6 ms·

The author directly stated seeing repeated procrastination in many situations, yet stated that laziness does not exist. The premise of this article is literall

by IncRnd 5y ago

The author directly stated seeing repeated procrastination in many situations, yet stated that laziness does not exist. The premise of this article is literally founded on intellectual laziness. When a person takes a course twice without ever managing to turn in homework, the situation of the student is not completely to blame, since the student didn't take the time to do something - the work, withdrawing in time, discussing options with the professor, something. It seems fairly clear that the author has a "schtick" or a unique "angle" on social psychology that is being promulgated. As it turns out, they released a book this year called, "Laziness Does Not Exist", three years after this article was written.

CharlesW 5y ago
TFA explains that procrastination is not laziness.
- IncRnd 5y ago
  > TFA explains that procrastination is not laziness. I didn't say that procrastination is identical with laziness. I did give a direct example drawn from the article showing how a person exhibited laziness. The difference between procrastination and laziness is obvious from their definitions. TFA is not needed to know they differ. Procrastination is postponing something, while laziness is being unwilling to act. But, none of that matters. The blanket assertion is that Laziness Does Not Exist, which is obviously false. There are people who are unwilling to act in certain situations.
  - carbonguy 5y ago
    Your original comment starts with: > The author directly stated seeing repeated procrastination in many situations, yet stated that laziness does not exist. This phrasing, with its use of "yet" to contrast procrastination and laziness, strongly implies that from your perspective procrastination IS laziness. So, while you didn't literally say "procrastination is identical with laziness" maybe you can see how you might have given that impression? For what it's worth, I agree with you that the title "Laziness Does Not Exist" is not literally true; "laziness" is a real term that people use to describe behavior, and it "exists" in that sense, at least. Do you feel there is some deeper relevance to the term, though? For example, do you think it's more accurate to say that "laziness" is an inherent character trait that explains behavior, rather than merely describing it?
    - IncRnd 5y ago
      > So, while you didn't literally say "procrastination is identical with laziness" maybe you can see how you might have given that impression? That might be perceived, but only when people pluck phrases and sentences out of content. What you quoted was directly followed by an example of laziness from the article. "The premise of this article is literally founded on intellectual laziness. When a person takes a course twice without ever managing to turn in homework, the situation of the student is not completely to blame, since the student didn't take the time to do something - the work, withdrawing in time, discussing options with the professor, something." > Do you feel there is some deeper relevance to the term, though? For example, do you think it's more accurate to say that "laziness" is an inherent character trait that explains behavior, rather than merely describing it? It is not about how I feel but the meanings of words. Procrastination describes behavior. Laziness can describe an attitude of being unwilling to act but also the behavior of indolence or lack of action.
      - carbonguy 5y ago
        > What you quoted was directly followed by an example of laziness from the article. Well, it was DIRECTLY followed by an assertion of intellectual laziness in the premise of the article, as your quote so helpfully shows. Perhaps if you were a bit less lazy you might have caught that? > It is not about how I feel but the meanings of words. Ah! An interesting assertion, considering that what you have repeatedly described as "an example of laziness" from the article could easily be described in another way, as my other reply to you hints at. For example, we could say it was "stubbornness" [1] or "passivity" [2] or even "dysfunction" [3] with as much justification as you use "laziness." So on what basis do you choose the one, and not another? [1] "the quality of being determined to do what you want and refusing to do anything else" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stubbornness https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stubb... [2]: "the quality of being passive, where "passive" is defined as "not acting to influence or change a situation" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/passive https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/passi... [3]: "a problem or fault in a part of the body or a machine" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dysfunction https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dysfu...
eyelidlessness 5y ago
> procrastination ... laziness I can only speak for my own procrastination, but it is certainly not rooted in anything I would identify as laziness. It’s rooted in my experience of ADHD, and the corresponding anxiety it produces. How can I be so sure? Because I will often go to great effort to avoid minimal-effort tasks. Or I’ll continue an effort that I sense is likely a sunk cost to abandon in favor of a better solution, because I’m determined to see the first effort through. Interestingly (to me), these were major influences on me becoming a programmer. I’m self taught, I didn’t learn to start a career. I thought I would probably work crappy retail jobs and be broke for the rest of my life. I learned to program because there were tasks I would prefer not to do, so I learned how to automate them out of my purview. Work avoidance, it turns out, is a hallmark of the craft. Why put off for tomorrow what can be put off entirely? Is that laziness? A younger me joked that it is along the lines of: I'm a lazy programmer; the good kind of lazy. I no longer see it that way. I see it as one lens among many into my state of mind which ultimately gives me both drive and difficulty—that makes me incredibly effective and also prone to forgetting to do simple chores for weeks at a time. Edit: that said, I wasn’t motivated to get around the paywall, so I have no idea if the article discusses similar concepts making my reply potentially redundant.
