Paid Work and Marriage

[Mole]

Aristotle taught that those who did paid work were no better than slaves or animals.

And it was protestantism and the bourgeois revolutions that taught work was fulfilling.

But why should we take any notice of Aristotle?

Well, Aristotle informed Christianity, through Thomas Aquinas and the Renaissance, right up to the Reformatioin.

So not only do we today try hopelessly to make work fulfilling, but we also try to make marriage fulfilling as well.

But it is a hopeless task in both cases.

Perhaps the Renaissance aristocrats were right - we can only find fulfullment in amateur pursuits like hobies and love affairs.

The very word, 'amateur', comes from the latin for love. And everyone loves to have a love affair - even the lovers. And all the world loves a lover.

What do you think?

 

[wolfy]

For some reason I'm thinking of Buddha's teaching 'Life is pain'

 

[Mole]

For some reason I'm thinking of Buddha's teaching 'Life is pain'

Good on you, Wolfy.

But with an independent and guaranteed income, you can devote yourself to music and philosophy and love affairs.

So paid work and marriage are the only things standing between you and fulfillment.

 

[professor goodstain]

Good on you, Wolfy.

But with an independent and guaranteed income, you can devote yourself to music and philosophy and love affairs.

So paid work and marriage are the only things standing between you and fulfillment.

I do believe the indoeuropean symbol (content) comes to mind. I could be wrong. Thanks. Good thread. What compelled me to write that. Perhaps contentment with knowledge. A thread presenting another possible angle to anothers discontent. Not you Vic. Another. Transparent in her conscience of guilt found in hindsight by imagining these words i read are from a human of the female gender.

 

[wolfy]

The problem with work is that you have to do it. It's the lack of control and subjugating yourself to others agendas that is distasteful.
In short the issue, at least for me is about creative control. Doing something that is meaningful to me.

It would be great if we could just spend our lives learning but that isn't going to happen. There are only two options. Hide or push through.
In my opinion the best way out is through.

 

[Poki]

Aristotle taught that those who did paid work were no better than slaves or animals.

And it was protestantism and the bourgeois revolutions that taught work was fulfilling.

But why should we take any notice of Aristotle?

Well, Aristotle informed Christianity, through Thomas Aquinas and the Renaissance, right up to the Reformatioin.

So not only do we today try hopelessly to make work fulfilling, but we also try to make marriage fulfilling as well.

But it is a hopeless task in both cases.

Perhaps the Renaissance aristocrats were right - we can only find fulfullment in amateur pursuits like hobies and love affairs.

The very word, 'amateur', comes from the latin for love. And everyone loves to have a love affair - even the lovers. And all the world loves a lover.

What do you think?

I think that not everyone or anything is 100% fit and that an affair is finding something that completes the remaining 100% thats not being met. In life we have work and hobbies to even itself out a little better. In relationships we have friends and lovers. Sometimes when we lack the friendship and end up finding a friend and have an emotional affair and sometimes we lack the love and find someone who ends up being a lover. We all want it all, but are willing to sacrafice in the name of love, but when that love starts to fade you do not sacrafice as much.

We can only find fulfillment because the other part is already filled, we are simply looking to top off the glass so to say. How far we go depends on how empty the glass was to begin with.

 

[Qre:us]

Aristotle taught that those who did paid work were no better than slaves or animals.

And it was protestantism and the bourgeois revolutions that taught work was fulfilling.

But why should we take any notice of Aristotle?

Even before they came along, it was said, karma yehi dharma. I.e., action is the path to virtue, because action is meant to be cause and effect.
Meaning, there is an individual duty for us all to be a cause in this world, in some 'righteous' way, such that a good effect can propagate. We must resist the state of inertia, stagnation.

That is why we work. It is to move this world and ourselves, from moment to moment, and we all have a part/duty to play in this. The key is knowing the right path to virtuous work, and resisting the wrong path and/or inertia.

 

[Poki]

Even before they came along, it was said, karma yehi dharma. I.e., action is the path to virtue, because action is meant to be cause and effect.
Meaning, there is an individual duty for us all to be a cause in this world, in some 'righteous' way, such that a good effect can propagate. We must resist the state of inertia, stagnation.

That is why we work. It is to move this world and ourselves, from moment to moment, and we all have a part/duty to play in this. The key is knowing the right path to virtuous work, and resisting the wrong path and/or inertia.

In some cases inertia and stagnation is the result of not knowing what path to take. So while we must resist the state of stagnation and inertia we must also not act to hastily or we may end up choosing the wrong paths more often than not.

 

[Qre:us]

In some cases inertia and stagnation is the result of not knowing what path to take. So while we must resist the state of stagnation and inertia we must also not act to hastily or we may end up choosing the wrong paths more often than not.

There's a way to do it: karma
Karma Yoga - in principle, it states, that we must remain detached from personal gains/rewards of the 'duty/action' in order to understand (and choose) the virtuous/right path. I.e., focus on what the deed will produce in action with regards to universal virtue, not with regards to what the payoff will be for YOU.
Quite abstract, and goes pretty against human motivation...but, it's all philosophy, with, pretty rare practical applications, except in those who devote their life to this way of being (very small part of this population).
Interesting, nonetheless
Karma Yoga - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

EDIT:
There's an interesting story/metaphor, I'll try to present it the best of my ability as I'm recalling what my grandpa said to me when I was like 8.

