29 ms·

Bertrand Russell: In Praise of Idleness (1932)

300 points by kamaal 13y ago

kyberias 13y ago
I'm way too lazy while idling to read this. tl;dr?
- kamaal 13y ago
  As automation increases and we have machines do most of our work. We don't seem to put that saved time into leisure. We rather seem to use that saved time to do more work. Humans aren't too happy with every one getting the same, even if that is sufficient for every one's sustenance. We inevitable use our time to buy things that distinguish us from other fellow humans. The theme was also propagated in the novel 1984,concept of equality among humans was/is going to be a big disaster.
  - arethuza 13y ago
    From what I recall of the Party in 1984 (at least the Inner Party) they had no illusions about them holding power to benefit anyone else: "The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know what no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power." [NB I find the natural antidote to this to be the speech from the end of The Great Dictator http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IvPIWzQcUY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IvPIWzQcUY]
    - kamaal 13y ago
      The problem with 'holding power' is you also need submission from the masses or at least need to keep them in order. There is never ever going to be a period of time in the human history, there was none in the past, nor will there be in the future where we shall attain peaceful uniform equality among humans. The very concept is against our very internal wiring. Equality means, every one gets the same regardless of their efforts in getting it. This is a very strange concept, and the human understanding of motivation rejects it. Those who contribute more, always assume they need to get proportional to their effort(which is justice), those who contribute less or nothing at all feel they are entitled to get the same as everyone because they think equality is justice. Net result? The hard working no longer feel motivated to contribute, or worse move else where where they feel they will better rewarded. The situation in the system worsens with no one building anything of real value, while expecting to get the same. That's how socialists and communists systems across the world have collapsed over time. Secondly, war will be perpetual state in which humans will live for many ages to come. In fact this too was discussed in pretty detail in 1984. War is basically an activity that destroys human effort, so that there is room to create more and more of it. That will ultimately be the only way in which more goods can be created and consumed. Unless of course in the far future we colonize universe to an extent there is far too much space for us to interfere. Just like the very very early humans on earth.
      - circlefavshape 13y ago
        "There is never ever going to be a period of time in the human history, there was none in the past, nor will there be in the future where we shall attain peaceful uniform equality among humans" This is simply not true. Hunter-gatherer societies are typically egalitarian, and our species has subsisted by hunting and gathering for the vast majority of its existence.
        haihaibye 13y ago
        In the tribe there was inequality of status (eg best hunters) and mate choice. Between tribes there was inequality of where to live, or living at all due to border clashes, raids etc
  - AimHere 13y ago
    >The theme was also propagated in the novel 1984,concept of equality among humans was/is going to be a big disaster. Not at all. If you want to mention an anti-egalitarian novel, Harrison Bergeron is probably the one to pick. Orwell was very definitely big on equality and socialism - In one of his essays, circa World War 2, he even proposed a maximum wage! 1984 was largely a critique of Stalinist totalitarianism (and post-war British austerity) rather than a criticism of socialism itself. In fact, one of his problems with Stalin (as well as the previously-mentioned totalitarianism) was that Stalin was a counterrevolutionary who crushed the egalitarian revolution going on in Spain during the Civil war - Orwell was fighting alongside a Trotskyite militia at the time and recounted his ideas in Homage to Catalonia. Orwell was to the left of Stalin, if anything. Orwell's socialism is certainitely the main thread throughout all of his work, but unfortunately his two most famous works - Animal Farm and 1984 - because they happen to be attacks on the Soviet Communist Party, are often erroneously read as attacks on socialism.
    - acheron 13y ago
      Orwell's main target seemed to be those who "corrupted" what he felt were the originally good ideas/intentions of socialism (Stalin in particular), with the result that people were left worse off (or, at best, no better) afterwards than they had been before socialism. Whether such "corruption" is inevitable or not... given his other writings, Orwell would have said no, but readers can have their own opinions.
  - aleh 13y ago
    > Humans aren't too happy with every one getting the same. > We inevitable use our time to buy things that distinguish us from other fellow humans. IMHO this is cultural, not biological phenomenon. In developed countries, especially US, people are pretty much being brainwashed to 'think different and buy X'. Yes, inequality is inevitable to some extent, however it is often artificially promoted for its own sake.
RyanMcGreal 13y ago
> If so, I shall not have lived in vain. Notwithstanding that small matter of formally defining the logical foundations of all mathematics.
- keithpeter 13y ago
  Well, having a good bash at that particular problem. Not sure if Russell and Whitehead actually succeeded. "Work is of two kinds: first, altering the position of matter at or near the earth's surface relatively to other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The first kind is unpleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid." I've always liked that quote.
  - singularity2001 13y ago
    third, telling computers what to do, which is partly unpleasant but highly paid.
  - TeMPOraL 13y ago
