User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 77

  1. #31
    Once Was Synarch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    8,470

    Default

    Money is liquid value. It is also value neutral. Not wanting money is generally nonsensical as it can be put toward any purpose, especially non-materialistic purposes. If you mean to make some statement about the futility of purpose, then that is really outside the bounds of a discussion on following your passions (and being able to live at the same time). I mean, if their work is so important to someone that they do not want to exchange it for money, then that is a different topic. That does not mean what they do is not worth money.

    If people are not willing to compensate you, how valuable is what you do? If you write a brilliant novel, wouldn't people be willing to reward you? I would. Does that mean you should seek money or prostitute yourself? No, but don't complain about being penniless and following dreams. The two are not mutually exclusive, we only make it so.

    Can something be valuable only to one person and to no one else? Maybe, but I wouldn't consider this art as important as something that has the ability to resonate and impact other people. Look at the art of schizophrenics. It is normally so individualized and without unity that it just does not have the power to resonate with the viewer except on the level of oddball curiosity. True art impacts and connects. True art reflects back the universality of life and this world.
    "Create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave."

  2. #32
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Synarch View Post
    Money is liquid value. It is also value neutral. Not wanting money is generally nonsensical as it can be put toward any purpose, especially non-materialistic purposes. If you mean to make some statement about the futility of purpose, then that is really outside the bounds of a discussion on following your passions (and being able to live at the same time). I mean, if their work is so important to someone that they do not want to exchange it for money, then that is a different topic. That does not mean what they do is not worth money.

    If people are not willing to compensate you, how valuable is what you do? If you write a brilliant novel, wouldn't people be willing to reward you? I would. Does that mean you should seek money or prostitute yourself? No, but don't complain about being penniless and following dreams. The two are not mutually exclusive, we only make it so.

    Can something be valuable only to one person and to no one else? Maybe, but I wouldn't consider this art as important as something that has the ability to resonate and impact other people. Look at the art of schizophrenics. It is normally so individualized and without unity that it just does not have the power to resonate with the viewer except on the level of oddball curiosity. True art impacts and connects. True art reflects back the universality of life and this world.
    First of all, I don't know of anyone who would refuse compensation for their work (and that's not what I'm arguing).

    Second, to the bolded question, the answer is an emphatic NO. You are making it seem as though monetary value is something that is decided apart from historical and cultural context. That is wrong. A piece of art, for instance, may not be worth as much during one era (or in one part of the world at one time) as in another. This is where people get the phrase "starving artist"...because many great artists were obscure and underpaid during their time. Surely their work was not bad because no one wanted to pay them anything for it.

    Third, the extent to which "true art" connects and resonates with the "universality of life" is not determined by its amount of exposure to other people.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  3. #33
    Once Was Synarch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    8,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Second, to the bolded question, the answer is an emphatic NO. You are making it seem as though monetary value is something that is decided apart from historical and cultural context. That is wrong. A piece of art, for instance, may not be worth as much during one era (or in one part of the world at one time) as in another. This is where people get the phrase "starving artist"...because many great artists were obscure and underpaid during their time. Surely their work was not bad because no one wanted to pay them anything for it.
    Their work was without value for them (bad) in that they did not benefit from it directly. Certainly this relies completely on context. Someone in the year 6000 may find the ashtray I made in middle school art class and decide that it is an artifact of priceless antiquity and value. Does that mean it is valuable? We can only discuss right now and we can really only measure using money. All other measures are purely subjective and without practical purpose.
    "Create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave."

  4. #34
    ish red no longer *sad* nightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INfj
    Posts
    3,741

    Default

    *throws in her random two cents*

    Why must "creating value" necessarily be the opposite of "following your passions"? There are ways to work it to have both. It depends on how flexible you're willing to be and how much effort you're willing to put in to make that dream a reality.

    Take art for example. Yes, you can be a starving artist... but you can also find a job in a related field and express yourself there, e.g. applied art (aka design?).

  5. #35
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Synarch View Post
    Their work was without value for them (bad) in that they did not benefit from it directly. Certainly this relies completely on context. Someone in the year 6000 may find the ashtray I made in middle school art class and decide that it is an artifact of priceless antiquity and value. Does that mean it is valuable? We can only discuss right now and we can really only measure using money. All other measures are purely subjective and without practical purpose.
    But measuring something's value in terms of what its worth monetarily is also subjective, because that value may change depending on the mood of consumers. Of course measuring, say, a painting's value in terms of its great technique or inventiveness is less practical than measuring it's worth in dollars at the moment, but practicality is not the only value in the world worth aspiring to.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  6. #36
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    That doesn't make sense. All you've managed to say here is that if you're creating art that no one wants, you're not going to get any money for it. Where do you get the idea that if one doesn't receive money for their art (or doesn't want to receive money for their work), that they don't regard it as valuable, or that it is not valuable in some other way?
    my interpretation was that it is society's value of what you do that determines its legitimacy as a means of survival

    it would probably be better to say that you may create art that nobody wants (ever), but you would not be an artist, at least not in a professional sense. that is to say, professional definition is given by society, not what any given person values doing. that is because this title is most often used to represent what that person means to the rest of us, and although a person might call himself a pinochle player, we could care less and would probably call him a gas station attendant.