There is a front-passage cleaner at the royal palace. His duty/job is to make sure that the steps leading up to the entrance of the royal palace is clean. One day, he completed his duty, only to have the king and his men return from a hunt in the forest and muddy up the passage as they went in, to which the cleaner bowed in reverence and gratitude that the king at least got to see and walk along a clean passage. The cleaner, without haste, and with much happiness, went about cleaning the passage again. As soon as he was done cleaning, a stray dog came in and muddied up the palace steps, to which the cleaner yelled, cussed, and shooed the dog away, unhappy that all his 'hard work' was for naught.
The story asks you/the cleaner to question why the differential reaction to the stray dog and the king? Whatever your duty, whatever you have chosen to undertake, do it out of a sense of duty to the task. It is muddy, it needs to be clean. Do not think of the personal gain (recognition from the king, versus, no 'payoff from dog')

 

[JocktheMotie]

Going to have to disagree Victor. I see [and have had] fulfillment in the implementation and execution of my thoughts and actions, not to mention fulfillment in the exclusive companionship of another human being.

Saying you cannot find actualization and worth in either just tells me you haven't experienced them, only terrible illusions of those concepts, which is indicated by your contempt.

 

[FemMecha]

Aristotle taught that those who did paid work were no better than slaves or animals.

And it was protestantism and the bourgeois revolutions that taught work was fulfilling.

But why should we take any notice of Aristotle?

Well, Aristotle informed Christianity, through Thomas Aquinas and the Renaissance, right up to the Reformatioin.

So not only do we today try hopelessly to make work fulfilling, but we also try to make marriage fulfilling as well.

But it is a hopeless task in both cases.

Perhaps the Renaissance aristocrats were right - we can only find fulfullment in amateur pursuits like hobies and love affairs.

The very word, 'amateur', comes from the latin for love. And everyone loves to have a love affair - even the lovers. And all the world loves a lover.

What do you think?

I think it is amazing the range of perception humans can hold towards certain activities. In a weird way I find it reassuring that we have the capacity to reinterpret our circumstance. Societies require an exchange of resources whether this involves employment or relationships. Being paid for work means you are involved in exchange with other members of your society. Maybe that makes a person an animal, but I suspect we fit that category long before we were paid in cash.

 

[Moiety]

Going to have to disagree Victor. I see [and have had] fulfillment in the implementation and execution of my thoughts and actions, not to mention fulfillment in the exclusive companionship of another human being.

Saying you cannot find actualization and worth in either just tells me you haven't experienced them, only terrible illusions of those concepts, which is indicated by your contempt.

Maybe, but different people have different needs too.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Just a side track, I've seen people express their distaste for Victor's views, but I don't see why. Maybe I've missed something.

Equating paid work with slavery would be a distasteful thing to do in a less elaborate language than Victor just did. But he did that just finely.

Paid work and marriage, as I take them in this context, both represent a level of commitment on one's part.

Restriction of one's liberties in hope of gaining equitable profits for their sacrifices.

But paid work, really? For what duration? For what conditions? Many a pay comes with more freedom on the part of the worker as compared to the freedom of the employer.

 

[JocktheMotie]

Maybe, but different people have different needs too.

Needs or desires? I think people can confuse the two at times.

 

[Moiety]

Needs or desires? I think people can confuse the two at times.

Does an introvert need or desire frequent solitude? Does a monk desire sexual intercourse or does he need it? What/who else but our personalities can dictate our needs?

 

[Mole]

Just a side track, I've seen people express their distaste for Victor...

But it is well deserved.

I express my distaste for them and they express their distaste for me.

It is mutual. And it is reciprocal.

But with one caveat - their distaste for me is a reaction - a reaction to my distaste.

They are reactionaries.

Were I to like them, they would probably like me in return - even their liking would be a reaction.

No, I like the freshly minted, the immediate feeling, intellectual integrity and moral courage.

The rest is not to my taste.

And unsurprisingly, they don't like the taste of me.

 

[Qre:us]

But with one caveat - their distaste for me is a reaction - a reaction to my distaste.
They are reactionaries.

And, YOU AREN'T?

I'm guessing at your response, sir -
Victor: Oh, but, who amongst us are not reactionaries?
To live in this world is to react.
How do we separate what is an action and what is a reaction?
How do we determine a beginning?


Yeah, try another one...

Btw...it's called being the one to start a thread...of course, everything else will be reactionary...as they're REPLYING to you. You know, when they hit that big blue, "Post REPLY" button???

You're reactionary just as often as the rest of us "pedestrian" crowd, actually in ALL threads that you have not started and pressed that big blue "Post REPLY" button to.

Stop hiding behind pretty words that amount to nothing. Sleight of words are only for those whose ego cannot accept their incomprehension and confusion of you so you can convince them to find "meaning" and beauty in the vacuous illusion of your prolix words. Smoke and mirrors....

Try not to reaffirm your worth by holding up the badge/screaming for the title, of 'misunderstood'.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Personally I find you very musical Victor ... I enjoy the lyrical expression of your point of view. Admittedly, it is likely easier for me to do so coming from the NF side of the house.

WRT your original post, I have felt similarly about work, and the constraints imposed by it. But marriage ... I would rather a deep personal fulfillment with one than flitting about with lover after lover.

 

[wolfy]

Perhaps the Renaissance aristocrats were right - we can only find fulfilment in amateur pursuits like hobbies and love affairs.

What do you think?

I've been thinking about it the last couple of days. I think whether or not you can find fulfilment in work and marriage or in hobbies and love affairs comes down to whether you feel depth of experience or breadth of experience is the best path to self actualisation/ fulfilment.

Personally I feel depth of experience is more important so you can achieve fulfilment through work and marriage.

*I'm not sure if breadth is the right word. I mean differing experiences. Shallow experience in a lot of areas.

 

[maliafee]

I agree that paid work is akin to enslavement. I prefer to do the kind of work I enjoy, when I want to, whether that makes me poor or not.

As for long term commitment like marriage, I disagree with Victor's assessment, only because I find this kind of arrangement fulfilling, and I find open-ended romantic experiences with no commitment overall disappointing and leaving me with an empty feeling.