    How does programming fit into this? It feels a bit in-between. On the one hand, you tell the computer what to do, in a way that feels similar to Type 2; on the other hand, you actually have to do the work of programming, which feels much like Type 1, except you're not moving physical matter around, but stuff in 'concept space'.
    - benched 13y ago
      In all seriousness, I've long thought of what I do as moving electrons around, getting pits onto CDs in the right place, things like that. Whatever I do in, say, C++-land, is a means to those ends. An intermediate step. I arrived at that way of thinking after trying to define 'work', and deciding that it always consists of moving matter around (transporting it, putting it into a desired configuration).
      - TeMPOraL 13y ago
        Interesting conclusion. However, notice that most of the energy (in thermodynamical sense) in this "work" is not spent on moving electrons in the computer around, nor even in the C++-land, but in concept-space. We do our work by building castles in the air out of abstract mental structures, and only then we formalize it in code that moves electrons around. When I look at the end results of work, I come to the same conclusion that indeed it ultimately consists of reconfiguring matter. That's what we need to do to reach whatever goals we have. Maybe the conceptspace work maps to the levels of intricacy of the end-result matter configuration, i.e. the more complex, precise thing you want to get, the more energy you need to expend on thinking rather than arranging atoms. It's easier to move a ton of bricks from one place to another than to design a microprocessor. So I guess that ultimately I agree with your comment. (disclaimer: writing this after two beers)
parasight 13y ago
It is rather strange. More and more things of everyday life are automated and computerized. Nevertheless, I have the impression to have less and less time to do all the things I want/need to do.
- Swizec 13y ago
  I have noticed the same. Then I remembered the internet makes my day feel like running with a parachute. Sure, I could just get up and go make lunch when I'm hungry. But I could also just refresh HN first. I think it takes a second, it actually takes 10 minutes. Especially if I reply to something. Sure I could just get home from exercise and start working. But I can also check out imgur and twitter first. I feel liek it takes 5 minutes, but it's actually half an hour. I have all this leisure time that I am being leisurely, but it doesn't feel leisurely. It feels like a rush to quickly pack more stuff in between work.
  - kamaal 13y ago
    >>I have all this leisure time that I am being leisurely, but it doesn't feel leisurely. This happens to me too. I wonder its because we are using the same tools for work and leisure. I would describe leisure as going out and playing a sport, or playing a musical instrument, or <add non computer hobby here>. I am now thinking we are confused between leisure and procrastination.
    - Swizec 13y ago
      > I am now thinking we are confused between leisure and procrastination. It's even simpler than that. We're addicted to the instant gratification of easily digestible information packets. Humans like to be informed and we innately think this is valuable, even when it isn't.
      - eniacpx 13y ago
        Your last sentence is on the money, and the reason people "enjoy" using Facebook.
hownottowrite 13y ago
Anyone looking for more praise of idleness should look into the works of Tom Hodgkinson. How to Be Idle is particularly brilliant.
- richtr 13y ago
  Here's the 5 minute summary: http://www.wikisummaries.org/How_To_Be_Idle http://www.wikisummaries.org/How_To_Be_Idle
  - hownottowrite 13y ago
    This book is less about being a guide and more about learning how to experience the world at a human speed. The chapters are just guide-points or koans.
  - smacktoward 13y ago
    The irony of only having time to read a Cliff's Notes version of a book called "How To Be Idle" is truly sublime.
- badman_ting 13y ago
  I think that book ruined my life, albeit in a very enjoyable manner.
computerJanitor 13y ago
"...there is no reason to go on being foolish forever."
- Draiken 13y ago
  Except there are... Reasons that are not ours, but for those who control us.
gbog 13y ago
I was half through and I suddenly had a click in my head, thought this was written by pg. Same clean and efficient style, same nakedness without any philosophical scaffolding, while being bullet tracing a straight line through many philosophical stand points. Two very clairvoyant minds. Let's go back reading.
gbog 13y ago
There is this thing about ancient China: each son, when his father died, had to mourn for three years. Yes, three years. And it meant stopping your official occupation, e.g. official employment. (This didn't apply to the peasant). Result: most of the great products of Chinese culture are a direct consequence of this forced idleness.
- jonahss 13y ago
  Could you provide a source for this conclusion? I'm interested in the idea, but can't find anything on it.
  - gbog 13y ago
    It has been mentioned in Essays on China by Simon Leys (I read it in French).
- padobson 13y ago
  Here's something sort of related in Deuteronomy 24:5 - If a man has recently married, he must not be sent to war or have any other duty laid on him. For one year he is to be free to stay at home and bring happiness to the wife he has married How much of the rest of the Bible came out of obeying that law, I wonder?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- AimHere 13y ago
  >The number one economic fallacy is this: he claims that doing a job, all other things being equal, removes bread from someone elses mouth. This is 100% false. Russell agrees with you, through the medium of sarcasm and reductio ad absurdum: >If this argument were valid, it would only be necessary for us all to be idle in order that we should all have our mouths full of bread. He prefixes citing the argument with: >Before advancing my own arguments for laziness, I must dispose of one which I cannot accept. in case you don't get the sarcasm.
- Aqueous 13y ago
  No. He says he 'cannot accept' that argument: 'Before advancing my own arguments for laziness, I must dispose of one which I cannot accept.'
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
