3 ms·

Certainly exists, though I think it's the minority. It's generally not difficult to tell who is happy or not from their choices, too, and I suspect in such case

by beaned 3y ago

Certainly exists, though I think it's the minority. It's generally not difficult to tell who is happy or not from their choices, too, and I suspect in such cases the scenario may be reversed. E.g. the graphic designer who is content in life, entertaining the stressed account manager with curiosity. This is also the vision of ourselves we love to see in stories and movies, since it associates low income with passion and success with unhappiness, even though you can have both (or neither).

wolverine876 3y ago
> I think it's the minority "I think ...' is not a supporting argument for 'I think ...'. It's probably a bit circular. I think moonbeams on Neptune are made of silver, but why should anyone else think so?
- beaned 3y ago
  I think it's a little disingenuous to make a comparison so extreme, but I guess I'd just ask why that theme seems so popular. Money doesn't make you happy, it's true. But there's a reason it's always presented as a dichotomy. It placates the masses.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    > I think it's a little disingenuous to make a comparison so extreme If you mean the moonbeams, it was meant to lighten things up a bit. Sorry that didn't come through. > Money doesn't make you happy, it's true. But there's a reason it's always presented as a dichotomy. It placates the masses. I'm a bit lost on how that applies to artists who choose the tradeoff between making their art and wealth.
    - beaned 3y ago
      Contentment with one's lot in life is easier to fake than income. These stories are popular because they provide a fantasy outlet for people who work hard but are unhappy, to justify their choices by villainizing the path not taken. It is a form of therapy. This therapy would not be needed if the general sentiment of those who pursue careers that many in this thread call "prestige" were actually fulfilling. In reality they are (on average) less fulfilling than simply having any somewhat high-paying job that offers security for oneself and one's family. There are of course exceptions for people who are true artists, who could not live if their soul was not developed through creative work. But again, they are the minority. The "prestige" we allot to very average jobs is superficial, a social formality we perform as polite society because we perceive it as needless to have people constantly reminded that they did not achieve as much as they could have.
      - wolverine876 3y ago
        > These stories are popular I don't see them much, nor does my comment match this story, nor did I post it because of some popularity. > they are (on average) less fulfilling than simply having any somewhat high-paying job that offers security for oneself and one's family. That's a misleading comparison: If you hold all other variables stable, of course a higher-paying job is better. But all other variables aren't stable; we need to make trade-offs. Your argument so far is that somehow the choice you would make must be the choice that would make most people happier. Also, you've provided no basis for saying that most would prefer or do better one way or another. > a social formality we perform as polite society because we perceive it as needless to have people constantly reminded that they did not achieve as much as they could have. They did achieve, but different things on a different scale. It's like a basketball player saying that a hockey player, not having a good jump shot, didn't achieve as much as they could have. They are playing different games. People in 'polite society' - i.e., people who made choices like yours - tend to have the narrow-minded belief that theirs is ipso facto the preferred way. It's especially a bias of people following a social norm - nothing challenges their belief, the norm supports it. I can't read your mind, but that seems to be the basis of your argument. Speaking as someone outside a significant social norm, it's as if one day I made a 90 deg right turn off the highway and hit the accelerator. I am going far and fast; people still on the highway say, 'they're not getting anywhere'. It's annoying and a bit isolating; it's a trade-off but that's the choice I preferred, and there's not a moment's doubt in my mind about my direction. In fact, I think many of them would benefit from joining me (or taking their own roads), but 99% can't imagine a world outside their social norms, they can't see there's anything on the landscape but that one narrow highway. What a fool I would be, what a waste it would be, to let their reactions dictate my life.
      - corethree 3y ago
        It's not just a social formality. A lot of people buy into it. It's wierd. It's a sort of lie told to ourselves. If a person lies to themselves basically it means that part of them believes in the lie, and another part of them knows the truth. Everyone at least has one lie they tell themselves so you can sort of relate. Everyone and I mean everyone is aware of the social formality you're talking about. There's literally no need to spell it out because you're just regurgitating truths that are obvious and self evident. The only time you would need to spell it out is when you encounter a poor soul who lies to himself. That's why my post was sarcastic because it's so obviously not true. Rich people do not actually respect poor people... it's absurd. Anyway as for lying to one self... This is exactly what wolverine is doing. There's no winning here. That person will continuously construct a scaffold of rational points to support his beliefs because not doing so results in some sort of admission he can't directly face. But even so... an aspect of him knows you're telling the actual truth.

