Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Is a Minimally Good Life?

psyche.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 162 posts

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#141

Post by rayiner »

foxdev wrote: post #140
rayiner wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using the definition of “minimal” you seem to be applying, I’d add children and family, and some sort of communal religion. Tons of people all over the world in places like Bangladesh who have few of the things on your list, but derive happiness and satisfaction from their family and their faith.

Things done in the name of religion are a net negative on my life. It's not the fault of all religious people, but the people doing it are hard to avoid if I get involved, even if I were inclined to try.

While that may be the case, 84% of the world identifies with an organized religion, and that number is growing (as the Christian population in China, the world’s largest putatively atheist country, grows rapidly). Religion is a bedrock for social organization nearly everywhere in the world. And actively religious people in nearly every country are much more likely to report being “very happy” compared to inactively religious or irreligious people: https://www.pewresearch.org/ft_19-01-31_wellbeing_activelyre...

None of the things in OP’s list are universals. Most people are happier if they have financial security, but some people find happiness in an ascetic and minimal lifestyle for example. And many poor people are very happy. The list therefore seems to reflect major factors that reflect happiness for the population in general. And, worldwide, participation in religion and having kids are to such factors. For much of the world that’s financially or politically insecure, they are two of the most important factors. Overlooking them completely is quite misanthropic.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#142

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #141
foxdev wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things done in the name of religion are a net negative on my life. It's not the fault of all religious people, but the people doing it are hard to avoid if I get involved, even if I were inclined to try.

While that may be the case, 84% of the world identifies with an organized religion, and that number is growing (as the Christian population in China, the world’s largest putatively atheist country, grows rapidly). Religion is a bedrock for social organization nearly everywhere in the world. And actively religious people in nearly every country are much more likely to report being “very happy” compared to inactively r…

[deleted]

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#143

Post by riffnote »

I suggest something similar. When we are constantly buying and requesting things we create work and stress for others. We become a high-maintenance humans. We contribute to the rush and tension we feel around us.

By consuming less and demanding less, we live a low maintenance life. Not minimally good, just low-maintenance. This along with looking for ways to serve our communities is the better way to go.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#144

Post by UncleMeat »

RhysU wrote: post #80
UncleMeat wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it hard to believe that your wife would prefer you to be a materially/economically poor individual who doesn't strive vs your peers. Really? You've never heard of somebody who'd rather their spouse work shorter hours and spend more time with them at home? Or spend more time with their family? Or travel more with them?

My hunch: His wife likely still wants him to be capable of material success and competition. She just doesn't want him to prioritize those endeavors past some particular threshold. Said another way, one's spouse probably finds it attractive that one can get a new job if one loses the current one. Marriages often go to hell when the husband is out of work and it becomes obvious that he either cannot or will not return…

This is a nasty generalization at best, and terrible sexism at worst. Why do you think you know my wife better than me?

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#145

Post by onecommentman »

adolph wrote: post #105
127 wrote: post #18

Men aren't built to be happy. Men are built to be effective.

happy != good

The intersection of the set HAPPY and the set GOOD is not the null set. HAPPY is not necessarily a superset of GOOD, and GOOD is not necessarily a superset of HAPPY.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#146

Post by licebmi__at__ »

MorningInfidel wrote: post #108
licebmi__at__ wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the point is not really a logical statement, but an appeal to emotion, expecting a logical refutation to a non logical statement is absurd and TBH, kinda ignorant of all the kinds of valid discussion humans have all the time. Do you really think is reasonable to demand a change of behavior in women instead of maybe demanding the same from men? Do you really think men with a couple are no longer part of the co…

I must be confused. I didn't read his controversial opinion as a demand, I read it as an observation. It's as unreasonable to expect women to counter their nature as it would be to tell men to stop preferring youth and beauty.

> If women chose something different, perhaps humanity wouldn't be so rapacious of the earth.

You know, I care a little about the framing. It can be that women could choose something different, or maybe men can also choose to not be part of the rat race, maybe it can be both, or maybe as you mentioned, it’s an impossible scenario. I don’t know with what I’ve read about what we know (and mostly don’t know about human mind) and with humanity’s history I choose to be careful with what it’s human nature and what could change.

But anyway the statement is as it is, and assigns responsibility mostly to women, which can be an assumption that women have more agency than men, or just blaming the opposite sex; as common in incel ideology. Not really reasonable either way IMO.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#147

Post by 3131s »

lm28469 wrote: post #107
afefers wrote: post #83

As someone very poor, for me good life means having money to the point where my choices are not based around it.

Imho every time you access the next step of the ladder you'll have a few months of happiness and fall right back to where you were. Money is important if you either don't have enough to meet your basic needs or have so much that you don't have to worry about it 1 second in your life (99.9% of people won't reach that state). Every steps in between is the same with extra distractions that won't do much, if anything at…

You need some perspective on this. A solid half of the world has so little money that these people routinely die from easily preventable conditions.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#148

Post by _5659 »

I read somewhere that the universal problem of existence is to survive with dignity, and mathematics being the language of the universe is uniquely poised to address the question.

As someone with ok health and a decent education to provide me work throughout the pandemic, I feel like the minimally good life is just life itself. It is enough to survive, and retain the will that you must choose to live. I've been very fortunate and very lucky, but it all feels so flimsy and discriminatory. I think the only "better" life one can work towards, is one in service of making it better for all of us.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#149

Post by jmpman »

golergka wrote: post #28

> what do members of a society owe to one another? > we should consider whether we would be content to live the lives that the least fortunate in our society actually live Stopped reading right there, because it's a complete non sequitur. People only owe one another what they have contractual obligations for; claiming that you owe to provide any kind of minimal standard of living for another person just because he al…

Although I expect I share many of your concerns, there are two aspects of ideal libertarian world view which trouble me. The first is that the masses who are unable to provide a productive life for themselves continue to multiply, ultimately driving society to collapse. The second is that wealth will be concentrated in a tiny fraction of the population, who will then convince the masses that it’s unethical for the elite to be taxed. The elites will continue to perpetuate their wealth through generations, and the masses will never be able to achieve socioeconomic mobility.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#150

Post by jonathanstrange »

rayiner wrote: post #141
foxdev wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things done in the name of religion are a net negative on my life. It's not the fault of all religious people, but the people doing it are hard to avoid if I get involved, even if I were inclined to try.

While that may be the case, 84% of the world identifies with an organized religion, and that number is growing (as the Christian population in China, the world’s largest putatively atheist country, grows rapidly). Religion is a bedrock for social organization nearly everywhere in the world. And actively religious people in nearly every country are much more likely to report being “very happy” compared to inactively r…

Sorry, but there is plenty of happiness research that contradicts most of what you say. There are world-wide studies about it every year in nearly every country of the world. Just look up "World Happiness Report", for instance, but there are many more studies. You can barely find a topic with less empirical research in psychology, sociology, and economics.

You're right that religion and community also play a role in happiness. That should be in the list. However, the rest of what you say is just wrong, or at least very misleading. People in very poor countries are overall less happy or satisfied with their life (according to their own reports) than people in richer countries.

There is a basic level of welfare that anyone who wants to be happy needs to attain. If you don't have that, then there will be all kinds of worries, e.g. you're worried about losing your income when you get sick or how to get enough food for your children. In that case, you cannot be happy. The basic needs and any existential worries associated with them cannot be substituted with religion or anything else.

Post reply on HN