sandeepspatil 13y ago
"borrowing made it appear as if the future was nourishing the present"
volume 13y ago
I wonder what Bertrand Russell would say about Undercover Cop. If only he were alive today and given the chance to produce his on reality tv show. I wonder what that would be like?
imarg 13y ago
Of a similar thinking is, I suppose, "The Right to Be Lazy" by Paul Lafargue. I read it some time ago and if I remember correctly he believed that there isn't/wasn't any need to work more than 3 hours a day because of the technological advances of the time (and to think this was in 1883!) After a quick search I found it is available online at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/lafargue/1883/lazy/ http://www.marxists.org/archive/lafargue/1883/lazy/
- foobarqux 13y ago
  "Quitting the Paint Factory" is another good essay on the theme but is marred by an atopical discussion of George Bush. http://paulbe.dreamwidth.org/961.html http://paulbe.dreamwidth.org/961.html
- ludwigvan 13y ago
  Trivia: Lafargue was Marx's daughter's husband.
  - kungfooguru 13y ago
    Trivia: And one of the people Marx was referring to when he said that if they are Marxists then "what is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist."
_nullandnull_ 13y ago
I recently stumbled upon a great graphic comic (mostly factual) about Betrand Russell and his life. I'd highly recommend it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logicomix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logicomix
leejoramo 13y ago
As wikipedia notes on Bertrand Russell: > His work has had a considerable influence on logic, mathematics, set theory, linguistics, artificial intelligence, computer science (see type theory and type system), and philosophy, especially philosophy of language, epistemology, and metaphysics. Plus he won the Nobel Prize in Literature! For a very approachable overview of Russell's complex life, I highly recommend the graphic novel "Logicomix" http://www.logicomix.com/ http://www.logicomix.com/ Then you will certainly find yourself wanting to learn more about this amazing person.
- samograd 13y ago
  For a very approachable view of Russel's thoughts and work, you can try reading his own writing: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/355 http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/355 My personal favourite so far has been 'Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays' with 'Analysis of Mind' currently at the top of my reading queue. Not everything he did was like reading 'Principia Mathematica' and his writing is very open, readable and eloquent.
  - leejoramo 13y ago
    Thanks for that link to Gutenberg. Adding those essays to my reading list.
  - angrow 13y ago
    > Whoever contemplates the world in the light of an ideal--whether what he seeks be intellect, or art, or love, or simple happiness, or all together--must feel a great sorrow in the evils that men needlessly allow to continue, and--if he be a man of force and vital energy--an urgent desire to lead men to the realization of the good which inspires his creative vision. "Proposed Roads to Freedom" is my pick for number one.
  - mercer 13y ago
    I liked a bunch of the essays I read by him, and loved "A History of Western Philosophy". I'm well aware (and felt his writing made it obvious enough) that it is not necessarily a 'accurate' history of philosophy, but it was a great book with a great approach.
benhirashima 13y ago
there's a great book in the same vein, How to be Idle. http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Idle-Manifesto-ebook/dp/B00DB3FUS0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1381245066&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+be+idle http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Idle-Manifesto-ebook/dp/B00DB3F...
ashutoshm 13y ago
and now for something completely different http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k799LiPqu2g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k799LiPqu2g [Bertie in Bollywood]
CaptainSwing 13y ago
There is a great deal of anarchist and libertarian communist literature critiquing the modern concept of work, notably Russian anarchist Kropotkin's book 'the conquest of bread' originally written in around 1906. http://libcom.org/library/the-conquest-of-bread-peter-kropotkin http://libcom.org/library/the-conquest-of-bread-peter-kropot...
yankoff 13y ago
I wonder how much Mr. Russel was idle himself having written on average 2 books per year throughout his life and significantly contributing on so many levels.
padobson 13y ago
The method of a leisure class without duties was, however, extraordinarily wasteful. None of the members of the class had to be taught to be industrious, and the class as a whole was not exceptionally intelligent. The class might produce one Darwin, but against him had to be set tens of thousands of country gentlemen who never thought of anything more intelligent than fox-hunting and punishing poachers. I'm down. We should be massively ramping up the amount of leisure time in our society so that we, as a society, never miss out on a potential Darwin or Lincoln or Jesus or whomever. How many world-changing, mental giants have we missed out on because they couldn't free their minds from working 40+ hours a week?
- npsimons 13y ago
  Well, apart from that last fictional character who has arguably brought more harm than good through his ideas (and arguably through them being misinterpreted), I'm all down with that.
  - shrikant 13y ago
    Actually, Jesus himself isn't fictional and his existence is pretty much agreed upon as a historical fact.[1] It's the details of his activities in the New Testament and various Gospels that are hotly debated. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus (use this as a starting point for further citations..) /pedant mode off.
    - innguest 13y ago
      Absolutely wrong. If you have evidence that this character existed, please point to it more specifically than a whole Wikipedia article. Nothing about "Jesus" is hotly debated because there isn't a single mention of a "Jesus" in any believable document to begin with. This is not the place to discuss, but I didn't want your wrong message to be the end of it.
