4 ms·

Agreed. Attachment to not owning things is exactly the same issue as attachment to owning things. All you're doing is completing some actions to avoid a certain

Agreed. Attachment to not owning things is exactly the same issue as attachment to owning things. All you're doing is completing some actions to avoid a certain feeling or outcome. I went through a phase where I just donated anything I thought was a distraction to charity, solved a lot in the short term, was insignificant in the long term. Addressing the fact I was bored with my career and hadn't had a break in years solved a lot more.

Evgeny 15y ago
Attachment to not owning things is exactly the same issue as attachment to owning things. It sounds as if you don't think that it is possible to genuinely not need certain things. If I don't own a TV and never even remember the fact that I don't have a TV, is that 'attachment'?
- momotomo 15y ago
  No. You're talking about the neutral case. I own no specialist plumbing tools, but as I'm not a plumber, it doesn't bother me either way. I'm talking about the two other cases - I must own X to be in state Y, or I must not have X to be in state Y. People set themselves up all sorts of artificial success milestones with stuff like this that are just as ineffective on either end of the scale. My own anecdote. I had a TV, I decided it was a distraction and owning it distressed me enough that I gave it away. I now own a TV again, it's dusty and gets used once a month. Nothing inherently different about the TV in this case, I just matured enough to be able to balance and manage my time better, so now there's no particular attachment (in the case of the TV) to having it there or not.
  - sliverstorm 15y ago
    I am currently trying to cut down my possessions (and sadly stressing a tad about it) so that they all fit reasonably in the back of my station wagon without overloading the suspension (I move once or twice a year). Would you consider that an artificial milestone?
    - momotomo 15y ago
      Artificial milestones to proceeding with a plan or taking an action, you're describing a literal milestone of fitting everything in your car due to a practical need. I was down to the point of it all fitting in the boot of a sedan but had no rhyme or reason to it at all, I was just acting out against a bunch of other stuff because I figured once I was done, I'd be "ready" _that_ is an artificial milestone.
  - Produce 15y ago
    The real question is - would you have been able to detach from your television distraction if you didn't have that time away from it? Personally, I find that going through periods of scarcity provides unique benefits because it proves, without a reasonable doubt, that it's possible to do so. Once the possibility has been witnessed, it is easier to say no even when the object is directly in front of you.
- kmfrk 15y ago
  > If I don't own a TV and never even remember the fact that I don't have a TV, is that 'attachment'? If you are compelled to blog about it incessantly and preach it as religion, yes. Otherwise, not really. The blog post is aimed at a certain type of people and mentality that personally drives me up the walls. The "minimalism"/paperless craze is one of the biggest at the moment. This is summarized in a great atheist joke: "How do you know someone is an atheist? They tell you."
latch 15y ago
I understand the spirit of what you are saying, I don't think I fully agree with it. Beyond the self though, I think an attachment to not owning is more beneficial to humanity (I use the term broadly). Less consumption is simply more sustainable for our planet. That simple.
- momotomo 15y ago
  I agree with you on this point. Apart from a handful of items I live fairly lightly anyhow, and less consumption is essential. I'd just rather see it executed as a rational and dispassionate decision than something motivated by anxiety or internal / social pressure, in those scenarios I often don't feel people can sustain it / they won't substitute with something else.
- rimantas 15y ago
  > Less consumption is simply more sustainable for our planet. The best take on this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw What it does even mean, to be sustainable planet? To keep the status quo adapted for current human civilization and its perception of what's right?
  - mapleoin 15y ago
    What it does even mean, to be sustainable planet? How about just keeping the wild polar bears alive?
    - Gotttzsche 15y ago
      just bring them to antarctica maybe
    - roel_v 15y ago
      Why?
      - pavpanchekha 15y ago
        Why not? (Let's not give flippant answers to flippant comments, that doesn't bode well for the rest of the conversation.)
megablast 15y ago
Just like how not collecting stamps is as much of a hobby as collecting stamps? Ok, I am being silly, but not owning things is not the same as having an attachment to not owning things.
- alain94040 15y ago
  If you keep feeling good because you don't own a stamp collection, if you keep reminding your friends how great it is not to own a stamp collection, then you are attached to stamp collections, just in a reverse way.