- IncRnd 5y ago
  > I learned to program because there were tasks I would prefer not to do, so I learned how to automate them out of my purview. Work avoidance, it turns out, is a hallmark of the craft. Why put off for tomorrow what can be put off entirely? > Is that laziness? > Edit: that said, I wasn’t motivated to get around the paywall, so I have no idea if the article discusses similar concepts making my reply potentially redundant. Laziness is the quality of not being willing to work or use any effort [1] Lazy: averse or disinclined to work, activity, or exertion; indolent. [2] According to Larry Wall, the original author of the Perl programming language, there are three great virtues of a programmer; Laziness, Impatience and Hubris [3] [1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/laziness https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/lazin... [2] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/laziness https://www.dictionary.com/browse/laziness [3] http://threevirtues.com/ http://threevirtues.com/
ppqqrr 5y ago
The author’s point is that labeling someone as “lazy” is intellectually lazy. Every person, throughout their lives, exhibits behaviors ranging the full spectrum from lazy to diligent. They might be lazy about one thing but diligent about another, all at different times, for reasons others may never find out about. Labeling a person as lazy ignores all of that, and lays judgement based on a specific things the labeler wish the labeled was more diligent about, and at the time of their choosing. It’s entirely subjective, and rarely constructive. Laziness, as a description of a person’s measurable, inherent attributes, is inherently vindictive, intellectually lazy, and generally unhelpful. It’s a way of saying “I give up on you, I don’t want to know your story, and I think you can’t change” without acknowledging your part in that judgement.
- IncRnd 5y ago
  > The author’s point is that labeling someone as “lazy” is intellectually lazy. The author's directly stated point in the headline, their book, and the article is that laziness "does NOT" exist.
  - ppqqrr 5y ago
    Well, headlines be headlines. If you take them literally, they’ll disappoint you.
    - IncRnd 5y ago
      That's kind of a lazy response, since I wrote three places the author directly mentioned their point not just the headline.
      - ppqqrr 5y ago
        Having provoked you so with a daring headline, the author’s ploy is to draw you into their actual writing, in which they will explain the nuances of their arguments. If you cannot be bothered to move past the headlines, you’ll just be provoked. If you’ve read all the text and are still not convinced, you’re entitled to your opinion.
lumost 5y ago
I think that’s the point. There is no reason for a student to get an F twice in a course they paid for without turning in any work. They could at least get a W or Audit if they withdraw late, but most schools also provide refunds if you withdraw in the first weeks. This means the individual couldn’t perform the basic unskilled task of withdrawing, something which usually just involves an email but in 2021 is usually done via button click. This doesn’t sound so much like laziness as depression.
judahmeek 5y ago
> It seems fairly clear that the author has a "schtick" or a unique "angle" on social psychology that is being promulgated. You mean they have an opinion based on their research? That's shocking. > As it turns out, they released a book this year called, "Laziness Does Not Exist", three years after this article was written. And that's relevant how? > When a person takes a course twice without ever managing to turn in homework, the situation of the student is not completely to blame, since the student didn't take the time to do something - the work, withdrawing in time, discussing options with the professor, something. See, you're trying to place blame. The author is in the mindset of looking for solutions. He's got my respect.
- exporectomy 5y ago
  It may need neither blame nor solutions. Perhaps they're only there to oggle the hot professor and is achieving their aims perfectly well.
carbonguy 5y ago
> When a person takes a course twice without ever managing to turn in homework, the situation of the student is not completely to blame, since the student didn't take the time to do something - the work, withdrawing in time, discussing options with the professor, something. And yet, any number of other words might legitimately describe the student's behavior - hesitant, confused, indifferent, passive, distracted etc. etc. So, is "lazy" the correct term to use? And if so, why? All that we know about this particular student is that they took a class twice without turning in any assignments! Perhaps they simply enjoyed how the professor lectured and weren't actually interested in getting a degree - though I'll grant that that's a less likely possibility, given the context of the discussion.

by IncRnd 5y ago

CharlesW 5y ago

TFA explains that procrastination is not laziness.