- Draiken 13y ago
  The problem is the decision to do this is never in the hands of the wage-earners... Only the powerful and rich can really change this reality, and it's clearly not aligned with their interests.
padobson 13y ago
I have to say there's a good chance that society is already moving toward Russell's ideal. If you just look at accelerators like YCombinator, you'll see that two successful startups (Dropbox and AirBnb) are by-and-large paying for the investment of the other several hundred startups several times over. So when will we see it going to the next level? Gather a bunch of people together, using whatever criteria you see fit, and tell them to do whatever they want. Pay for their room and board, and see what is produced from their complete leisure time. If the produce of that investment was one of the individuals simply having an idea on the scale of something like "Democracy" or "Altruism", wouldn't it be completely worth it if the other individuals never did anything more than eat, sleep, and play video games?
- VLM 13y ago
  We called those "housing projects" and they were not exactly a paradise to live in. Superficially need some minimal level of education/civilization. Which merely excludes those bored by formal education, most of whom are idiots and a small fraction of them are geniuses. For lack of a better idea you could use some weighted GPA/IQ/GRE/SAT/ACT score system. Assuming the smartest people are those who come up with the best ideas. It does seem that to spread an idea you need a smart dude but a think tank should hire marketing people for that? Perhaps a lotto would work just as well for selection. A lotto instead of elections would likely give us a superior government, perhaps it would give us superior ideas on average. Another interesting example is the Institute for Advanced Studies nearby Princeton, I think. You might want to examine whats been produced there.
- anjc 13y ago
  Surely YCombinator and startup culture is the antithesis of what Russell is talking about as being desirable? The legions of burned out coders would probably not equate crunch time with leisure time.
enduser 13y ago
There are a number of beautiful places in the United States where it is possible for a person to subsist quite luxuriously on $1200/mo and preserve the ability to throw parties for friends, buy books and tools, etc. As of January a person with such income will have free Medicare in Oregon. "Fuck You" money is an illusion that keeps you working. The mind loves to believe that having enough of some external thing will give us control, safety, or whatever we most fear the lack of. It isn't true. A man with with excess money is absorbed in concerns of what to do with it and is hardly free. He might be able to say "fuck you" to people, but he can't say "fuck you" to money. Freedom is measured by the scarcity of our concerns. And happiness, perhaps, by closeness with people to whom we need never say "fuck you" because we love them and accept them fully.
- theunixbeard 13y ago
  Any specific recommendations? I've seen Eugene, Boise, Flagstaff, and Albuquerque thrown around on HN before but I'd like to hear your thoughts.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - mimiflynn 13y ago
    Eugene is in Oregon with the free medicaid. ABQ is my favorite, though. I hear great things about Boise, especially if you are into river sports.
    - ImprovedSilence 13y ago
      Boise is flippin fantastic. I say this as someone from the Northeast who never gave a state like Idaho a second (or even first) thought. I like being close to family (here on east coast), but if I was picking one place in the US to live based on cost of living and awesome things to do, with amazingly beautiful women, awesome outdoor activity, coupled with good urban lifestyle, Boise would be IT. Also a decent tech/software scene I hear. Just look at what $400k will buy you. It's outta this world, plus you're in an awesome location (right at the base of the Rockies).
myth_drannon 13y ago
On the same note I would like to add another related and a great article: The Quality of life http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2013/07/31/the-quality-of-life/ http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2013/07/31/the-quality-of-life/
pvdm 13y ago
He also wrote "Conquest of Happiness".
pjdorrell 13y ago
"If he merely puts his savings in a stocking, like the proverbial French peasant, it is obvious that they do not give employment." What is "obvious" to Bertrand Russell is bad economics. When the peasant puts his money in a stocking, he causes a slight deflation, so prices decrease, which increases the value of everyone else's money. So everyone else effectively has more to spend, if they want to. However, everyone else would be prudent to assume that the peasant will eventually spend his money, which will correspondingly cause prices to rise again. It might seem that an earlier gain is offset by a later loss. But, those who benefit from the slight deflation can choose to invest the increased value of their monetary holdings into industry. At a later time, when the peasant decides to spend his money, the products of that industry will be ready for purchase. Thus, with nothing more than surplus cash and a stocking, the peasant has driven investment in industry, productive employment, and long-term growth in the wealth of society, the benefits of which he has foregone since he chose not to seek a return of interest on his savings.
- wintersFright 13y ago
  Keep in mind this was 1932 when there was the gold standard. Inflation was more volatile then and was -10% (minus!) according to http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/usa-historical-inflation-rate?start-year=1915&end-year=1932 http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/usa-historical-i...
- philwelch 13y ago
  That's not how deflation works. If it was, it would be far less painful.
kevgnulldev 13y ago
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell
00rion 13y ago
I notice that nobody has related this to the Swiss proposal to provide a basic income for all adults. If it works there, I wonder if other countries will move in that direction.

