4 ms·

The article sets up a bit of a false dichotomy. It's partly inherent in using idleness as the alternative to economically productive work. Did Russell himself u

The article sets up a bit of a false dichotomy. It's partly inherent in using idleness as the alternative to economically productive work. Did Russell himself use that term (edit: yes :-))? I'm guessing it's supposed to be provocative, to make it stick. But I'd imagine that's part of the problem. Many people would balk, and I think rightly so, at the connotations. There's nothing positive about undirected free time over a long period. And the article doesn't help with glosses like "Netflix in pyjamas." The best alternatives to economically productive work are equally productive in different domains. For example, take gardening. You might be surprised at the quality of aerobic exercise you get working a large yard and garden. I recently took a heart rate monitor and found I could replace my morning jog. My heart rate was actually higher on average, and the sense of purpose was a welcome distraction from the work. Unfortunately few are taught these kinds of healthful alternatives. I can only imagine what a difference in health and cognition there would be if schools taught hands-on agriculture and gave students garden plots.

wiz21c 6y ago
> There's nothing positive about undirected free time over a long period. I could easily fill that time with dozens of ideas. But you see, I'm lucky enough to be a "creative" person. That is, I'm in love with the things I invent. The more I invent, the more passionnated I am. I can sustain an incredible level of activity just to achieve goals I create myself. But these goals are mostly non economic. So being able to just do my stuff without having to prove an economical value to it would be very much welcome.
- aslfksdfl 6y ago
  >I'm lucky enough to be a "creative" person This is the kind of insanity Russel's original essay alludes to. If we weren't taught to fill every hour with "productive" work, then anyone could foster their creativity with idle pursuits that aren't limited by their ability to produce value. People feel like they're not creative because they feel the constant need to produce something of value and are afraid to experiment with anything else. Creativity requires that type of experimentation. The fact that we claim some people are creative and some are not is a complete facade. It's similar to saying "oh I can't draw" or "I'm bad at math" — well no, you've likely just spent less time practicing it... maybe you're too afraid to fail to even try.
  - wiz21c 6y ago
    You're right. And unfortunately, as you said, things are not as clear cut even for me. For example, it took me long (and the good will of my beloved) to accept that I should work less and have more time for me, that it'd be much better for my health. Sometimes too I feel guilty of not contributing to society by "traditional" means, etc. So you're right, the inescapable necessity of work is still in our culture :-/
- brushfoot 6y ago
  I'd say what you're describing isn't undirected. You have goals and they sound positive, assuming that what you're inventing is positive (e.g., not torture devices). They use and refine your creativity, they potentially help others, they give you opportunities to partner with others to work toward a common positive goal, etc. I don't think that's idleness for the average person. It's more like nihilism and hedonism. I'm not arguing that jobs are the solution, to be clear -- just objecting to the terminology. If everyone would use free time in the way you would, there would be no problem.
silveroriole 6y ago
Thank goodness we can get aerobic exercise in while gardening. If ‘twere not so, gardening might be - horror - unproductive! “The modern man thinks that everything ought to be done for the sake of something else, and never for its own sake.” I know “nobody reads the article” is an HN joke, but surely asking whether Russell uses the word idleness in his essay titled “In Praise of Idleness” is taking the mick...
- brushfoot 6y ago
  Edited -- I'd forgotten they cited the essay in the article. :-) I know what you're saying and for the most part, I agree. I don't want to give the impression that I'm disparaging what isn't immediately materially, visibly useful to me. I don't believe in "inutile beauty" from a philosophical perspective, but not in the sense that I want to do away with it...just that I don't believe it exists. I think everything has some effect. So that's one thing I like about gardening -- I find (for me) there's a bigger cluster of positive effects around gardening than jogging. The produce makes my family and friends happy and there are little goals to keep me distracted from the exertion. I still get the cognitive effects of a hard aerobic workout, but there are other benefits too. I'm curious, what would you consider an unproductive activity?

wiz21c 6y ago

> There's nothing positive about undirected free time over a long period. I could easily fill that time with dozens of ideas. But you see, I'm lucky enough to be a "creative" person. That is, I'm in love with the things I invent. The more I invent, the more passionnated I am. I can sustain an incredible level of activity just to achieve goals I create myself. But these goals are mostly non economic. So being able to just do my stuff without having to prove an economical value to it would be very much welcome.

aslfksdfl 6y ago
>I'm lucky enough to be a "creative" person This is the kind of insanity Russel's original essay alludes to. If we weren't taught to fill every hour with "productive" work, then anyone could foster their creativity with idle pursuits that aren't limited by their ability to produce value. People feel like they're not creative because they feel the constant need to produce something of value and are afraid to experiment with anything else. Creativity requires that type of experimentation. The fact that we claim some people are creative and some are not is a complete facade. It's similar to saying "oh I can't draw" or "I'm bad at math" — well no, you've likely just spent less time practicing it... maybe you're too afraid to fail to even try.
- wiz21c 6y ago
  You're right. And unfortunately, as you said, things are not as clear cut even for me. For example, it took me long (and the good will of my beloved) to accept that I should work less and have more time for me, that it'd be much better for my health. Sometimes too I feel guilty of not contributing to society by "traditional" means, etc. So you're right, the inescapable necessity of work is still in our culture :-/
brushfoot 6y ago
I'd say what you're describing isn't undirected. You have goals and they sound positive, assuming that what you're inventing is positive (e.g., not torture devices). They use and refine your creativity, they potentially help others, they give you opportunities to partner with others to work toward a common positive goal, etc. I don't think that's idleness for the average person. It's more like nihilism and hedonism. I'm not arguing that jobs are the solution, to be clear -- just objecting to the terminology. If everyone would use free time in the way you would, there would be no problem.

silveroriole 6y ago

Thank goodness we can get aerobic exercise in while gardening. If ‘twere not so, gardening might be - horror - unproductive! “The modern man thinks that everything ought to be done for the sake of something else, and never for its own sake.” I know “nobody reads the article” is an HN joke, but surely asking whether Russell uses the word idleness in his essay titled “In Praise of Idleness” is taking the mick...

brushfoot 6y ago
Edited -- I'd forgotten they cited the essay in the article. :-) I know what you're saying and for the most part, I agree. I don't want to give the impression that I'm disparaging what isn't immediately materially, visibly useful to me. I don't believe in "inutile beauty" from a philosophical perspective, but not in the sense that I want to do away with it...just that I don't believe it exists. I think everything has some effect. So that's one thing I like about gardening -- I find (for me) there's a bigger cluster of positive effects around gardening than jogging. The produce makes my family and friends happy and there are little goals to keep me distracted from the exertion. I still get the cognitive effects of a hard aerobic workout, but there are other benefits too. I'm curious, what would you consider an unproductive activity?