4 ms·

My reading of the speech (full here[1]), was the opposite of your conclusion. She makes the case that people are naturally passionate about (different) things,

by shubb 13y ago

My reading of the speech (full here[1]), was the opposite of your conclusion. She makes the case that people are naturally passionate about (different) things, and should be free to follow that passion. She makes the case that many jobs could be automated out of existence, if the objective was to free people from the need to work, rather than to perpetuate a status quo that keeps them tired and passive. These are fairly common thoughts, on the new left. I know that in the 1970s in the UK, it was expected labor intensive manufacturing jobs would be replaced by automation, and the government had conferences to decide what to do, to give people purpose without work. As it turned out, the jobs were destroyed, by outsourcing in the 1980s, and a great bulk of service jobs that were unnecessary just a few years before were created to take up the slack. Western economies are hugely over-weighted towards the service sector, but think - in a country where 40% of jobs are industrial, how do they get by with such a low proportion of servants? Does it not follow that those jobs are unnecessary? Isn't it immoral to force people do do them? Shouldn't we recalibrate society so they don't have to? So they can spend more time creating, launching startups, live longer due to earlier retirement? Personally, I'm on the fence on this one. I get a lot of purpose and enjoyment from my job, and not having one takes a huge toll on the unemployed. I find it hard to understand why unemployed friends don't just create jobs for themselves, to provide the self respect they so desperately want. Maybe people need a system that creates jobs for them so they can have a purposeful life. But anyway, the ability conjure up dedication towards a chosen goal? Certainly that would make you a productive god, a robot even, but not (according to the author) a fully realized human. That would require passion. [1]http://americaviaerica.blogspot.com.au/p/speech.html http://americaviaerica.blogspot.com.au/p/speech.html

decasteve 13y ago
When everything is standardized and trained with specificity, as our school system is, we are turning people into automatons. The trouble with automatons is they get automated. We have been moving, for the past 50 years, into an era where there is still a staggering amount of work that needs to be done but there is no singular defined "job" to employ a person from their early 20s until their mid-60s retirement.
- VLM 13y ago
  This is the classic "education" vs "training" argument. For a variety of weird political/cultural/doublespeak reasons we're not allowed to discuss the difference, they're supposed to be synonyms. However, an education lasts a lifetime and gives meaning to life and a lifetime of interesting things to think about, and ways to think. Job training is just a meal ticket. You can guess which philosophies applied in pre-industrial vs modern K-12 .edu and which applied in pre-tuition bubble and post-tuition bubble university .edu in the USA. There is quite an impedance bump going from HS senior to Univ Freshman because of this conversion from pure training automaton setting to at least still partially an educational setting.
Dylan16807 13y ago
What's the difference between passion and true dedication? I would have said there wasn't one.
- shubb 13y ago
  I meant that dedication is when you make yourself do something in order to achieve a goal, while passion is doing that thing for it's own sake. That's what I think the girl meant. Which is the opposite of what the GP was talking about. Clearly, doing anything significant requires dedication - you aren't going to enjoy every moment. And people become passionate about whatever they do. Or they have passion for the goal they are dedicated to. The contradiction is artificial. But I can see that, if the speaker felt like her life was full of dedication, without passion, she'd feel very unfulfilled.

by shubb 13y ago

decasteve 13y ago

When everything is standardized and trained with specificity, as our school system is, we are turning people into automatons. The trouble with automatons is they get automated. We have been moving, for the past 50 years, into an era where there is still a staggering amount of work that needs to be done but there is no singular defined "job" to employ a person from their early 20s until their mid-60s retirement.

VLM 13y ago
This is the classic "education" vs "training" argument. For a variety of weird political/cultural/doublespeak reasons we're not allowed to discuss the difference, they're supposed to be synonyms. However, an education lasts a lifetime and gives meaning to life and a lifetime of interesting things to think about, and ways to think. Job training is just a meal ticket. You can guess which philosophies applied in pre-industrial vs modern K-12 .edu and which applied in pre-tuition bubble and post-tuition bubble university .edu in the USA. There is quite an impedance bump going from HS senior to Univ Freshman because of this conversion from pure training automaton setting to at least still partially an educational setting.

Dylan16807 13y ago

What's the difference between passion and true dedication? I would have said there wasn't one.

shubb 13y ago
I meant that dedication is when you make yourself do something in order to achieve a goal, while passion is doing that thing for it's own sake. That's what I think the girl meant. Which is the opposite of what the GP was talking about. Clearly, doing anything significant requires dedication - you aren't going to enjoy every moment. And people become passionate about whatever they do. Or they have passion for the goal they are dedicated to. The contradiction is artificial. But I can see that, if the speaker felt like her life was full of dedication, without passion, she'd feel very unfulfilled.