) who are stressed out in the upper echelons of corporations and feeling lousy about it. I think this would give them a chance to contribute to a good cause, where they could hear instant results of their largesse and be entertained at the same time. Their souls need us!

Let's investigate this on ebay, shall we...?

Yes xman perhaps that could be an option if the workaholics here fail to show any enthusiasm for the concept. Utopia would be attainable if we idlers could be liberated from the pressure of having to procure money for the essentials...

It would be very encouraging if this idea catches on and the rift between idlers and strivers could be narrowed. Come on you workaholics...cast aside your cynicism and embrace enlightenment! Think of the merry idlers blossoming as a direct result of your benevolence...the love will flourish and we can all be happy!

I re-watched “The School of Rock” last night, which, in a funny sort of way, is a good fictional example of the positive side of idling... Alright, it’s a silly little film about an old (ish) rocker attempting to use a bunch of kids to fulfil his rock’n’roll dreams… but it’s also how about, with enough determination and self-belief, one can achieve success outside of the mainstream and without conforming to traditional notions of “work” and “contributing to society”…

Rock’n’roll (the old-fashioned type) and idling go together like…

(???)

…cheese and…

(!)

…erm…

(…)

…pickle!

.
.
.

:-/

.
.
.

Yeah, baby!

:-!!!

----------

Another prog on TV at the mo which has some relevance to some of the things being said above is the ever-so-worthy but nonetheless poignant “Into the West” – the latest Spielberg epic, which is painful to watch, but oddly compelling. It is pretty much about the birth of modern capitalism and “The American Way” (which translates nowadays to “The Western Way”). If anyone is unaware of it, it is basically about the building of the first American railroad, the pioneers of the American west and how this whole process “impacted” (*understatement!*) on the Native Americans. It contrasts all the positive talk of progress, growth, discovery, etc, with the wholesale slaughter and disrespect for the simpler, ancient ways of the indigenous “savages”…

The latest episode tells of how schools were created for “Indian” children to be educated in the White Man’s ways, in order to be assimilated and become “useful” members of society…

Have things changed so much since then…?

…

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

Money does make you happy, it's been proved - so there

But that article doesn’t conclude anything, really, does it? Having more money gives you more choices, which will probably increase your likelihood of being happy – I think anyone who sets out to “scientifically prove” this is kind of stating the obvious, but backing it up with some numbers. To pull out a few bits from the article…

Professor Oswald reported a study of Britons who won $2,000 to $250,000 in a lottery. They showed an increase in happiness averaging just more than a point on a 36-point scale two years later.

Lottery winners, eh? That’s such a representative group of society! (and “just more than a point”… amazing!)

Other studies, rather than asking for a summary estimate of happiness, followed people and repeatedly recorded their feelings. These studies show a smaller effect of income on happiness, Professor Kahneman and his colleagues said.

In both types of measurement, I think there is a danger of equating people saying they are happy with them actually being happy… Perhaps people with more money want people to think they are happy? Or they need to convince themselves they are happy, in order to justify their pursuit of wealth? Neurological studies may be more reliable.

Does money make someone happier? Or does being happier allow someone to earn more money?

… which tosses another Bone of Contention into the Soup of Doubt!

In any case, researchers say money’s effect is small.

In other words, they can’t conclusively say one way or another, but their scientific pride doesn’t allow them to admit this (perhaps)…

…

So does money make you happier? Still don’t know…

…

[[[~P~]]]

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

There's no disputing that I'd be happy if I were to land myself oodles of free cash. But I wouldn't kid myself into believing that it's gonna solve my problems or that it's a state of grace with any permanence. There's just as much chance of my wife becoming a bitch and cheating on me as there was before. There's just as much chance of me getting an incurable disease. There's still the possibility of my daughter getting flattened by a ride-on lawnmower. There's the possibility of attracting some many leeches into my life that I'd lose sight of who were real friends and who weren't. There are a myriad of new psychological, emotional, political and social problems that come with the change in lifestyle. There's all the new land, new gadgets and shit to maintain. There's the burden of choosing which exclusive escourt(s) to entertain of a weekend. But who could deny that a person living in a capitalist society would not benefit from an injection of free cash? Money or no money, same old shit happens to everybody. Just those with cash might get to suffer a little more comfortably.

One day I might be thankful that some millionaire has invested cash into scientific research because that research may be exploited by technologists and may well save my life.

