4 ms·

That operates under the assumptions that you are: 1) Making others pay for your pursuit of passion. 2) That having others paying for your pursuit of passion i

That operates under the assumptions that you are: 1) Making others pay for your pursuit of passion. 2) That having others paying for your pursuit of passion is unfair to them. Neither of which are safe, or even good, assumptions to make. Conversely, I am willing to assume that Santiago's father probably gladly paid for some things that allowed his son to pursue his passions, and - as stated in the piece - allowed him to do work that intersects his passions. Immigrating was probably one of those things.

jasode 10y ago
>Neither of which are safe, or even good, assumptions to make. I'm not making that assumption. I'm responding to the article. Author already framed it with the question: "Are you a burden to those around you?" That self-diagnostic question is really the main point of the article. The "screw passion" in the title is just provocative bait. The article goes on to admonish those who mentally say "yes" to that question.
- ravitation 10y ago
  I am also responding to the article, and I'm also responding to your response to the article. I'm responding to part of your response that seems to take the assumptions that are made in the article at face value. Yes, he promotes that self-diagnosis without defining burden, which is also kind of the point of my response to your comment.
  - jasode 10y ago
    >, he promotes that self-diagnosis without defining burden, Personally, I don't need the author to define "burden" for me to understand his point. Part of being an adult is to judge the financial relationship with your parents as being fair. This includes overriding your parents saying to you, "Oh don't mind us, we don't need that $5000 for a European vacation or retirement funds. We want you to use it to produce your rap youtube video!" In other words, parents can be simultaneously "generous to you" and "unfair to themselves". No doubt you have your own idea of what is a burden which may be different from many other readers but it doesn't really matter right? Every parent-child dynamic is different.
    - ravitation 10y ago
      > but it doesn't really matter right? Yes, it absolutely does matter. The difference isn't that I'm defining the meaning of burden differently than you. It's that I'm choosing to not broadly define it at all (because I know that every dynamic is different), and that the author (and you) are choosing to define it. The author's entire point completely relies on a universal definition of burden because he's also making a universal statement about following one's passions. That universal definition doesn't exist because (as you said) every dynamic is different. So, his entire argument (the title of the piece) falls apart once it's understood that the definition of burden is inherently non-universal. Also, the word burden is just not a very good (e.g. very descriptive) word in this context.
      - jasode 10y ago
        >falls apart once it's understood that the definition of burden is inherently non-universal. If you have a personal non-universal idiosyncratic definition of "burden", please share it. I assume its something compatible with ",gladly paid for some things that allowed his son to pursue his passions," (I don't think it would change the plug-and-play nature of the author's essay but I'm willing to be shown that _your_ definition completely throws the author's words into a mess of contradictions.)
        ravitation 10y ago
        Okay... As a preface, when I say defining burden I'm using it in the context of this article and the question it poses. > Are you a burden to those around you? Where burden is being used as an attribute, i.e. to be a burden. This requires knowing what a burden is, which you actually stated yourself as being different from person to person. > your own idea of what is a burden which may be different from many other readers My logical reasoning, like I said, doesn't rely on some "personal non-universal idiosyncratic" definition of burden, it relies on the statement you said yourself, that what a burden is is contextual. But, the author needs a universal definition (which is why I said that burden isn't a very good word), and part of that definition is a universal judgement on the absolute moral correctness of being a burden. Am I a burden on those around me? Yes? Well maybe that's okay, because being a "burden" doesn't have to be inherently bad. That Chinese Crested Hairless is a "burden" by some definition, but that's okay. A newborn certainly could be a "burden", but that's okay. Someone's parents are paying for him or her to go to college and graduate debt free, that certainly could be a "burden", but it's also okay. He or she probably shouldn't drop out of school and get a job, so he or she can stop being a "burden".

jasode 10y ago

>Neither of which are safe, or even good, assumptions to make. I'm not making that assumption. I'm responding to the article. Author already framed it with the question: "Are you a burden to those around you?" That self-diagnostic question is really the main point of the article. The "screw passion" in the title is just provocative bait. The article goes on to admonish those who mentally say "yes" to that question.

ravitation 10y ago
I am also responding to the article, and I'm also responding to your response to the article. I'm responding to part of your response that seems to take the assumptions that are made in the article at face value. Yes, he promotes that self-diagnosis without defining burden, which is also kind of the point of my response to your comment.
- jasode 10y ago
  >, he promotes that self-diagnosis without defining burden, Personally, I don't need the author to define "burden" for me to understand his point. Part of being an adult is to judge the financial relationship with your parents as being fair. This includes overriding your parents saying to you, "Oh don't mind us, we don't need that $5000 for a European vacation or retirement funds. We want you to use it to produce your rap youtube video!" In other words, parents can be simultaneously "generous to you" and "unfair to themselves". No doubt you have your own idea of what is a burden which may be different from many other readers but it doesn't really matter right? Every parent-child dynamic is different.
  - ravitation 10y ago
    > but it doesn't really matter right? Yes, it absolutely does matter. The difference isn't that I'm defining the meaning of burden differently than you. It's that I'm choosing to not broadly define it at all (because I know that every dynamic is different), and that the author (and you) are choosing to define it. The author's entire point completely relies on a universal definition of burden because he's also making a universal statement about following one's passions. That universal definition doesn't exist because (as you said) every dynamic is different. So, his entire argument (the title of the piece) falls apart once it's understood that the definition of burden is inherently non-universal. Also, the word burden is just not a very good (e.g. very descriptive) word in this context.
    - jasode 10y ago
      >falls apart once it's understood that the definition of burden is inherently non-universal. If you have a personal non-universal idiosyncratic definition of "burden", please share it. I assume its something compatible with ",gladly paid for some things that allowed his son to pursue his passions," (I don't think it would change the plug-and-play nature of the author's essay but I'm willing to be shown that _your_ definition completely throws the author's words into a mess of contradictions.)
      - ravitation 10y ago
        Okay... As a preface, when I say defining burden I'm using it in the context of this article and the question it poses. > Are you a burden to those around you? Where burden is being used as an attribute, i.e. to be a burden. This requires knowing what a burden is, which you actually stated yourself as being different from person to person. > your own idea of what is a burden which may be different from many other readers My logical reasoning, like I said, doesn't rely on some "personal non-universal idiosyncratic" definition of burden, it relies on the statement you said yourself, that what a burden is is contextual. But, the author needs a universal definition (which is why I said that burden isn't a very good word), and part of that definition is a universal judgement on the absolute moral correctness of being a burden. Am I a burden on those around me? Yes? Well maybe that's okay, because being a "burden" doesn't have to be inherently bad. That Chinese Crested Hairless is a "burden" by some definition, but that's okay. A newborn certainly could be a "burden", but that's okay. Someone's parents are paying for him or her to go to college and graduate debt free, that certainly could be a "burden", but it's also okay. He or she probably shouldn't drop out of school and get a job, so he or she can stop being a "burden".