>Some principles to guide people toward wise activities and away from unwise activities. The paternalism inherent in categorizing some activities as "wise" and

>Some principles to guide people toward wise activities and away from unwise activities. The paternalism inherent in categorizing some activities as "wise" and others as "unwise" is exactly the sort of thing the article argues against. If I want to spend my days playing a video game, and I find genuine fulfillment in it, who are you to say that it is a "wise" or "unwise" activity? >Addictive, abusive, and destructive patterns of behavior are bad. They're "bad" because you're coming at it from a reference frame that says that every hand and every mind is needed to ensure the collective survival and prosperity of the community. In short, no work, no food. But that hasn't been the case for quite some time. Moreover, it also looks like you're taking the view that addiction is a choice. Empirically, it is not. Drug users do not choose to be addicted to drugs. They are addicted because of a poor choice they made years (or, in some cases, decades) ago. Thirty years of experience has shown that treating drug addiction as a moral problem is ineffective, expensive, and corrosive to society. >"compulsively binge-viewing TV will keep you from your studies." And why are we studying? To get a job, which is exactly the problem that UBI seeks to solve. If compulsive TV-watching (or heck, even compulsive novel-reading) is more interesting than your studies, then maybe the problem is with the studies, not the TV.