5 ms·

I think this separation is a basic strategy for thinking about a complex world, and probably an effective one. I don't think it's meant to be taken too literall

by psyc 9y ago

I think this separation is a basic strategy for thinking about a complex world, and probably an effective one. I don't think it's meant to be taken too literally, as if the world were actually like that, although I suppose some do take it that way. I doubt people can generally manage a holistic view of everything, practically speaking. I doubt people can manage very accurate views outside narrow domains. The holistic view is valuable, I just don't think it can be applied fulltime. Compartmentalized and simplified models are valuable too. Maybe necessary.

AndrewKemendo 9y ago
Effective how or toward what ends? Seems to me that how someone views this issue is simply a function of how to skew and distort one's self image to more positively reflect how they want to be seen. So for example if you do something you don't truly believe in or morally support for your work, then having psychological distance between your work and personal life makes more sense because you aren't staking "who you are" in your work. So you decide to define "who you are" in the other portions of your life. Again, this seems to be cognitive dissonance at it's finest.
- grasshopperpurp 9y ago
  Reminds me of a quote from a previous thread: >Those of us who came from a business background remember our business ethics in university well. The running joke, from start to finish, is a thank you for compiling together the things we should walk carefully and carry a big stick while doing. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16368722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16368722
- psyc 9y ago
  Effective for deciding what to do with your limbs and lips on a day-to-day practical basis.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  >So for example if you do something you don't truly believe in or morally support for your work, then having psychological distance between your work and personal life makes more sense because you aren't staking "who you are" in your work. People have much more control over their actions outside of work though. Not to describe a strict compartmentalization but a diminishment towards your actions at work makes sense. I define "who I am" much more by what it is I do outside of work because I have actually have control over what it is that I do once I walk out of the office.
  - zrobotics 9y ago
    Not to edge close to a Godwin here, but how is that materially different from a soldier 'just following orders'? If anything, the soldier's excuse is more valid, since it is far easier to quit a job than quit military service. I'm not saying that both are easy, but I am uncomfortable with rationalizing what a person does at work as not reflecting on their moral character.

by psyc 9y ago

AndrewKemendo 9y ago

Effective how or toward what ends? Seems to me that how someone views this issue is simply a function of how to skew and distort one's self image to more positively reflect how they want to be seen. So for example if you do something you don't truly believe in or morally support for your work, then having psychological distance between your work and personal life makes more sense because you aren't staking "who you are" in your work. So you decide to define "who you are" in the other portions of your life. Again, this seems to be cognitive dissonance at it's finest.

grasshopperpurp 9y ago
Reminds me of a quote from a previous thread: >Those of us who came from a business background remember our business ethics in university well. The running joke, from start to finish, is a thank you for compiling together the things we should walk carefully and carry a big stick while doing. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16368722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16368722
psyc 9y ago
Effective for deciding what to do with your limbs and lips on a day-to-day practical basis.
frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
>So for example if you do something you don't truly believe in or morally support for your work, then having psychological distance between your work and personal life makes more sense because you aren't staking "who you are" in your work. People have much more control over their actions outside of work though. Not to describe a strict compartmentalization but a diminishment towards your actions at work makes sense. I define "who I am" much more by what it is I do outside of work because I have actually have control over what it is that I do once I walk out of the office.
- zrobotics 9y ago
  Not to edge close to a Godwin here, but how is that materially different from a soldier 'just following orders'? If anything, the soldier's excuse is more valid, since it is far easier to quit a job than quit military service. I'm not saying that both are easy, but I am uncomfortable with rationalizing what a person does at work as not reflecting on their moral character.