Fair enough - there are positive aspects to it all. Personally, though, whilst being thankful and appreciative of others' virtues and strengths, I wish others would respect my desire for a simple life of tea, lentil dhal, space-jazz and staring into the distance.

crick cracked DNA whilst off his head on acid. Jesus abstained and brought back some wisdom. There's a chance that I might benefit mankind by dipping my lip and fiddling with my willy.

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

You are a fine fellow Yan! If only your philosophy could be adopted by the masses of deluded fools who spend their lives in slavery to the work ethic. So sad. I am rather disappointed with the lack of interest by the workaholics in my sponsorship idea...perhaps they are working back...deadlines and all that kinda shit...

Can't be bothered to read back over the thread so excuse me if this has already been asked. But to those from the idling thing: Do you work? How do you pay your rent / mortgage? Bills?

Pepsoid: I thought you worked in an office somewhere--how does it all fit together?

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

"Mr Cade you seem to be the one with all the pity."

To be honest, I just think the slacker attitude is shitty, and I don't have much pity. It seems to me a case of, "I'll argue in favour what suits me best" rather than, "I'll try to get closer to the through argument". In other words, the argument for laziness is lazy.

"You however appear to be arguing that anyone who doesn't work in a job they love is lazy."

Well, no, seeing as I wrote a whole post explaining that not everyone gets the chance to do that, particularly if they prioritise other kind of work, like bringing up children, or extra-curricular pursuits. Pepsoid was trying to argue that any kind of work ethic in itself is evil, and a tool of capitalist slave-drivers. I've just been trying to point out that this is so much bull, and that work in general is good for us for many reasons.

I also dislike this attitude because it *is* pure decadence. To even consider the idea that your life would be better if you slouched about and did nothing suggests obscene wealth. On all our parts.

We had a discussion here on the money issue before, and I think it was pointed out (not by me) that things also change when you've got a family. Then you might pursue money rampantly not for wealth and status, but to give your family the best living conditions available. Maybe to give your partner more free time to actually spend time with your children.

It just isn't as simple as 'careerists are bad' or 'careerists miss the fact that money isn't important'. Let's compare the father who sacrifices time he'd dearly like to spend with his children so that he can get them into a better school, or pay for a house in a nicer area, with the lazy, selfish father who can't be arsed and spends what money he earns down the pub, just because he finds that more relaxing. Who's the cunt there, eh?

Bludgerallen:
"To do as we truly wish...as long as others were were not hurt or harmed of course."

But you're naive if you think that doing whatever you want to do doesn't affect other people all the time. We live unsustainable lifestyles - every measure you *don't* take to keep your consumption down takes advantage of the rest of the world's poverty. It's harder work to bike to work than it is to drive, for instance, so the lazy person drives until the oil runs out and screws up the atmosphere further. Nice one.

Besides which, it's all very well for you, a decadent Westener living in relative luxury, to say, 'Hey, let's all be lazy', but you'd be the first to throw a strop if no one was manning your local takeaway, or sewing your cheap trainers together, or making sure you got electricity and clean water. Selfish much?

Like it or not, there's a lot of truth in the 'everyone pitch in' philosophy. True, it suits authoritarian-style governments to emphasise that, but what they're doing is exaggerated a truth, rather than making it up out of thin air. It's like when Bush and Blair said that Saddam was a tyrant. They were pushing that because it suited their agenda, but that doesn't me that Saddam *wasn't* a tyrant.

Many of us are lucky that we're allowed the freedom we are in terms of the range of careers and the free time we get. Our society still requires people to fulfil a vast range of drab jobs in order to operate. Lounging about because you can is kind of saying, "Fuck you, I don't have to work" to all the people who try to keep things ticking along for you. It's the kind of shitty attitude over-wealthy people have....

"why not offer philanthropic workaholics the opportunity to sponsor idlers?"

...so it doesn't surprise me that you'd suggest this.

"In school we are conditioned with uniformity and conformity and then programmed to be easily absorbed into the insatiable fiscal monster which perpetuates the nightmare..."

Where the hell did you go to school?? Doesn't sound like they're following the syllabus. At school, I was taught to say, "Fuck you" to my boss if there business wasn't ethical, as well as various other bits of decent advice.

"If only your philosophy could be adopted by the masses of deluded fools who spend their lives in slavery to the work ethic. So sad."