IncRnd 5y ago
> TFA explains that procrastination is not laziness. I didn't say that procrastination is identical with laziness. I did give a direct example drawn from the article showing how a person exhibited laziness. The difference between procrastination and laziness is obvious from their definitions. TFA is not needed to know they differ. Procrastination is postponing something, while laziness is being unwilling to act. But, none of that matters. The blanket assertion is that Laziness Does Not Exist, which is obviously false. There are people who are unwilling to act in certain situations.
- carbonguy 5y ago
  Your original comment starts with: > The author directly stated seeing repeated procrastination in many situations, yet stated that laziness does not exist. This phrasing, with its use of "yet" to contrast procrastination and laziness, strongly implies that from your perspective procrastination IS laziness. So, while you didn't literally say "procrastination is identical with laziness" maybe you can see how you might have given that impression? For what it's worth, I agree with you that the title "Laziness Does Not Exist" is not literally true; "laziness" is a real term that people use to describe behavior, and it "exists" in that sense, at least. Do you feel there is some deeper relevance to the term, though? For example, do you think it's more accurate to say that "laziness" is an inherent character trait that explains behavior, rather than merely describing it?
  - IncRnd 5y ago
    > So, while you didn't literally say "procrastination is identical with laziness" maybe you can see how you might have given that impression? That might be perceived, but only when people pluck phrases and sentences out of content. What you quoted was directly followed by an example of laziness from the article. "The premise of this article is literally founded on intellectual laziness. When a person takes a course twice without ever managing to turn in homework, the situation of the student is not completely to blame, since the student didn't take the time to do something - the work, withdrawing in time, discussing options with the professor, something." > Do you feel there is some deeper relevance to the term, though? For example, do you think it's more accurate to say that "laziness" is an inherent character trait that explains behavior, rather than merely describing it? It is not about how I feel but the meanings of words. Procrastination describes behavior. Laziness can describe an attitude of being unwilling to act but also the behavior of indolence or lack of action.
    - carbonguy 5y ago
      > What you quoted was directly followed by an example of laziness from the article. Well, it was DIRECTLY followed by an assertion of intellectual laziness in the premise of the article, as your quote so helpfully shows. Perhaps if you were a bit less lazy you might have caught that? > It is not about how I feel but the meanings of words. Ah! An interesting assertion, considering that what you have repeatedly described as "an example of laziness" from the article could easily be described in another way, as my other reply to you hints at. For example, we could say it was "stubbornness" [1] or "passivity" [2] or even "dysfunction" [3] with as much justification as you use "laziness." So on what basis do you choose the one, and not another? [1] "the quality of being determined to do what you want and refusing to do anything else" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stubbornness https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stubb... [2]: "the quality of being passive, where "passive" is defined as "not acting to influence or change a situation" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/passive https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/passi... [3]: "a problem or fault in a part of the body or a machine" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dysfunction https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dysfu...

eyelidlessness 5y ago

> procrastination ... laziness I can only speak for my own procrastination, but it is certainly not rooted in anything I would identify as laziness. It’s rooted in my experience of ADHD, and the corresponding anxiety it produces. How can I be so sure? Because I will often go to great effort to avoid minimal-effort tasks. Or I’ll continue an effort that I sense is likely a sunk cost to abandon in favor of a better solution, because I’m determined to see the first effort through. Interestingly (to me), these were major influences on me becoming a programmer. I’m self taught, I didn’t learn to start a career. I thought I would probably work crappy retail jobs and be broke for the rest of my life. I learned to program because there were tasks I would prefer not to do, so I learned how to automate them out of my purview. Work avoidance, it turns out, is a hallmark of the craft. Why put off for tomorrow what can be put off entirely? Is that laziness? A younger me joked that it is along the lines of: I'm a lazy programmer; the good kind of lazy. I no longer see it that way. I see it as one lens among many into my state of mind which ultimately gives me both drive and difficulty—that makes me incredibly effective and also prone to forgetting to do simple chores for weeks at a time. Edit: that said, I wasn’t motivated to get around the paywall, so I have no idea if the article discusses similar concepts making my reply potentially redundant.

