4 ms·

Different ages and cultures will give different spins to the same old human needs and inclinations.

emodendroket 9y ago
I don't think it's a "different spin to the same old human need;" I think it's a phenomenon entirely different in kind. This is, I think, as clearly as I can possibly state my argument.
- mantas 9y ago
  It's not different at all. It's traveling somewhere afar without objective practical need. Going to music festivals is sort of like pilgrimage as well. But I definitely count it as vacation. People do classic pilgrimages and call that hiking vacation nowadays. Amateur sports events, especially multi-day stage ones, are totally like pilgrimage. You get together with people with common goal, do shit and hang out. I sure as hell count that as vacation.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    > It's not different at all. It's traveling somewhere afar without objective practical need. You are looking at this from the perspective of an atheist living in 2018 and not a deeply religious medieval peasant.
    - mantas 9y ago
      Well, we still have religious people doing pilgrimages. Both christians and not. At least some of them sure do treat them as vacation. On top of that, plenty of people in medieval time were not that deeply religious. Even in clergy or among monks. Even including religious component, I don't really see how it differs much from e.g. pilgrimaging to music festivals. I've done quite a bit of traveling where solo task was to see a specific artist. I do count that as vacation :) What is your definition of vacation? What specifically stops pilgrimage from being a vacation?
      - emodendroket 9y ago
        To someone religiously devoted it's not an impractical diversion but something deeply practical. It seems to me in some sense more akin to traveling to a renowned hospital -- you might take in some sights while you are there, but diversion isn't the point.
        mantas 9y ago
        So you're saying vacation is only if it's impractical and the diversion itself must be the point? You might be conflating shightseeing and vacation as time-off. On top of that, you might want to look into how pilgrimage or other religious get togethers look like. It's not like people come and pray and do nothing else. In most cases shopping and getting together with people from afar is involved. People have and always had natural needs like roof for the night and food. And rest during the day. If a bunch of people got together at night having a similar goal, they'll probably have a chat and maybe even party a little. There's a reason why many religious sights were surrounded by shopping and entertainment. Even a long time ago. For example, the very simple act of sunday church. Back when traveling took time, it was certainly a day trip for rural people. It was pretty much a tiny conference or festival for them. That's why market square a frequently next to churches and markets are held on sunday. People come, shop, have a chat... And go to church while at it. I'm talking not only today, but from historical perspective too. Talking about vacation only as "diversion", I guess quite a few of my vacations wouldn't count then. If I was going to a music festival, diversion itself wouldn't mean jackshit to me. I went to many festivals where I basically got to the location in cheapest possible way. Stayed on festival grounds and then got home in cheapest possible way. I saw no sights nor diversion itself was the point. But boy if it was vacation :) Same about amateur racing. I get to the location, I race, get some food, sleep it off and go home. Sometimes terrain/location is part of signing up for the specific race. Sometimes I go there just because it's well organised and my friends are going. More likely than not no sights are seen nor I are about location aside from race track much. Sometimes vacation is purely to get out of daily routine and jut spend time with myself. Diversion itself ain't the point either.
        emodendroket 9y ago

I don't think it's a "different spin to the same old human need;" I think it's a phenomenon entirely different in kind. This is, I think, as clearly as I can possibly state my argument.

mantas 9y ago
It's not different at all. It's traveling somewhere afar without objective practical need. Going to music festivals is sort of like pilgrimage as well. But I definitely count it as vacation. People do classic pilgrimages and call that hiking vacation nowadays. Amateur sports events, especially multi-day stage ones, are totally like pilgrimage. You get together with people with common goal, do shit and hang out. I sure as hell count that as vacation.
- emodendroket 9y ago
  > It's not different at all. It's traveling somewhere afar without objective practical need. You are looking at this from the perspective of an atheist living in 2018 and not a deeply religious medieval peasant.
  - mantas 9y ago
    Well, we still have religious people doing pilgrimages. Both christians and not. At least some of them sure do treat them as vacation. On top of that, plenty of people in medieval time were not that deeply religious. Even in clergy or among monks. Even including religious component, I don't really see how it differs much from e.g. pilgrimaging to music festivals. I've done quite a bit of traveling where solo task was to see a specific artist. I do count that as vacation :) What is your definition of vacation? What specifically stops pilgrimage from being a vacation?
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      To someone religiously devoted it's not an impractical diversion but something deeply practical. It seems to me in some sense more akin to traveling to a renowned hospital -- you might take in some sights while you are there, but diversion isn't the point.
      - mantas 9y ago
        So you're saying vacation is only if it's impractical and the diversion itself must be the point? You might be conflating shightseeing and vacation as time-off. On top of that, you might want to look into how pilgrimage or other religious get togethers look like. It's not like people come and pray and do nothing else. In most cases shopping and getting together with people from afar is involved. People have and always had natural needs like roof for the night and food. And rest during the day. If a bunch of people got together at night having a similar goal, they'll probably have a chat and maybe even party a little. There's a reason why many religious sights were surrounded by shopping and entertainment. Even a long time ago. For example, the very simple act of sunday church. Back when traveling took time, it was certainly a day trip for rural people. It was pretty much a tiny conference or festival for them. That's why market square a frequently next to churches and markets are held on sunday. People come, shop, have a chat... And go to church while at it. I'm talking not only today, but from historical perspective too. Talking about vacation only as "diversion", I guess quite a few of my vacations wouldn't count then. If I was going to a music festival, diversion itself wouldn't mean jackshit to me. I went to many festivals where I basically got to the location in cheapest possible way. Stayed on festival grounds and then got home in cheapest possible way. I saw no sights nor diversion itself was the point. But boy if it was vacation :) Same about amateur racing. I get to the location, I race, get some food, sleep it off and go home. Sometimes terrain/location is part of signing up for the specific race. Sometimes I go there just because it's well organised and my friends are going. More likely than not no sights are seen nor I are about location aside from race track much. Sometimes vacation is purely to get out of daily routine and jut spend time with myself. Diversion itself ain't the point either.
        emodendroket 9y ago