You should take a long look at your own vastly over-simplistic, ill thought out viewpoints before you go branding everyone else 'deluded fools'. Thinking your way to the truth of the matter often requires work, just like everything else. Many philosophers devote great portions of their life just to thinking, and still don't find the answers. So don't expect to have hit on eternal wisdom just by proliferating dull mantras like this.

~

I'll Show You Tyrants * Fuselit * The Prowl Log * Woe's Woe

Laziness, is possibly the most beautiful of all vices – to shed gladly the deranged sorrowful ethic of ‘elbow grease’ dear lord what madmen decided it was positively refreshing too feel tired, broken, de-humanised through a days tough ploughing through inane pointlessness generally to make someone else richer. Being gloriously idle is a poetic phrase, but it has merits. Human beings only find bother when en mass we become suddenly active. For instance, wars are the apex of human industry; second only to Christmas shopping. It seems perfectly logical to me, that God did not mean for his people to be busy – look at the Garden of Eden, a positive utopia – no work, no boss, no tax returns! Clearly God’s original intentions for Adam and Eve were one eternal golden slumber. Only when they began irritating him, did God evict them – warning that no good would come from their labours, and they would till the tough soil until death. I am most eagerly with Jehovah on this one, sound concept.

I am not an overly lethargic man, but in the strenuous almost bitter glory of being idle, I find the notion of ‘hard work’ is revealed in all its vulgarity and ugly brutality. Sitting in a local pub, on a summers day, jotting down thoughts, can be seen as being thoroughly idle, yet it is hardly a negative. If the world embraced the idle soul, as oppose to attacking it; if the world became less industriously pious, I should think we would all gradually gleam with a poet’s sense of inner gladness.

Sex is possibly the only exception to this rule. You should see how vigorous the allure of sex makes even the idlest of dreamer move.

Morrissey said it best when he sang

“I was looking for a job and I found a job, heaven knows I am miserable now”

Embrace the thought, admonish all action!

But there's hard work, and then there's hard work. I enjoy hard work, especially in the garden. Digging, pulling weeds, mowing grass; that's 'hard work', and gratifying at that. The best jobs I've had have pushed me, physically, emotionally, mentally: being a caseworker for refugees was extremely taxing, but god, I went home every single night drained and depleted and happier than a pig in a mudhole, because the work was worthwhile and didn't just benefit myself.

This whole 'work is rubbish' attitude is mystifying; sure, most jobs have a greater or lesser element of drudgery about them, but it feels *good* to be productive, to earn one's keep in some way, shape or form. *Not* working (and by this I mean doing absolutely nothing, not even gardening) is not only boring, but soul-destroying. It has nothing at all to do with being a slave to the system.

spartarcad your words are sheer poetry. Your post would indeed inspire me to burn my plough and instead scatter a handful of seeds to the wind as fits with nature.

Verily Spartacard the profundity within the simplicity of your gentle message is poetic...the deranged workaholic is unable to comprehend the beauty of idleness. Mr. Cade I pray that one day the sheer futility of striving comes to you in a moment of clarity...you mock the over-simplistic philosophy of idling, yet the irony is that the idling philosophy is very simple!

In answer to your question Enzo, I only work part-time at the moment which just keeps me above the breadline, but I will be returning to study next year and will work less hours...I am not ambitious and not impressed or intimidated by strivers...

A life of decadence would be blissful! A life devoted to pleasure! Not a life of boring rules and regulations...those bland production- line bores in suits comparing CV's, forever competing and trying to out-do, out-buy or out-wit...

"...I am not ambitious and not impressed or intimidated by strivers..."

"the deranged workaholic"

"the masses of deluded fools who spend their lives in slavery to the work ethic"

There's a lot of this kind of us & them / persecution complex nonsense. I couldn't give a fuck if you worked for exxonmobil or sat on your arse all day, wanking. I'm no workaholic, but I apply myself to things that I do in and out of work. That's got nothing to do with 'the man' or sucking the corporate cock of satan (I've not worked in the private sector and I live quite simply) - it just means I engage with what I do.

I think you lot like to be part of a little gang - no doubt many of you will go on to find Scientology or similar. I also suppose more than a few of you were bullied through school and don't have too many friends outside of World of Warcraft. But having said that, I don't really care.

