4 ms·

In a world where no one is compelled to work more than four hours a day, every person possessed of scientific curiosity will be able to indulge it, and every pa

In a world where no one is compelled to work more than four hours a day, every person possessed of scientific curiosity will be able to indulge it, and every painter will be able to paint without starving, however excellent his pictures may be. Young writers will not be obliged to draw attention to themselves by sensational pot-boilers, with a view to acquiring the economic independence needed for monumental works, for which, when the time at last comes, they will have lost the taste and capacity. Men who, in their professional work, have become interested in some phase of economics or government, will be able to develop their ideas without the academic detachment that makes the work of university economists often seem lacking in reality. Medical men will have the time to learn about the progress of medicine, teachers will not be exasperatedly struggling to teach by routine methods things which they learnt in their youth, which may, in the interval, have been proved to be untrue. -- Bertrand Russell http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html

jariel 7y ago
This is a funny kind of bubble quote, by someone I think out of touch with most people. I believe most people would watch TV, play cards, play video games. This is what they already do with their spare time, there's no reason to believe there wouldn't be more of it. It's amazing what a 'schedule' and 'working with others' and 'requirements' and 'deadlines' can do - it brings people to life and is probably the only way hard things get done. For a certain kind of person, some free time would lead to a lot of exploration but for most people it would not.
- tprice7 7y ago
  "This is what they already do with their spare time, there's no reason to believe there wouldn't be more of it." I can see one reason: the benefit that you get from an activity is a nonlinear function of how much time you invest in it. This is why people tend to specialize in certain domains. If you barely have any time to practice painting for example, maybe it's not worth learning to paint in the first place. Conversely, if you have more free time, it could be worthwhile to find more creative things to do with it. This is especially true if you consider frame-switching overhead. The amount you can get done in 6 hours of some demanding creative activity is probably more than 3 times the amount you could get done in 2 hours. And obviously people would have more long uninterrupted blocks of free time if they had to work less overall. Also, with most schools being the way they are, I think children in general get very little opportunity to pursue their creative impulses; it's always about following the teacher's instructions. Maybe adults would have more curiosity and creativity if these traits weren't snuffed out in their formative years. Finally, even in our current society, being just a lazy consumer in your free time is far from universal, for example: https://www.namm.org/news/press-releases/gallup-organization-reveals-findings-american-atti https://www.namm.org/news/press-releases/gallup-organization...
- perfunctory 7y ago
  > This is what they already do with their spare time, there's no reason to believe there wouldn't be more of it. From the same essay "The pleasures of urban populations have become mainly passive: seeing cinemas, watching football matches, listening to the radio, and so on. This results from the fact that their active energies are fully taken up with work; if they had more leisure, they would again enjoy pleasures in which they took an active part." http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html
- nathan_compton 7y ago
  Who cares? Sounds like a win/win to me. Some people get to relax more and the curious or creative get to explore or create more.
  - jariel 7y ago
    When nobody works it's definitely 'lose lose lose' for almost everyone.

jariel 7y ago

This is a funny kind of bubble quote, by someone I think out of touch with most people. I believe most people would watch TV, play cards, play video games. This is what they already do with their spare time, there's no reason to believe there wouldn't be more of it. It's amazing what a 'schedule' and 'working with others' and 'requirements' and 'deadlines' can do - it brings people to life and is probably the only way hard things get done. For a certain kind of person, some free time would lead to a lot of exploration but for most people it would not.

tprice7 7y ago
"This is what they already do with their spare time, there's no reason to believe there wouldn't be more of it." I can see one reason: the benefit that you get from an activity is a nonlinear function of how much time you invest in it. This is why people tend to specialize in certain domains. If you barely have any time to practice painting for example, maybe it's not worth learning to paint in the first place. Conversely, if you have more free time, it could be worthwhile to find more creative things to do with it. This is especially true if you consider frame-switching overhead. The amount you can get done in 6 hours of some demanding creative activity is probably more than 3 times the amount you could get done in 2 hours. And obviously people would have more long uninterrupted blocks of free time if they had to work less overall. Also, with most schools being the way they are, I think children in general get very little opportunity to pursue their creative impulses; it's always about following the teacher's instructions. Maybe adults would have more curiosity and creativity if these traits weren't snuffed out in their formative years. Finally, even in our current society, being just a lazy consumer in your free time is far from universal, for example: https://www.namm.org/news/press-releases/gallup-organization-reveals-findings-american-atti https://www.namm.org/news/press-releases/gallup-organization...
perfunctory 7y ago
> This is what they already do with their spare time, there's no reason to believe there wouldn't be more of it. From the same essay "The pleasures of urban populations have become mainly passive: seeing cinemas, watching football matches, listening to the radio, and so on. This results from the fact that their active energies are fully taken up with work; if they had more leisure, they would again enjoy pleasures in which they took an active part." http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html
nathan_compton 7y ago
Who cares? Sounds like a win/win to me. Some people get to relax more and the curious or creative get to explore or create more.
- jariel 7y ago
  When nobody works it's definitely 'lose lose lose' for almost everyone.