    however, synarch, i think what youre saying is an oversimplification. some people can have the best of both worlds, but far more often it is a balance between prosperity and satisfaction. the question is, what is the best balance?

    going back to the original question, it is no surprise that society places a positive stigma on making a lot of money, because this is what you need to prosper in said society. but on the other end of the spectrum, if there were no society (assume momentarily that one could still get a job) then the value of money wouldnt exist and people would seek satisfaction.

    tying in what nightning said "If you'll be happy with "success" as defined by our society, then go for that. If you'll be happier following your passions and don't mind making do with less, there's no point in not trying that option out first.", in other words, it depends whether you are more emotionally invested in how you integrate with society or your own individual experience.

  7. #37
    Once Was Synarch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    8,470

    Default

    I am not saying their is no satisfaction or joy in creation for one's own benefit or to serve some ideal or impulse. I'm just saying that if you want your labor to flow through to your life in such a way to where you may subsist on it, you must keep in mind its value. I agree with the subjectivity of the marketplace, however this is a subjectivity you can milk and transmute into the rudiments for continued corporeal existence.
    "Create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave."

  8. #38
    Once Was Synarch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    8,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grayscale View Post
    tying in what nightning said "If you'll be happy with "success" as defined by our society, then go for that. If you'll be happier following your passions and don't mind making do with less, there's no point in not trying that option out first.", in other words, it depends whether you are more emotionally invested in how you integrate with society or your own individual experience.
    Total agreement. Most people who abhor the idea of the marketplace for their 'art' are also people who are rather uncomfortable with most forms of social congress.
    "Create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave."

  9. #39
    Senior Member Grayscale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    MBTI
    istp
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Synarch View Post
    I am not saying their is no satisfaction or joy in creation for one's own benefit or to serve some ideal or impulse. I'm just saying that if you want your labor to flow through to your life in such a way to where you may subsist on it, you must keep in mind its value. I agree with the subjectivity of the marketplace, however this is a subjectivity you can milk and transmute into the rudiments for continued corporeal existence.
    i understand what youre saying but the question still remains--how much should money cost us?

    Quote Originally Posted by Synarch View Post
    Total agreement. Most people who abhor the idea of the marketplace for their 'art' are also people who are rather uncomfortable with most forms of social congress.
    that is a fairly extreme example... i mean to approach this on the subject for the majority in the middle who would neither sell our soul for money nor live in a cardboard box for our passions.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Lexlike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    InTP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    149

    Default

    I think society itself is obssesed to measure everythink by "value", while the best measurement is money. Bot it its not, propably an odd example: i always asked my father why he does not want to sell his old mercedes. He answered me: I love the car and I will never sell it. So value is for everyone subjective, as everything. A peace of art has aslo a value, but it differes indivually.
    i think it is not the goal or it should be the goal of every indidviduall to achieve the greatest value of his work by making the most money.
    Great examples are Marx, Tolstoy, who indeed never fit in in society, but who were passionated thiknkers and who created value, which you cannot measure with money.
    Both grew up in wealthy families, but they followed their ideals. Tostoy lived as a author in his "prime time" in the high society, but he confessed that they life they all lead there was "irrelevant" and he moved to Sibiria to the poor workers, where he become at the end one of them...
    He refused even a nobel prize, as many Artists did before and after him...
    So Passion is not measurable
    I...74%
    N...66%
    F... 62%
    P... 72%
    Ti- Ne- Si- Fe
    Te- Ni-Fi- Se
    Ennegramm: 4w5
    Intrapersonal with Logical- Mathemathical I.
    Cassification: brunette East- baltid^^

Similar Threads

  1. Don't follow your passion
    By Zeno in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 07-09-2016, 11:05 PM
  2. The problem with following your passion
    By Olm the Water King in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 11-12-2015, 05:03 PM
  3. Following Your Heart
    By LucrativeSid in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-20-2008, 08:19 PM
  4. "Success" in a career--What does it mean to you?
    By ygolo in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-25-2008, 02:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO