3 ms·

Minimalism is misnamed: http://joshuaspodek.com/minimalism-misnamed-maximalism http://joshuaspodek.com/minimalism-misnamed-maximalism If someone doesn't value

by spodek 9y ago

Minimalism is misnamed: http://joshuaspodek.com/minimalism-misnamed-maximalism http://joshuaspodek.com/minimalism-misnamed-maximalism If someone doesn't value stuff, does value meaning, and gets rid of the former to maximize the latter, why call attention to and name them by what they don't value? What we call minimalism comprises people who maximalize meaning, value, importance, and purpose.

warent 9y ago
My girlfriend and I are very minimalist (err... maximalist?) owning only a few outfits each (no accessories), and just the bare necessities of home items. If we find something has no utility, it gets donated or trashed. That being said, "minimalism vs. maximalism" really seems like splitting hairs here, as I don't think one implies something better than the other or is inherently clearer.
- dingaling 9y ago
  But such a form of minimalism won't work unless other people are non-minimalists. For example, if you find you need a trilobed screwdriver to repair one of your few possessions you'll either have to borrow it from a friend or rent it[0]. Both those options require that someone else be non-minimalist for your benefit. If all people were strongly minimalist this would have the effect of moving nearly all gadgets into the service domain. Screwdriver-as-service, ironing-as-a-service, yard-brushing-as-a-service. Is that scenario really less consumerist and less stressful than just going out and buying a screwdriver and keeping it in a box in the garage? [0] or buy it and then sell it when done, which i'll categorise as renting here
  - warent 9y ago
    That's an interesting argument I hadn't heard before. It's a good point. Is it less consumerist? Probably, because you're paying for only precisely what you need, and the odds of getting something you don't need (and never will use) are far lower. Alternative idea, if everyone were minimalist then we could develop a system of communal tools and goods.
  - dagw 9y ago
    if you find you need a trilobed screwdriver to repair one of your few possessions Pay someone to come and fix it or just throw it out and get a new one. Being Minimalist doesn't have to mean being frugal.
    - AstralStorm 9y ago
      Then the only difference is that you do not keep things you do not use. However it is a misnomer until you minimalize number of possessions to which implies frugality to a point. Not perhaps in the "buy cheapest" but "buy least".
  - tedmiston 9y ago
    This is easily solved by tool libraries or tool rental services or borrowing from a neighbor that builds stuff. Another solution is buying one, possibly used, and reselling it after you're done. Most minimalists heavily encourage borrowing or renting things that aren't in your personal definition of minimal (but might be in the next person's). Because each person defines their minimal set of possessions differently, I don't follow to your conclusion that minimalism is dependent upon non-minimalists.
mseebach 9y ago
I actively share the goal of seeking "meaning, value, importance, and purpose", but I haven't found that the amount of stuff I own makes much impact on this goal (and the impact it does make is at least ambiguous, not clearly negative). We call people who drive cars to go places "drivers" instead of "arrivers" because driving is the most significant difference between them and people who seek to go places as pedestrians, bicyclists, or train, boat or airplane passengers. There are plenty of people seek to "maximalize meaning, value, importance, and purpose" but one subgroup emphasizes the significance of the absence of stuff, and so it makes sense to distinguish them by this, rather than the goal which they share very broadly.

by spodek 9y ago

warent 9y ago

My girlfriend and I are very minimalist (err... maximalist?) owning only a few outfits each (no accessories), and just the bare necessities of home items. If we find something has no utility, it gets donated or trashed. That being said, "minimalism vs. maximalism" really seems like splitting hairs here, as I don't think one implies something better than the other or is inherently clearer.

dingaling 9y ago
But such a form of minimalism won't work unless other people are non-minimalists. For example, if you find you need a trilobed screwdriver to repair one of your few possessions you'll either have to borrow it from a friend or rent it[0]. Both those options require that someone else be non-minimalist for your benefit. If all people were strongly minimalist this would have the effect of moving nearly all gadgets into the service domain. Screwdriver-as-service, ironing-as-a-service, yard-brushing-as-a-service. Is that scenario really less consumerist and less stressful than just going out and buying a screwdriver and keeping it in a box in the garage? [0] or buy it and then sell it when done, which i'll categorise as renting here
- warent 9y ago
  That's an interesting argument I hadn't heard before. It's a good point. Is it less consumerist? Probably, because you're paying for only precisely what you need, and the odds of getting something you don't need (and never will use) are far lower. Alternative idea, if everyone were minimalist then we could develop a system of communal tools and goods.
- dagw 9y ago
  if you find you need a trilobed screwdriver to repair one of your few possessions Pay someone to come and fix it or just throw it out and get a new one. Being Minimalist doesn't have to mean being frugal.
  - AstralStorm 9y ago
    Then the only difference is that you do not keep things you do not use. However it is a misnomer until you minimalize number of possessions to which implies frugality to a point. Not perhaps in the "buy cheapest" but "buy least".
- tedmiston 9y ago
  This is easily solved by tool libraries or tool rental services or borrowing from a neighbor that builds stuff. Another solution is buying one, possibly used, and reselling it after you're done. Most minimalists heavily encourage borrowing or renting things that aren't in your personal definition of minimal (but might be in the next person's). Because each person defines their minimal set of possessions differently, I don't follow to your conclusion that minimalism is dependent upon non-minimalists.

mseebach 9y ago

I actively share the goal of seeking "meaning, value, importance, and purpose", but I haven't found that the amount of stuff I own makes much impact on this goal (and the impact it does make is at least ambiguous, not clearly negative). We call people who drive cars to go places "drivers" instead of "arrivers" because driving is the most significant difference between them and people who seek to go places as pedestrians, bicyclists, or train, boat or airplane passengers. There are plenty of people seek to "maximalize meaning, value, importance, and purpose" but one subgroup emphasizes the significance of the absence of stuff, and so it makes sense to distinguish them by this, rather than the goal which they share very broadly.