Evgeny 15y ago

Attachment to not owning things is exactly the same issue as attachment to owning things. It sounds as if you don't think that it is possible to genuinely not need certain things. If I don't own a TV and never even remember the fact that I don't have a TV, is that 'attachment'?

momotomo 15y ago
No. You're talking about the neutral case. I own no specialist plumbing tools, but as I'm not a plumber, it doesn't bother me either way. I'm talking about the two other cases - I must own X to be in state Y, or I must not have X to be in state Y. People set themselves up all sorts of artificial success milestones with stuff like this that are just as ineffective on either end of the scale. My own anecdote. I had a TV, I decided it was a distraction and owning it distressed me enough that I gave it away. I now own a TV again, it's dusty and gets used once a month. Nothing inherently different about the TV in this case, I just matured enough to be able to balance and manage my time better, so now there's no particular attachment (in the case of the TV) to having it there or not.
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  I am currently trying to cut down my possessions (and sadly stressing a tad about it) so that they all fit reasonably in the back of my station wagon without overloading the suspension (I move once or twice a year). Would you consider that an artificial milestone?
  - momotomo 15y ago
    Artificial milestones to proceeding with a plan or taking an action, you're describing a literal milestone of fitting everything in your car due to a practical need. I was down to the point of it all fitting in the boot of a sedan but had no rhyme or reason to it at all, I was just acting out against a bunch of other stuff because I figured once I was done, I'd be "ready" _that_ is an artificial milestone.
- Produce 15y ago
  The real question is - would you have been able to detach from your television distraction if you didn't have that time away from it? Personally, I find that going through periods of scarcity provides unique benefits because it proves, without a reasonable doubt, that it's possible to do so. Once the possibility has been witnessed, it is easier to say no even when the object is directly in front of you.
kmfrk 15y ago
> If I don't own a TV and never even remember the fact that I don't have a TV, is that 'attachment'? If you are compelled to blog about it incessantly and preach it as religion, yes. Otherwise, not really. The blog post is aimed at a certain type of people and mentality that personally drives me up the walls. The "minimalism"/paperless craze is one of the biggest at the moment. This is summarized in a great atheist joke: "How do you know someone is an atheist? They tell you."

latch 15y ago

I understand the spirit of what you are saying, I don't think I fully agree with it. Beyond the self though, I think an attachment to not owning is more beneficial to humanity (I use the term broadly). Less consumption is simply more sustainable for our planet. That simple.

momotomo 15y ago
I agree with you on this point. Apart from a handful of items I live fairly lightly anyhow, and less consumption is essential. I'd just rather see it executed as a rational and dispassionate decision than something motivated by anxiety or internal / social pressure, in those scenarios I often don't feel people can sustain it / they won't substitute with something else.
rimantas 15y ago
> Less consumption is simply more sustainable for our planet. The best take on this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw What it does even mean, to be sustainable planet? To keep the status quo adapted for current human civilization and its perception of what's right?
- mapleoin 15y ago
  What it does even mean, to be sustainable planet? How about just keeping the wild polar bears alive?
  - Gotttzsche 15y ago
    just bring them to antarctica maybe
  - roel_v 15y ago
    Why?
    - pavpanchekha 15y ago
      Why not? (Let's not give flippant answers to flippant comments, that doesn't bode well for the rest of the conversation.)

megablast 15y ago

Just like how not collecting stamps is as much of a hobby as collecting stamps? Ok, I am being silly, but not owning things is not the same as having an attachment to not owning things.

alain94040 15y ago
If you keep feeling good because you don't own a stamp collection, if you keep reminding your friends how great it is not to own a stamp collection, then you are attached to stamp collections, just in a reverse way.