5 ms·

"Then when I'm worn out and it's time for work" "I feel satisfied knowing that at least I accomplished my goals for the day, which is all that matters." So, yo

"Then when I'm worn out and it's time for work" "I feel satisfied knowing that at least I accomplished my goals for the day, which is all that matters." So, you're basically selling your least productive time and you're saying this is OK. You must be one of those folks who detest their job to do that. Please change your job. First, this may give you an opportunity to do something more enjoyable and leave what you currently do vacant for someone else who'll enjoy it more. Second, if you do your paid job well enough despite being "worn out", then you're not using your full potential, which is a pity. Do yourself and others a favor.

sangnoir 10y ago
> So, you're basically selling your least productive time and you're saying this is OK I don't see what the problem is here, unless he signed a contract that said he'd give his best hours to the employer. > Second, if you do your paid job well enough despite being "worn out", then you're not using your full potential, which is a pity. No one hires you to "use your full potential" - they hire you to do your job. What would be the problem if Albert Einstein were to teach jnr high school[1] science and doodling away on his personal theoretical physics at 4AM? I see no ethical quagmire of putting ones' interest before the employers while fulfilling the prescribed duties, especially when considering the power balance and the fact that the other party in this relationship is usually a soulless legal construct that puts itself (and shareholders) before any employee. 1. or a Swedish patent office
- restalis 10y ago
  "No one hires you to «use your full potential» - they hire you to do your job. What would be the problem if Albert Einstein were to teach jnr high school science and doodling away on his personal theoretical physics at 4AM?" I wasn't caring about the employer on that particular statement, it was about living one's full potential in general. And for Einstein parable, in practice what you do often gets on your mind before something else, it's basically the opposite of "out of sight out of mind". "I see no ethical quagmire of putting ones' interest before the employers while fulfilling the prescribed duties, especially when considering the power balance and the fact that the other party in this relationship is usually a soulless legal construct that puts itself (and shareholders) before any employee." You've laid out a battlefield here, a context of conflicting interests or a situation with opposing parties at least. My advice was to get away from that, because that is not worth anyone's involvement. Change jobs, do something you enjoy and care to get involved into.
dragonwriter 10y ago
He's using his full potential, just not on work he's selling to others. I don't see anything wrong with doing that, as long as the market value of what he is selling is able to support that practice. Work to live, not live to work.
Broken_Hippo 10y ago
He doesn't view his job as something that determines his potential nor his worth, nor is this something necessary for life enjoyment as long as the job is tolerable. The hobbies and other such things makes him inherently happy. Not only that, but these things are much more constant than a simple job. A job is just a job, however. A lot of people don't really like working at all. If he works at a factory, he's not doing anyone a favor by doing an already good job better - there are limits to what folks can do in that situation. He is, however, doing them a favor by having a work/life balance that makes him happy because it helps make his attitude better.
- restalis 10y ago
  I understand your view, I've been there. I'm just encouraging both throwaway26960 and you (or anyone else for that mater) to look for something better. It's possible to end up with something more than merely "tolerable", something worth spending more than just leftovers of your energy.
  - Broken_Hippo 10y ago
    Me personally? Any job I get at this point will be just a job. I don't speak the native language well enough to work in a lot of fields and my prior experience isn't worth nearly as much. What I'm really looking at is basically service jobs - janitorial and other such things, perhaps CNA type of work. Maybe I'll get lucky and get a factory job or something. But at the end of the day, there is only so far effort beyond doing the job well (which I tend to want to do on my own accord) will get me in these types of fields. The main thing a job brings me is income, honestly. A job that "isn't too bad" or "I don't mind the work" where the people "aren't too bad" is good enough. Now, this is entirely of my own choosing, but a lot of folks are in similar situations with fewer life choices. But I get great internal pleasure out of cooking a good meal, out of making a wonderful piece of artwork, learning new techniques. Continued language learning (I've had 2 years of class, 600+ hours) remains important regardless of work. Seeing more of the country and the world? Definitely important. So I'll put more effort into those sorts of things than a job.

sangnoir 10y ago

> So, you're basically selling your least productive time and you're saying this is OK I don't see what the problem is here, unless he signed a contract that said he'd give his best hours to the employer. > Second, if you do your paid job well enough despite being "worn out", then you're not using your full potential, which is a pity. No one hires you to "use your full potential" - they hire you to do your job. What would be the problem if Albert Einstein were to teach jnr high school[1] science and doodling away on his personal theoretical physics at 4AM? I see no ethical quagmire of putting ones' interest before the employers while fulfilling the prescribed duties, especially when considering the power balance and the fact that the other party in this relationship is usually a soulless legal construct that puts itself (and shareholders) before any employee. 1. or a Swedish patent office

restalis 10y ago
"No one hires you to «use your full potential» - they hire you to do your job. What would be the problem if Albert Einstein were to teach jnr high school science and doodling away on his personal theoretical physics at 4AM?" I wasn't caring about the employer on that particular statement, it was about living one's full potential in general. And for Einstein parable, in practice what you do often gets on your mind before something else, it's basically the opposite of "out of sight out of mind". "I see no ethical quagmire of putting ones' interest before the employers while fulfilling the prescribed duties, especially when considering the power balance and the fact that the other party in this relationship is usually a soulless legal construct that puts itself (and shareholders) before any employee." You've laid out a battlefield here, a context of conflicting interests or a situation with opposing parties at least. My advice was to get away from that, because that is not worth anyone's involvement. Change jobs, do something you enjoy and care to get involved into.

dragonwriter 10y ago

He's using his full potential, just not on work he's selling to others. I don't see anything wrong with doing that, as long as the market value of what he is selling is able to support that practice. Work to live, not live to work.

Broken_Hippo 10y ago

He doesn't view his job as something that determines his potential nor his worth, nor is this something necessary for life enjoyment as long as the job is tolerable. The hobbies and other such things makes him inherently happy. Not only that, but these things are much more constant than a simple job. A job is just a job, however. A lot of people don't really like working at all. If he works at a factory, he's not doing anyone a favor by doing an already good job better - there are limits to what folks can do in that situation. He is, however, doing them a favor by having a work/life balance that makes him happy because it helps make his attitude better.

restalis 10y ago
I understand your view, I've been there. I'm just encouraging both throwaway26960 and you (or anyone else for that mater) to look for something better. It's possible to end up with something more than merely "tolerable", something worth spending more than just leftovers of your energy.
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
  Me personally? Any job I get at this point will be just a job. I don't speak the native language well enough to work in a lot of fields and my prior experience isn't worth nearly as much. What I'm really looking at is basically service jobs - janitorial and other such things, perhaps CNA type of work. Maybe I'll get lucky and get a factory job or something. But at the end of the day, there is only so far effort beyond doing the job well (which I tend to want to do on my own accord) will get me in these types of fields. The main thing a job brings me is income, honestly. A job that "isn't too bad" or "I don't mind the work" where the people "aren't too bad" is good enough. Now, this is entirely of my own choosing, but a lot of folks are in similar situations with fewer life choices. But I get great internal pleasure out of cooking a good meal, out of making a wonderful piece of artwork, learning new techniques. Continued language learning (I've had 2 years of class, 600+ hours) remains important regardless of work. Seeing more of the country and the world? Definitely important. So I'll put more effort into those sorts of things than a job.