300 points by kamaal 13y ago

kyberias 13y ago

I'm way too lazy while idling to read this. tl;dr?

kamaal 13y ago
As automation increases and we have machines do most of our work. We don't seem to put that saved time into leisure. We rather seem to use that saved time to do more work. Humans aren't too happy with every one getting the same, even if that is sufficient for every one's sustenance. We inevitable use our time to buy things that distinguish us from other fellow humans. The theme was also propagated in the novel 1984,concept of equality among humans was/is going to be a big disaster.
- arethuza 13y ago
  From what I recall of the Party in 1984 (at least the Inner Party) they had no illusions about them holding power to benefit anyone else: "The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know what no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power." [NB I find the natural antidote to this to be the speech from the end of The Great Dictator http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IvPIWzQcUY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IvPIWzQcUY]
  - kamaal 13y ago
    The problem with 'holding power' is you also need submission from the masses or at least need to keep them in order. There is never ever going to be a period of time in the human history, there was none in the past, nor will there be in the future where we shall attain peaceful uniform equality among humans. The very concept is against our very internal wiring. Equality means, every one gets the same regardless of their efforts in getting it. This is a very strange concept, and the human understanding of motivation rejects it. Those who contribute more, always assume they need to get proportional to their effort(which is justice), those who contribute less or nothing at all feel they are entitled to get the same as everyone because they think equality is justice. Net result? The hard working no longer feel motivated to contribute, or worse move else where where they feel they will better rewarded. The situation in the system worsens with no one building anything of real value, while expecting to get the same. That's how socialists and communists systems across the world have collapsed over time. Secondly, war will be perpetual state in which humans will live for many ages to come. In fact this too was discussed in pretty detail in 1984. War is basically an activity that destroys human effort, so that there is room to create more and more of it. That will ultimately be the only way in which more goods can be created and consumed. Unless of course in the far future we colonize universe to an extent there is far too much space for us to interfere. Just like the very very early humans on earth.
    - circlefavshape 13y ago
      "There is never ever going to be a period of time in the human history, there was none in the past, nor will there be in the future where we shall attain peaceful uniform equality among humans" This is simply not true. Hunter-gatherer societies are typically egalitarian, and our species has subsisted by hunting and gathering for the vast majority of its existence.
      - haihaibye 13y ago
        In the tribe there was inequality of status (eg best hunters) and mate choice. Between tribes there was inequality of where to live, or living at all due to border clashes, raids etc
- AimHere 13y ago
  >The theme was also propagated in the novel 1984,concept of equality among humans was/is going to be a big disaster. Not at all. If you want to mention an anti-egalitarian novel, Harrison Bergeron is probably the one to pick. Orwell was very definitely big on equality and socialism - In one of his essays, circa World War 2, he even proposed a maximum wage! 1984 was largely a critique of Stalinist totalitarianism (and post-war British austerity) rather than a criticism of socialism itself. In fact, one of his problems with Stalin (as well as the previously-mentioned totalitarianism) was that Stalin was a counterrevolutionary who crushed the egalitarian revolution going on in Spain during the Civil war - Orwell was fighting alongside a Trotskyite militia at the time and recounted his ideas in Homage to Catalonia. Orwell was to the left of Stalin, if anything. Orwell's socialism is certainitely the main thread throughout all of his work, but unfortunately his two most famous works - Animal Farm and 1984 - because they happen to be attacks on the Soviet Communist Party, are often erroneously read as attacks on socialism.
  - acheron 13y ago
    Orwell's main target seemed to be those who "corrupted" what he felt were the originally good ideas/intentions of socialism (Stalin in particular), with the result that people were left worse off (or, at best, no better) afterwards than they had been before socialism. Whether such "corruption" is inevitable or not... given his other writings, Orwell would have said no, but readers can have their own opinions.
- aleh 13y ago
  > Humans aren't too happy with every one getting the same. > We inevitable use our time to buy things that distinguish us from other fellow humans. IMHO this is cultural, not biological phenomenon. In developed countries, especially US, people are pretty much being brainwashed to 'think different and buy X'. Yes, inequality is inevitable to some extent, however it is often artificially promoted for its own sake.

RyanMcGreal 13y ago

> If so, I shall not have lived in vain. Notwithstanding that small matter of formally defining the logical foundations of all mathematics.