Regardless, I see that none of you seem to practice what you preach too well anyway so the whole argument is somewhat redundant.

Enzo..

"Those who refuse to join in the 'work force' are condemmed as lazy."

I'm condemning no-one, I'm just asking: How do you buy food and pay rent if you don't work?

And how does pepsoid's office job fit in to a life of idleness?

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

LOL...Enzo...I will resist the temptation to exchange profanities with you you slimy wog cunt but will clarify a few points for you...

I was expelled from a few schools for kicking the shit of smartarses that thought they were tough...after leaving school I was constantly in trouble with the police for a variety of anti-social behaviours which ultimately led to 2 periods of imprisonment...in prison i was charged with inciting a riot and refused to work in there too...

I had a whale of a time in nightclubs in Melbourne with great drugs, gorgeous girls and crazy mates...I lived with a call-girl and life was one great party! I have just turned 40 and have been married for almost 10 years...I turned away from the lifestyle that i was living when i got married, but still have strong non-conformist inclinations...if what i post offends you i couldn't give a fuck! I'd prefer to exchange philosophies in a civilised manner...but, if you wish to throw the shit around then expect some back wogboy...

""Those who refuse to join in the 'work force' are condemned as lazy."

I'm condemning no-one, I'm just asking: How do you buy food and pay rent if you don't work?"

Enzo did you bother to read my whole post or did you just scan it for lines that you could rail against? Go back and read it and see if you think I am condemning you.

But I do work, to answer your previous question. I teach English in Japan and with the free time I have I study the Noh theatre. I often go to the US (with others) to perform and teach traditional Japanese music in universities. really have very few days when I don't have to do something but I like my life but that does not stop me from extolling the virtues of being Idle. Indeed, I spent many a idle day even week before I decided to leave the country that gave the world mass production and do something that I wanted to.

"Enzo did you bother to read my whole post"

No. I said before that I coudn't be bothered to read back over everything.

"did you just scan it for lines that you could rail against?"

No. It just kinda leapt out at me.

I like the sound of the work you do. But it sounds to me like by idleness you mean 'doing nothing when there's nothing to be done.' Surely that's a truism? Or have I misunderstood again?

Allan...

Regarding "If what I post offends you", I'm not offended.

Regarding the rest of your life story: Good for you.

Just one question: Where did 'wogboy' come from?

Enzo..

Read my rubbish novel as it happens!
http://somesolitude.wordpress.com/

There's a lot of this kind of us & them / persecution complex nonsense.

I think you lot like to be part of a little gang - no doubt many of you will go on to find Scientology or similar. I also suppose more than a few of you were bullied through school and don't have too many friends outside of World of Warcraft. But having said that, I don't really care.

Well that's certainly a colourful argument...it has no bearing on the claims made however.

That something is not true for you is no basis to reject it outright as being false. Also that one or more of 'the gang', only 2 of whom I know of mind you, may have a job does not prove the claims made thus far to be false.

I don't think anyone has argued that some money is not required to live. I presently work but will be leaving my employment very soon. I keep my spending as low as possible, grow about 1/3 of my food with plans to increase that amount, and will resort to some short-term contract work or odd jobs when funds run low.

Doesn't really matter what wogboy means Enzo...I just got very annoyed at your generalisations. It would be nicer if we are able to have robust debates without resorting to profanities and puerile name-calling. I apologise for responding in the way that i did. I suppose i have always been a bit rebellious and resented being compelled to do that which i did not want to do...the choices that i made were not good ones which i only came to understand in my late 20's...while i did make a nuisance of myself and hurt a lot of people directly, and indirectly, i also hurt myself by being so determined to not capitulate to what was expected of me. Having children merely complicates matters all the more as i will not be advocating a lifestyle which entirely rejects what the herd are clamouring for. I am fascinated by the fact that some people completely embrace the consumerist/careerist lifestyle...

'Wog is also a slang term in Australian English originally denoting Australians of South East European ancestry, more recently also those from the Middle East. This meaning came into popular use in the 1950s when Australia accepted large numbers of immigrants from Southern Europe. Although originally used pejoratively, the term is increasingly used more affectionately, especially by the individuals the term is used to describe. Wog is a word with definite and widespread currency in contemporary Australian English, and for the most part it is rarely considered to be the sort of slur or insult that it remains in other parts of the Anglosphere.' from Wikipedia.

