3 ms·
> It's also interesting to note that this transition always involves a moral dimension, including the judgment of those not fully on board with your movement of
by hannob 9y ago
> It's also interesting to note that this transition always involves a moral dimension, including the judgment of those not fully on board with your movement of choice, and also competition with those who ARE on board.
Sorry to call out your strawman here.
I've followed the minimalism debate for a while and I hardly anywhere hear so often things like "this is no competition", "this is what I feel works good for me, but you don't have to do it", "if you like your books keep them" etc. What you claim is largely not happening, apart from maybe some fringes of the movement.
- kstenerud 9y agoHmm, ok, let's use a small sample from this very thread: Karma judgment (the zen master): "What we call minimalism comprises people who maximalize meaning, value, importance, and purpose." Competition: "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." The True Scotsman: "Just to note, 'minimalists' are almost universally hated in every minimalist community I've seen and I would really not take them as any soft of spokespeople for minimalism." Moral goalpost: "It sometimes amazes you how little you need to be happy yet everything we do is to get as much as possible."
- AstralStorm 9y agoYes, probably some drug or kind of simulation is enough. /s The question is ill posed since our brains are not wired for consistent happiness. You are probably mistaking it with being contented which starts by admitting defeat. And this is all orthogonal to efficiency or productivity which ate important social goals if not strictly personal ones. (Sometimes they partially coincide.)