keithpeter 13y ago
Well, having a good bash at that particular problem. Not sure if Russell and Whitehead actually succeeded. "Work is of two kinds: first, altering the position of matter at or near the earth's surface relatively to other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The first kind is unpleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid." I've always liked that quote.
- singularity2001 13y ago
  third, telling computers what to do, which is partly unpleasant but highly paid.
- TeMPOraL 13y ago
  How does programming fit into this? It feels a bit in-between. On the one hand, you tell the computer what to do, in a way that feels similar to Type 2; on the other hand, you actually have to do the work of programming, which feels much like Type 1, except you're not moving physical matter around, but stuff in 'concept space'.
  - benched 13y ago
    In all seriousness, I've long thought of what I do as moving electrons around, getting pits onto CDs in the right place, things like that. Whatever I do in, say, C++-land, is a means to those ends. An intermediate step. I arrived at that way of thinking after trying to define 'work', and deciding that it always consists of moving matter around (transporting it, putting it into a desired configuration).
    - TeMPOraL 13y ago
      Interesting conclusion. However, notice that most of the energy (in thermodynamical sense) in this "work" is not spent on moving electrons in the computer around, nor even in the C++-land, but in concept-space. We do our work by building castles in the air out of abstract mental structures, and only then we formalize it in code that moves electrons around. When I look at the end results of work, I come to the same conclusion that indeed it ultimately consists of reconfiguring matter. That's what we need to do to reach whatever goals we have. Maybe the conceptspace work maps to the levels of intricacy of the end-result matter configuration, i.e. the more complex, precise thing you want to get, the more energy you need to expend on thinking rather than arranging atoms. It's easier to move a ton of bricks from one place to another than to design a microprocessor. So I guess that ultimately I agree with your comment. (disclaimer: writing this after two beers)

parasight 13y ago

It is rather strange. More and more things of everyday life are automated and computerized. Nevertheless, I have the impression to have less and less time to do all the things I want/need to do.

Swizec 13y ago
I have noticed the same. Then I remembered the internet makes my day feel like running with a parachute. Sure, I could just get up and go make lunch when I'm hungry. But I could also just refresh HN first. I think it takes a second, it actually takes 10 minutes. Especially if I reply to something. Sure I could just get home from exercise and start working. But I can also check out imgur and twitter first. I feel liek it takes 5 minutes, but it's actually half an hour. I have all this leisure time that I am being leisurely, but it doesn't feel leisurely. It feels like a rush to quickly pack more stuff in between work.
- kamaal 13y ago
  >>I have all this leisure time that I am being leisurely, but it doesn't feel leisurely. This happens to me too. I wonder its because we are using the same tools for work and leisure. I would describe leisure as going out and playing a sport, or playing a musical instrument, or <add non computer hobby here>. I am now thinking we are confused between leisure and procrastination.
  - Swizec 13y ago
    > I am now thinking we are confused between leisure and procrastination. It's even simpler than that. We're addicted to the instant gratification of easily digestible information packets. Humans like to be informed and we innately think this is valuable, even when it isn't.
    - eniacpx 13y ago
      Your last sentence is on the money, and the reason people "enjoy" using Facebook.

hownottowrite 13y ago

Anyone looking for more praise of idleness should look into the works of Tom Hodgkinson. How to Be Idle is particularly brilliant.

richtr 13y ago
Here's the 5 minute summary: http://www.wikisummaries.org/How_To_Be_Idle http://www.wikisummaries.org/How_To_Be_Idle
- hownottowrite 13y ago
  This book is less about being a guide and more about learning how to experience the world at a human speed. The chapters are just guide-points or koans.
- smacktoward 13y ago
  The irony of only having time to read a Cliff's Notes version of a book called "How To Be Idle" is truly sublime.
badman_ting 13y ago
I think that book ruined my life, albeit in a very enjoyable manner.

computerJanitor 13y ago

"...there is no reason to go on being foolish forever."

Draiken 13y ago
Except there are... Reasons that are not ours, but for those who control us.

gbog 13y ago

I was half through and I suddenly had a click in my head, thought this was written by pg. Same clean and efficient style, same nakedness without any philosophical scaffolding, while being bullet tracing a straight line through many philosophical stand points. Two very clairvoyant minds. Let's go back reading.

gbog 13y ago

There is this thing about ancient China: each son, when his father died, had to mourn for three years. Yes, three years. And it meant stopping your official occupation, e.g. official employment. (This didn't apply to the peasant). Result: most of the great products of Chinese culture are a direct consequence of this forced idleness.

jonahss 13y ago
Could you provide a source for this conclusion? I'm interested in the idea, but can't find anything on it.
- gbog 13y ago
  It has been mentioned in Essays on China by Simon Leys (I read it in French).
padobson 13y ago
Here's something sort of related in Deuteronomy 24:5 - If a man has recently married, he must not be sent to war or have any other duty laid on him. For one year he is to be free to stay at home and bring happiness to the wife he has married How much of the rest of the Bible came out of obeying that law, I wonder?

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

AimHere 13y ago
>The number one economic fallacy is this: he claims that doing a job, all other things being equal, removes bread from someone elses mouth. This is 100% false. Russell agrees with you, through the medium of sarcasm and reductio ad absurdum: >If this argument were valid, it would only be necessary for us all to be idle in order that we should all have our mouths full of bread. He prefixes citing the argument with: >Before advancing my own arguments for laziness, I must dispose of one which I cannot accept. in case you don't get the sarcasm.
Aqueous 13y ago
No. He says he 'cannot accept' that argument: 'Before advancing my own arguments for laziness, I must dispose of one which I cannot accept.'