Oh, puhleeze.

I got a copy of The Beatles 'Love' album last night. Mr. Martin, it's official, you are the sixth Beatle. It's an audio montage par excellence, btw, and highly worthy. It's one of the most emotionally stirring albums I've heard in a long while. That aside, the album opens with a mystifying solitary vocal chorus of John, Paul and George singing the opening lines of 'Because' and the lyrics are as follows:-

Because the world is round it turns me on
Because the world is round...aaaaaahhhhhh

Because the wind is high it blows my mind
Because the wind is high......aaaaaaaahhhh

Love is all, love is new
Love is all, love is you

Because the sky is blue, it makes me cry
Because the sky is blue.......aaaaaaaahhhh

I was listening to this, headphones wrapped snuggly round my ears, at roughly 4am this morning. Imo, there's no better time to become intimate with music and therefore yourself. My eyes welled-up and a little tear rolled down my cheek as I listened to this angelic choir of Liverpudlians echoeing through the ages and I thought to myself: we get so caught-up in things that are petty and totally pointless, rushing here and rushing there, and sometimes we fail to just stop, sit back, and look around us and go, "wow! Yeah! This is what it's about."

Kinda put things into perspective for me.

p.s. - the crying may have been because I've not had any duloxetine for 6 days :-0

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Yan I know what you mean. For me it's sunday afternoon lazing about listening to Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds...The Boatman's Call...

"But it sounds to me like by idleness you mean 'doing nothing when there's nothing to be done"

I like that way of putting it. And how few people are able to achieve this! From my observations people are at their wits end to stay 'busy' checking their phone mail, calling someone, anyone on their mobile phone, posting nonsense on forums (oops!) well, you know what I mean!

Allan...apology accepted and I apologise too for my generalisations and insults.

Xman: I agree with what you just posted entirely. I would say, knowing when to 'do' and when not to 'do' is important. I've said myself many times that there isn't enough 'just sitting' these days. There is still a culture of it in some continental European countries, but it doesn't happen here. By the same token, though, engaging in 'doing' is important too, and I don't mean consumerism or even work for the most part, I just mean going out or getting involved with things like writing or having a passion for films or sport or whatever else.

Enzo..

Enzo: I would agree with that too. It could be the corollary to what you said before:
doing what needs to be done when it needs to be done, or something like that. I think the difficulty is deciding what needs to be done. And that's a value judgement that everyone make for themselves by sitting quietly and listening to their inner voice

Say, I'm starting to think we can all be friends here. Or am I just a cock-eyed optimist?

Are we still talking about this? Oh well since we are…

Just want to say, first of all, that I don’t personally belong to any kind of “gang” and while I believe in much of the idling philosophy, I am far from inflexible or immovable in terms of my views. I find this sort of discussion useful for questioning one’s outlook on how one should think about and live one’s life, and I started this thread not with the intention of stolidly arguing a particular point, but rather to present that point and see what everyone thought. I personally do generally believe in the principles of idling… for me, on the whole, it is not so much about saying that all work is “bad” and all people who choose to do particular types of work are “bad,” but rather it is about presenting an alternative – i.e. that people who choose not to work, in the generally accepted sense, people who choose to do less, to slow down, to try and live life more simply and idly, are also not bad.

On a couple of particular points…

Totally agree with Archergirl re different types of (hard) work… As per the discussion I mentioned having started on The Idler forum, entitled “Work ain’t so bad” (I’ll provide another link if you like), some types of work (gardening, cleaning the bath… hell, even cleaning your teeth!) can, if approached in the right way, be fulfilling, meditative and personally and soulfully rewarding. What the idler, generally, objects to, is the concept that there is something innately virtuous in working towards the “smooth-running” of the vast, faceless “system” (The “Man,” if you like).

Regarding my own personal situation, to answer Enzo’s query, yes I do work in an office – I presently temp in a credit control department. I am not presently living the idea idle lifestyle. For me, however, being “an idler” is a lot about attitude – an approach to life, rather than necessarily the practical details (although that does of course come into it). It is about not feeling guilty if you are choosing not to work as hard as those around you; not feeling guilty if you don’t “care” as much as those around you; not feeling guilty if you are not “contributing” as much as those around you. In my perception, the pursuit of personal happiness is a perfectly valid and acceptable goal. It is, in a sense, “selfish,” but selfishness is not innately bad! One shouldn’t (again, in my opinion), however, keep that happiness to oneself – I believe that, to use a little bit of a cliché, “spreading a little happiness” can do the world a hell of a lot more good than making the office or the company you work for run a little more “smoothly” or getting all those invoices paid by the end of the month.

