Live data from Hacker News

The future is emotional

aeon.co

51–60 of 61 posts

Re: The future is emotional

#51
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally side question - are you Russian by nature and language? If you are, I'm wondering if you ever feel limited by English as a language. Do you feel like you have bigger, better ideas in Russian?

I'm not Russian, but it feels like emotional responses are more... emotional in Russian. Like thinking about something or swearing. English is a more rational language, and my "native" (I don't use it much) language is a bit restrictive when expressing anything, whether logical or emotional.

Strikes me as more of a cultural difference than language. There are certainly English-speaking people who swear a lot, and creatively, and others who rarely utter a profane word.

Re: The future is emotional

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it's also highly physical. Cooking and cleaning take up a large chunk of the time and labor, even if you aren't technically required to do so.

Hmm, okay, let's say we compare: - Working in the back of the house in a restaurant - Someone who visits old people and also cooks and cleans for them. The first one, while requiring skill and being a relatively low-paid job that a lot of people might not want to take, technically doesn't require customer interaction. (And perhaps not even much in the way of English skills, which makes it a more practical job for som…

I think the difference is that there are two ways to burn out from the job, or the pressure comes from multiple ways, than other jobs.

This is anecdotal, but my mother in law spent a decade paying home visits to disabled vets. This is not senior care, but you see similar situations of people with special needs and an inability to care for themselves fully. Two things that she emphasized were how she was hugely underpaid for the work she actually did (as opposed to the work she was minimally required to do) and how she needed frequent, long spans filling paperwork to recover from the physical and mental duties. I may be wrong, but you don't often see that with jobs that require exertion on a single front unless it's extremely stressful and salaried accordingly (e.g. surgeon).

Re: The future is emotional

#53

Any sociopath/psychopath can game the emotional intelligence system by appearing to be whatever they feel they need to be, to get what they want, and it's not pretty.

Stay tuned for the next employment-related thread where multiple people relay advice to "fake it 'til you make it."

Re: The future is emotional

#54
post #28

I really, really, really hate it when they refer to things like taking physical care of the elderly as "emotional labor." Caretaking can have a huge emotional component, but this framing has serious inherent problems. Furthermore, art, fiction and music are things that can do a lot for people emotionally and psychologically, both the makers of such and the consumers. Yet no one ever seems to include those in these ri…

I believe what the article points to convey about "emotional labour" is that, it is tough to do these jobs because, being in constant company of distress and suffering is emotionally very tough.

Specially in case of elderly or those suffering from terminal diseases, it is much more tough because inherent you are helpless, you want to do so much but inspite of your best efforts, you can't do anything.

that's emotional labour!

Re: The future is emotional

#55
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People socialize with producers all of the time When it's a one-way conversation, that's consuming.

It's less one-way when live-streamed Q&A's and AMAs are now possible.

Unless it's a direct 1 to 1 conversation, it's still consumed. Typically in AMAs it's a one-way communication. A person asks a question, if it gets chosen then a response is done, nothing ever happens after that.

Re: The future is emotional

#56
post #28

I really, really, really hate it when they refer to things like taking physical care of the elderly as "emotional labor." Caretaking can have a huge emotional component, but this framing has serious inherent problems. Furthermore, art, fiction and music are things that can do a lot for people emotionally and psychologically, both the makers of such and the consumers. Yet no one ever seems to include those in these ri…

Clarifying question: are you referring to emotional labor as labor which is emotionally taxing for the producer, or labor which produces a positive emotional effect on the consumer / receiver?

Re: The future is emotional

#57
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it ironic that your reaction to the article proves the point you imagine it makes, but that it doesn't actually make. The way I understood the sentences you point out (and I am pretty certain that my reading matches the author's intention) is that certain things are put in opposition to technical subjects merely because this is where power is currently overwhelmingly concentrated. When you write about the impo…

To use your analogy, the article's title is "The key to jobs in the future is not water but land." It spends very little time arguing this. Instead, it assumes it, and rather argues why land is useful, with some random remarks throw in about how the land is green and the water is blue. I don't think it's an over-reaction to understand that they are implying that the water is unimportant, and also implying that the wa…

> there's no reason why analytical skills can't help us improve services that require a lot of emotional empathy

While I agree with that to a certain extent (example, the work Microsoft is doing in collaboration with Dr. Eckman's work on microexpressions to read emotional cues from facial expressions), there is a certain part in mindful, loving-kindness that I doubt could be replicated by automation. (Or rather, if there were a way, it would involve a kind of self-serve ... where the user is lead through an experience that generates self-compassion).

I say this as someone who has spent much of my 20s and early 30s heavily analytical, then went through some extreme, transformative experiences. These transformative experiences got me in awareness of emotions in a way that was difficult for my intellect to fool me into thinking otherwise. There was a world of experience that made much more sense.