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

sandeepspatil 13y ago

"borrowing made it appear as if the future was nourishing the present"

volume 13y ago

I wonder what Bertrand Russell would say about Undercover Cop. If only he were alive today and given the chance to produce his on reality tv show. I wonder what that would be like?

imarg 13y ago

Of a similar thinking is, I suppose, "The Right to Be Lazy" by Paul Lafargue. I read it some time ago and if I remember correctly he believed that there isn't/wasn't any need to work more than 3 hours a day because of the technological advances of the time (and to think this was in 1883!) After a quick search I found it is available online at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/lafargue/1883/lazy/ http://www.marxists.org/archive/lafargue/1883/lazy/

foobarqux 13y ago
"Quitting the Paint Factory" is another good essay on the theme but is marred by an atopical discussion of George Bush. http://paulbe.dreamwidth.org/961.html http://paulbe.dreamwidth.org/961.html
ludwigvan 13y ago
Trivia: Lafargue was Marx's daughter's husband.
- kungfooguru 13y ago
  Trivia: And one of the people Marx was referring to when he said that if they are Marxists then "what is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist."

_nullandnull_ 13y ago

I recently stumbled upon a great graphic comic (mostly factual) about Betrand Russell and his life. I'd highly recommend it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logicomix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logicomix

leejoramo 13y ago

As wikipedia notes on Bertrand Russell: > His work has had a considerable influence on logic, mathematics, set theory, linguistics, artificial intelligence, computer science (see type theory and type system), and philosophy, especially philosophy of language, epistemology, and metaphysics. Plus he won the Nobel Prize in Literature! For a very approachable overview of Russell's complex life, I highly recommend the graphic novel "Logicomix" http://www.logicomix.com/ http://www.logicomix.com/ Then you will certainly find yourself wanting to learn more about this amazing person.

samograd 13y ago
For a very approachable view of Russel's thoughts and work, you can try reading his own writing: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/355 http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/355 My personal favourite so far has been 'Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays' with 'Analysis of Mind' currently at the top of my reading queue. Not everything he did was like reading 'Principia Mathematica' and his writing is very open, readable and eloquent.
- leejoramo 13y ago
  Thanks for that link to Gutenberg. Adding those essays to my reading list.
- angrow 13y ago
  > Whoever contemplates the world in the light of an ideal--whether what he seeks be intellect, or art, or love, or simple happiness, or all together--must feel a great sorrow in the evils that men needlessly allow to continue, and--if he be a man of force and vital energy--an urgent desire to lead men to the realization of the good which inspires his creative vision. "Proposed Roads to Freedom" is my pick for number one.
- mercer 13y ago
  I liked a bunch of the essays I read by him, and loved "A History of Western Philosophy". I'm well aware (and felt his writing made it obvious enough) that it is not necessarily a 'accurate' history of philosophy, but it was a great book with a great approach.

benhirashima 13y ago

there's a great book in the same vein, How to be Idle. http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Idle-Manifesto-ebook/dp/B00DB3FUS0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1381245066&sr=8-1&keywords=how+to+be+idle http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Idle-Manifesto-ebook/dp/B00DB3F...

ashutoshm 13y ago

and now for something completely different http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k799LiPqu2g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k799LiPqu2g [Bertie in Bollywood]

CaptainSwing 13y ago

There is a great deal of anarchist and libertarian communist literature critiquing the modern concept of work, notably Russian anarchist Kropotkin's book 'the conquest of bread' originally written in around 1906. http://libcom.org/library/the-conquest-of-bread-peter-kropotkin http://libcom.org/library/the-conquest-of-bread-peter-kropot...

yankoff 13y ago

I wonder how much Mr. Russel was idle himself having written on average 2 books per year throughout his life and significantly contributing on so many levels.

padobson 13y ago

The method of a leisure class without duties was, however, extraordinarily wasteful. None of the members of the class had to be taught to be industrious, and the class as a whole was not exceptionally intelligent. The class might produce one Darwin, but against him had to be set tens of thousands of country gentlemen who never thought of anything more intelligent than fox-hunting and punishing poachers. I'm down. We should be massively ramping up the amount of leisure time in our society so that we, as a society, never miss out on a potential Darwin or Lincoln or Jesus or whomever. How many world-changing, mental giants have we missed out on because they couldn't free their minds from working 40+ hours a week?

npsimons 13y ago
Well, apart from that last fictional character who has arguably brought more harm than good through his ideas (and arguably through them being misinterpreted), I'm all down with that.
- shrikant 13y ago
  Actually, Jesus himself isn't fictional and his existence is pretty much agreed upon as a historical fact.[1] It's the details of his activities in the New Testament and various Gospels that are hotly debated. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus (use this as a starting point for further citations..) /pedant mode off.
  - innguest 13y ago
    Absolutely wrong. If you have evidence that this character existed, please point to it more specifically than a whole Wikipedia article. Nothing about "Jesus" is hotly debated because there isn't a single mention of a "Jesus" in any believable document to begin with. This is not the place to discuss, but I didn't want your wrong message to be the end of it.
Draiken 13y ago
The problem is the decision to do this is never in the hands of the wage-earners... Only the powerful and rich can really change this reality, and it's clearly not aligned with their interests.