Spartacad… welcome to the thread! You words are indeed idle poetry personified…
:-)

And finally (for this “comment,” that is)… I agree with Xman and think we are probably closer in our views than we might have thought! With that in mind…

Peace and happiness and finding time just to “be” to all… :-)))))

{{{_"P"_}}}

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Review of "Casino Royale")

Here's an excerpt from a book I've been reading this afternoon. It's from 'Faust - stretch out time' by Andy Wilson.

"Our age creates a surplus of death, inasmuch as we inherit a kind of living death as our birthright under capitalism. A commodity economy requires the walking dead to keep things ticking over. As this requirement is the first principle of the economy, huge numbers of specialists are kept busy clearing a route for the funeral march, erecting signposts and way stations and lining the pavement to cheer the rest on. Universities, advertising agencies, government departments, political parties and media corporations work to smooth its path and keep things running to order. At the entrance to the economy is a sign announcing: "Welcome to Death." '

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Yikes!

Absolutely right, of course.

Which brings me onto my next topic...

The Meaning of Life!

Time for a new thread...

{{{_"P"_}}}

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Can We Ever Really Know the Truth About Anything?)

Idleness is fine in moderation. Beyond that, it becomes depressing for many people. This has nothing to do with outside pressures - it’s the lack of that sense of satisfaction you feel when you’ve ‘achieved’ something – whatever task that is. Years ago I was kept on at a sister company of one that had gone bust. They didn’t actually have a job for me to do (they were supposedly figuring that out). The upshot was that for about three months, I commuted back and forth to Bank everyday to sit in an office and play Klondike. Although the pay was good, and I liked playing Klondike, I resigned. They were not at all surprised.

The idea of a strong work ethic being a ‘virtue,’ may well come from the reality that, in many instances, if someone is dicking about and avoiding work, someone else has to pick up their slack. I used to work with a girl who chatted most of the day, worked at a snail’s pace, always had an excuse to leave half way through the afternoon and took innumerable sickies. The fact that she was a chirpy little bugger only increased the aggravation of those around her.

~
www.fabulousmother.com

2Lou: “The idea of a strong work ethic being a ‘virtue,’ may well come from the reality that, in many instances, if someone is dicking about and avoiding work, someone else has to pick up their slack.”

This is a very fair point, Lou - however, it does lead to the “work ethic” being fuelled by that most unhealthy of emotions: guilt. Most people, I think, deep down, are nice, considerate people, who would not want to feel that their “slack” is being “picked up” by someone else - particularly if that someone is a close colleague; someone they may even consider a friend. Even if one does feel one works too hard, indeed that the entire office (or whatever) in which one earns one’s wage works too hard, short of starting a revolution or instigating industrial action, the overriding factor in such a circumstance will pretty much always be that hugely powerful emotion of guilt. I know. I have been there. I have been driven by it. But the problem is that it leads to everyone in the office working too hard, everyone knowing that they work too hard, but no one being willing to do anything about - except perhaps moan to each other over tea and biscuits. Offices are driven by stress and guilt. Such forces are insidiously powerful, and most people within the “system” are probably not even aware just how strong these factors are. Rising out of this stress/guilt combo is the nebulous, almost religious notion of “Work Ethic,” which only semi-consciously drives people to work harder and harder, whilst not even really being aware of or questioning where it comes from.