You're mistaken in thinking that emotional empathy means that such people will not be divisive. The most compassionate can stay centered even in face of extreme divisiveness -- being centered in midst of extreme emotions is why they _can_ be compassionate -- and as such, can often be the voice of uncomfortable, deep, soul-shaking truths. Or better, to bear silent witness for the uncomfortable truths as it works its way out into the open.

The kind of "emotional labor" this article talks about involves bearing a lot of pain and suffering, above and beyond the physical labor. These pain are often pain that, others are not witnessing or mindful themselves. The traditional archetype of heroism is exactly the wrong archetype that bears these pain: the traditional hero who bears pain fools himself into thinking he still retains control over when and how that pain expresses itself. Life, though, brings pain all on its own. No one can control it. Absorbing, deflecting, and armoring against pain does not develop empathy. There is no fooling yourself that you can control when and how it happens, and that unpredictability and lack of control makes it much more difficult to experience. A traditional hero eventually breaks under these conditions. Our society currently materially rewards these heroes, even though they are not suited for dealing with pain and suffering.

When we cross a threshold with automation, I think we will no longer have much left to keep the existential anguish at bay. And that's when people who have been quietly working with these difficult emotions will help keep things from flying apart.

Re: The future is emotional

#58
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it ironic that your reaction to the article proves the point you imagine it makes, but that it doesn't actually make. The way I understood the sentences you point out (and I am pretty certain that my reading matches the author's intention) is that certain things are put in opposition to technical subjects merely because this is where power is currently overwhelmingly concentrated. When you write about the impo…

To use your analogy, the article's title is "The key to jobs in the future is not water but land." It spends very little time arguing this. Instead, it assumes it, and rather argues why land is useful, with some random remarks throw in about how the land is green and the water is blue. I don't think it's an over-reaction to understand that they are implying that the water is unimportant, and also implying that the wa…

> To use your analogy, the article's title is "The key to jobs in the future is not water but land."

No, it isn't.

> I don't think it's an over-reaction to understand that they are implying that the water is unimportant,

Not only do they not say that, I seriously doubt they think that.

> and also implying that the water won't help to fulfill the same needs that the land might fulfill.

Well, that's a matter of opinion and you're welcome to disagree with the article, but I think that there are many important jobs that software can't do well. I certainly don't think that it's obvious that software will do all those things well any time soon.

> there's no reason why analytical skills can't help us improve services that require a lot of emotional empathy

Maybe, but the article says no such thing.

> they are not as separate as "land" vs "water.

At this point they are.

> what I find ironic is an article that places such importance on emotional empathy is happy to use a divisive title like "The future is not X but Y

What I find ironic is that this is not the title at all.

> Obviously the people that personally hold greater weight for X are going to be annoyed.

Why? That's not the title nor explicitly or implicitly said in the article at any point. What annoys me is that not only are you now in the position having far more power, but are annoyed at the claim that others may have some power as well, insisting that your power dominates theirs and balking at the idea that it may not.

Re: The future is emotional

#59
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For one thing, it simultaneously glamorizes and discounts the hard physical labor involved in doing things like cleaning up someone who is playing with their own feces and throwing them at you. For another, it discounts the actual education and intelligence involved in doing a good job of taking proper care of people. For a third, it just reinforces the pink collar ghetto mentality surrounding this kind of work. Perh…

All of that seems to argue pretty strongly in favor of calling it "emotional labor" - caretaking involves a serious trade-off where the caretaker is expending a lot of emotional energy to do work for someone else. Much like physical labor involves expending a lot of physical energy to get stuff done. I don't see anything either overly demeaning or glamorous about that descriptive term, it seems to describe exactly th…

From the article:

For men and women, paid and unpaid, waking at 3am to care for a crying baby or bathing a distressed Alzheimer’s patient can be gruelling and transcendentally life-affirming all at once.

Lots of people take satisfaction in a job well done. This is pretty universally true, regardless of what kind of work you do. The above framing describes cleaning up other people's literal shit in near religious ecstasy type terms. If that isn't overblown, I don't know what is.

I did the full time mom thing for a lot of years. I raised and homeschooled two special needs kids and was a military wife. Finding good solutions that supposedly did not exist is something that I feel very proud of. But cleaning up literal shit never felt like some sort of joyous nigh religious thing. It was grueling, yes. Transcendental, big fat nope.

I am appalled by this article. You should go look up the recent article called "My Family's Slave."

Re: The future is emotional

#60

Is there a job that doesn't require some emotional intelligence?

Given the number of bosses I've had with near 0 emotional intelligence, software development is one of them.

I've experienced managers like that, but both their careers and their organizations were harmed by their lack of emotional intelligence. I don't think that it is accurate to say software development doesn't require emotional intelligence.

It's worth noting that emotional intelligence doesn't mean someone is kind and good. Emotional intelligence can also allow people to be manipulative too. That can be perhaps even more harmful to employees than an emotionally unintelligent manager, but usually such a manager can be very successful and effective for their organization.

Post reply on HN