padobson 13y ago

I have to say there's a good chance that society is already moving toward Russell's ideal. If you just look at accelerators like YCombinator, you'll see that two successful startups (Dropbox and AirBnb) are by-and-large paying for the investment of the other several hundred startups several times over. So when will we see it going to the next level? Gather a bunch of people together, using whatever criteria you see fit, and tell them to do whatever they want. Pay for their room and board, and see what is produced from their complete leisure time. If the produce of that investment was one of the individuals simply having an idea on the scale of something like "Democracy" or "Altruism", wouldn't it be completely worth it if the other individuals never did anything more than eat, sleep, and play video games?

VLM 13y ago
We called those "housing projects" and they were not exactly a paradise to live in. Superficially need some minimal level of education/civilization. Which merely excludes those bored by formal education, most of whom are idiots and a small fraction of them are geniuses. For lack of a better idea you could use some weighted GPA/IQ/GRE/SAT/ACT score system. Assuming the smartest people are those who come up with the best ideas. It does seem that to spread an idea you need a smart dude but a think tank should hire marketing people for that? Perhaps a lotto would work just as well for selection. A lotto instead of elections would likely give us a superior government, perhaps it would give us superior ideas on average. Another interesting example is the Institute for Advanced Studies nearby Princeton, I think. You might want to examine whats been produced there.
anjc 13y ago
Surely YCombinator and startup culture is the antithesis of what Russell is talking about as being desirable? The legions of burned out coders would probably not equate crunch time with leisure time.

enduser 13y ago

There are a number of beautiful places in the United States where it is possible for a person to subsist quite luxuriously on $1200/mo and preserve the ability to throw parties for friends, buy books and tools, etc. As of January a person with such income will have free Medicare in Oregon. "Fuck You" money is an illusion that keeps you working. The mind loves to believe that having enough of some external thing will give us control, safety, or whatever we most fear the lack of. It isn't true. A man with with excess money is absorbed in concerns of what to do with it and is hardly free. He might be able to say "fuck you" to people, but he can't say "fuck you" to money. Freedom is measured by the scarcity of our concerns. And happiness, perhaps, by closeness with people to whom we need never say "fuck you" because we love them and accept them fully.

theunixbeard 13y ago
Any specific recommendations? I've seen Eugene, Boise, Flagstaff, and Albuquerque thrown around on HN before but I'd like to hear your thoughts.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- mimiflynn 13y ago
  Eugene is in Oregon with the free medicaid. ABQ is my favorite, though. I hear great things about Boise, especially if you are into river sports.
  - ImprovedSilence 13y ago
    Boise is flippin fantastic. I say this as someone from the Northeast who never gave a state like Idaho a second (or even first) thought. I like being close to family (here on east coast), but if I was picking one place in the US to live based on cost of living and awesome things to do, with amazingly beautiful women, awesome outdoor activity, coupled with good urban lifestyle, Boise would be IT. Also a decent tech/software scene I hear. Just look at what $400k will buy you. It's outta this world, plus you're in an awesome location (right at the base of the Rockies).

myth_drannon 13y ago

On the same note I would like to add another related and a great article: The Quality of life http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2013/07/31/the-quality-of-life/ http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2013/07/31/the-quality-of-life/

pvdm 13y ago

He also wrote "Conquest of Happiness".

pjdorrell 13y ago

"If he merely puts his savings in a stocking, like the proverbial French peasant, it is obvious that they do not give employment." What is "obvious" to Bertrand Russell is bad economics. When the peasant puts his money in a stocking, he causes a slight deflation, so prices decrease, which increases the value of everyone else's money. So everyone else effectively has more to spend, if they want to. However, everyone else would be prudent to assume that the peasant will eventually spend his money, which will correspondingly cause prices to rise again. It might seem that an earlier gain is offset by a later loss. But, those who benefit from the slight deflation can choose to invest the increased value of their monetary holdings into industry. At a later time, when the peasant decides to spend his money, the products of that industry will be ready for purchase. Thus, with nothing more than surplus cash and a stocking, the peasant has driven investment in industry, productive employment, and long-term growth in the wealth of society, the benefits of which he has foregone since he chose not to seek a return of interest on his savings.

wintersFright 13y ago
Keep in mind this was 1932 when there was the gold standard. Inflation was more volatile then and was -10% (minus!) according to http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/usa-historical-inflation-rate?start-year=1915&end-year=1932 http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/usa-historical-i...
philwelch 13y ago
That's not how deflation works. If it was, it would be far less painful.

kevgnulldev 13y ago

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell

00rion 13y ago

I notice that nobody has related this to the Swiss proposal to provide a basic income for all adults. If it works there, I wonder if other countries will move in that direction.