So what’s the solution? Well, like I said, there’s revolution or industrial action. But let’s face it, how many people have the strength of personality to instigate such action? I know I don’t. That is perhaps a personal failing, but I admit to it and try to work around it. I am not - I repeat, not - guilt-free. But I am working on it. And I have at least come to the conclusion that it is, in the vast majority of cases, a useless and destructive emotion. It should not drive one’s actions. Due to its power, however, it so often does. I do strongly feel, though, that one should work to overcome The Big G’s influence and follow one’s own heart as to what one feels is right. It may surprise people to hear, and feel like a huge contradiction to what I have already said, that I am not actually a slacker at work. An idler, yes. A slacker, no. It is a “traditional” idler’s work-pattern to be extremely hard-working for short bursts of time and then reward oneself with long periods of idleness. I religiously believe in this and try to follow it, where possible, to the letter. In the workplace (and, for that matter, elsewhere), I am constantly trying to find better, more efficient, quicker ways of doing things. This leads to me being able to do a job in an hour which may take someone else two hours or more. I don’t, however, then go to my boss and say, “Please Miss, can I have some more,” but reward myself with idletime: posting on these forums, going for an extended tea-break (masked in “kindly making drinks for everyone else”), wandering around the office for a bit, or whatever. In this way, I overcome the G-factor by knowing/feeling in my own heart that I am probably doing pretty much the same amount of work as everyone else. I know that the “system” (the company I work for) would not officially reward me with paid time off for doing Job A twice as fast, so I reward myself... guilt-free!

I’ve written a little more than I intended on this particular topic, but I feel very strongly that we should not be driven by guilt; that guilt is an extremely poisonous and useless emotion (which, by the way, leads to resentment, which is never a good thing to have floating around any environment); that we should lead by example; that we are all responsible for our own paths and should follow our own truths, regardless of whether the individuals around us also choose to do so.

{{{_"P"_}}}

... What is "The Art of Tea"? ...
(www.pepsoid.wordpress.com - latest... Can We Ever Really Know the Truth About Anything?)

A friend of mine who does very high-level consultation on what I guess you could call power in the workplace says that the ideal work:rest ratio is 3:2, three days of work then two of rest or three weeks of straight work followed by two of rest. It works less well at longer intervals (like three months of balls-out work followed by two months of doing nothing).

That being said, I feel very strongly that the way 'working life' is structured in this society is deeply, deeply flawed (hamster-wheel rat-race working to survive and not much time to enjoy it etc); I rather think the Spanish and the French have a much better grip on the so-called 'work-life balance'; Brits and Yanks most of whom have no balance whatsoever unless they pay dearly for it. I begin to resent it more and more; I enjoy my 'idle' time immensely as I get very little of it, especially during the week. I keep trying to talk Mr. Archergirl into moving somewhere more southerly, like Andalucia, where it's warm and they take very long, relaxed lunch hours, but he's dead against it as his language abilities are about on par with a chicken's.

Pepsoid>"...but I feel very strongly that we should not be driven by guilt; that guilt is an extremely poisonous and useless emotion "

One can't live in a state of denial peps...Guilt is a normal human emotion and exists for a purpose. Guilt will assist a person in having a sense of moral responsibility. A lack of this sense of moral responsibility is the hallmark of a psychopath. Get in tune with your guilt and embrace it, for it will keep you a sane person. It may be one of the most important emotions to possess.

Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

Guilt is not a simple emotion. It is important to look into yourself and understand why you are feeling guilt. It can be healthy when the reason for it is that you are doing something that deep down you feel is wrong.
But it can also be a result of outside pressure that threatens your self-esteem if you don't do what is expected. Soldiers in war feel a strong sense of guilt if they don't follow orders, even when those orders are to massacre innocent people. Of course they feel guilt if they do it anyway. It is very complex thing.
The important thing is to know yourself. And to do that you be acting automatically. You simply have to get in the habit of quieting your mind and listening to your inner voice.

There is more of beauty in a moment's silence than in all the works of tongue or pen...

Sorry folks, I meant to say this:

"The important thing is to know yourself. And to do that you can't be acting automatically"

There is more of beauty in a moment's silence than in all the works of tongue or pen...

Guilt ‘leads to everyone in the office working too hard, everyone knowing that they work too hard, but no one being willing to do anything about - except perhaps moan to each other over tea and biscuits.’

Er, not in my experience. Employers demanding too much of their employees can make someone work too hard. The need for extra cash can make someone work too hard. The self-inflicted one-upmanship of the 'who comes in first, leaves last,' variety can make someone work too hard. Refusing to feel guilty about not pulling your weight can compel someone else to work too hard.

There’s a big difference between people being ultra efficient and getting through their workload quicker than anyone else and what you said earlier, i.e:

"It is about not feeling guilty if you are choosing not to work as hard as those around you; not feeling guilty if you don’t “care” as much as those around you; not feeling guilty if you are not “contributing” as much as those around you."

Everyone's salary comes out of the same pot, Peps.

~
www.fabulousmother.com