by beaned 3y ago

wolverine876 3y ago

> I think it's the minority "I think ...' is not a supporting argument for 'I think ...'. It's probably a bit circular. I think moonbeams on Neptune are made of silver, but why should anyone else think so?

beaned 3y ago
I think it's a little disingenuous to make a comparison so extreme, but I guess I'd just ask why that theme seems so popular. Money doesn't make you happy, it's true. But there's a reason it's always presented as a dichotomy. It placates the masses.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > I think it's a little disingenuous to make a comparison so extreme If you mean the moonbeams, it was meant to lighten things up a bit. Sorry that didn't come through. > Money doesn't make you happy, it's true. But there's a reason it's always presented as a dichotomy. It placates the masses. I'm a bit lost on how that applies to artists who choose the tradeoff between making their art and wealth.
  - beaned 3y ago
    Contentment with one's lot in life is easier to fake than income. These stories are popular because they provide a fantasy outlet for people who work hard but are unhappy, to justify their choices by villainizing the path not taken. It is a form of therapy. This therapy would not be needed if the general sentiment of those who pursue careers that many in this thread call "prestige" were actually fulfilling. In reality they are (on average) less fulfilling than simply having any somewhat high-paying job that offers security for oneself and one's family. There are of course exceptions for people who are true artists, who could not live if their soul was not developed through creative work. But again, they are the minority. The "prestige" we allot to very average jobs is superficial, a social formality we perform as polite society because we perceive it as needless to have people constantly reminded that they did not achieve as much as they could have.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      > These stories are popular I don't see them much, nor does my comment match this story, nor did I post it because of some popularity. > they are (on average) less fulfilling than simply having any somewhat high-paying job that offers security for oneself and one's family. That's a misleading comparison: If you hold all other variables stable, of course a higher-paying job is better. But all other variables aren't stable; we need to make trade-offs. Your argument so far is that somehow the choice you would make must be the choice that would make most people happier. Also, you've provided no basis for saying that most would prefer or do better one way or another. > a social formality we perform as polite society because we perceive it as needless to have people constantly reminded that they did not achieve as much as they could have. They did achieve, but different things on a different scale. It's like a basketball player saying that a hockey player, not having a good jump shot, didn't achieve as much as they could have. They are playing different games. People in 'polite society' - i.e., people who made choices like yours - tend to have the narrow-minded belief that theirs is ipso facto the preferred way. It's especially a bias of people following a social norm - nothing challenges their belief, the norm supports it. I can't read your mind, but that seems to be the basis of your argument. Speaking as someone outside a significant social norm, it's as if one day I made a 90 deg right turn off the highway and hit the accelerator. I am going far and fast; people still on the highway say, 'they're not getting anywhere'. It's annoying and a bit isolating; it's a trade-off but that's the choice I preferred, and there's not a moment's doubt in my mind about my direction. In fact, I think many of them would benefit from joining me (or taking their own roads), but 99% can't imagine a world outside their social norms, they can't see there's anything on the landscape but that one narrow highway. What a fool I would be, what a waste it would be, to let their reactions dictate my life.
    - corethree 3y ago
      It's not just a social formality. A lot of people buy into it. It's wierd. It's a sort of lie told to ourselves. If a person lies to themselves basically it means that part of them believes in the lie, and another part of them knows the truth. Everyone at least has one lie they tell themselves so you can sort of relate. Everyone and I mean everyone is aware of the social formality you're talking about. There's literally no need to spell it out because you're just regurgitating truths that are obvious and self evident. The only time you would need to spell it out is when you encounter a poor soul who lies to himself. That's why my post was sarcastic because it's so obviously not true. Rich people do not actually respect poor people... it's absurd. Anyway as for lying to one self... This is exactly what wolverine is doing. There's no winning here. That person will continuously construct a scaffold of rational points to support his beliefs because not doing so results in some sort of admission he can't directly face. But even so... an aspect of him knows you're telling the actual truth.