IncRnd 5y ago
> I learned to program because there were tasks I would prefer not to do, so I learned how to automate them out of my purview. Work avoidance, it turns out, is a hallmark of the craft. Why put off for tomorrow what can be put off entirely? > Is that laziness? > Edit: that said, I wasn’t motivated to get around the paywall, so I have no idea if the article discusses similar concepts making my reply potentially redundant. Laziness is the quality of not being willing to work or use any effort [1] Lazy: averse or disinclined to work, activity, or exertion; indolent. [2] According to Larry Wall, the original author of the Perl programming language, there are three great virtues of a programmer; Laziness, Impatience and Hubris [3] [1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/laziness https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/lazin... [2] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/laziness https://www.dictionary.com/browse/laziness [3] http://threevirtues.com/ http://threevirtues.com/

ppqqrr 5y ago

The author’s point is that labeling someone as “lazy” is intellectually lazy. Every person, throughout their lives, exhibits behaviors ranging the full spectrum from lazy to diligent. They might be lazy about one thing but diligent about another, all at different times, for reasons others may never find out about. Labeling a person as lazy ignores all of that, and lays judgement based on a specific things the labeler wish the labeled was more diligent about, and at the time of their choosing. It’s entirely subjective, and rarely constructive. Laziness, as a description of a person’s measurable, inherent attributes, is inherently vindictive, intellectually lazy, and generally unhelpful. It’s a way of saying “I give up on you, I don’t want to know your story, and I think you can’t change” without acknowledging your part in that judgement.

IncRnd 5y ago
> The author’s point is that labeling someone as “lazy” is intellectually lazy. The author's directly stated point in the headline, their book, and the article is that laziness "does NOT" exist.
- ppqqrr 5y ago
  Well, headlines be headlines. If you take them literally, they’ll disappoint you.
  - IncRnd 5y ago
    That's kind of a lazy response, since I wrote three places the author directly mentioned their point not just the headline.
    - ppqqrr 5y ago
      Having provoked you so with a daring headline, the author’s ploy is to draw you into their actual writing, in which they will explain the nuances of their arguments. If you cannot be bothered to move past the headlines, you’ll just be provoked. If you’ve read all the text and are still not convinced, you’re entitled to your opinion.

lumost 5y ago

I think that’s the point. There is no reason for a student to get an F twice in a course they paid for without turning in any work. They could at least get a W or Audit if they withdraw late, but most schools also provide refunds if you withdraw in the first weeks. This means the individual couldn’t perform the basic unskilled task of withdrawing, something which usually just involves an email but in 2021 is usually done via button click. This doesn’t sound so much like laziness as depression.

judahmeek 5y ago

> It seems fairly clear that the author has a "schtick" or a unique "angle" on social psychology that is being promulgated. You mean they have an opinion based on their research? That's shocking. > As it turns out, they released a book this year called, "Laziness Does Not Exist", three years after this article was written. And that's relevant how? > When a person takes a course twice without ever managing to turn in homework, the situation of the student is not completely to blame, since the student didn't take the time to do something - the work, withdrawing in time, discussing options with the professor, something. See, you're trying to place blame. The author is in the mindset of looking for solutions. He's got my respect.

exporectomy 5y ago
It may need neither blame nor solutions. Perhaps they're only there to oggle the hot professor and is achieving their aims perfectly well.

carbonguy 5y ago

> When a person takes a course twice without ever managing to turn in homework, the situation of the student is not completely to blame, since the student didn't take the time to do something - the work, withdrawing in time, discussing options with the professor, something. And yet, any number of other words might legitimately describe the student's behavior - hesitant, confused, indifferent, passive, distracted etc. etc. So, is "lazy" the correct term to use? And if so, why? All that we know about this particular student is that they took a class twice without turning in any assignments! Perhaps they simply enjoyed how the professor lectured and weren't actually interested in getting a degree - though I'll grant that that's a less likely possibility, given the context of the discussion.