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

You are not your job

jry.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 443 posts

Re: You are not your job

#341

Post by hiclemi »

tvier wrote: post #316
abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

This comment defines value as what people pay for things, then comes to the conclusion that they way to value people must be based on what people will pay for them. That's not insightful, that's just circular reasoning, and it fails to explain normal human behavior. Does a child have no value to it's parents because it's "easily produced"[1] and "disposable and replaceable"? [1] I imagine OP has never given birth

Yeah, exactly! Market value and personal/relational value are completely different axes. Conflating the two is a category error and not insight..

Re: You are not your job

#342

Post by hiclemi »

abcde666777 wrote: post #128
throwaway-11-1 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren’t valuable to markets, but like I have neighbors who are treasured by the community and genuinely bring joy to everyone. But no, I guess they aren’t economically important. I actually don’t like how every soul has been reduced to an efficiency metric, surprised how much I find forums like this accept that framing.

True as well. I've had similar communal experiences where you get a taste of the old way, the way humans would have operated when we lived in tribes. And on that level I think we are capable of valuing each other as beings - the instinct to look out for each other kicks in. But this modern society we live in... it's just not structured that way anymore. Most of us live in little silos now: our job and our atomic fami…

[dead]

Re: You are not your job

#343

Post by scottLobster »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #332
abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

You're right, if you've diminished yourself to a generic "consumer", and haven't interleaved yourself into a fabric of value beyond economic. Relationships are worth a lot and can't really be bought. Do/Will you care for someone? Do/Will they care for you? This can make you far more valuable than your economic outputs, and also worth economic inputs if you ever lack.

The ability to care for someone in any material sense requires economic resources. Even having free time is a form of wealth that not all enjoy.

Re: You are not your job

#344

Post by pasquinelli »

abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

> We are in fact very disposable and replaceable.

we are, but that doesn't mean we're not valuable. everything is disposable, everything is replacable.

the idea that an individual human life isn't very valuable and that it's only first-worlders that have trouble understanding that is projection. that is the modern, first world (read capitalist) view of human life. you think you're thinking but you're actually regurgitating the ideology you've received.

Re: You are not your job

#345

Post by maerF0x0 »

scottLobster wrote: post #343
maerF0x0 wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, if you've diminished yourself to a generic "consumer", and haven't interleaved yourself into a fabric of value beyond economic. Relationships are worth a lot and can't really be bought. Do/Will you care for someone? Do/Will they care for you? This can make you far more valuable than your economic outputs, and also worth economic inputs if you ever lack.

The ability to care for someone in any material sense requires economic resources. Even having free time is a form of wealth that not all enjoy.

"All" is a pretty high bar. I think a huge proportion of the developed world has a lot of choice and is repeatedly choosing stuff/experiences over people. Not sure how we'd find data to resolve that... People living paycheck to paycheck, or not having $400 to cover a bill is not really proof without understanding how they're spending money... As far as I can tell a lot of today's economic woes in the developed world is self inflicted through lifestyle inflation. We live in bigger houses (more sq ft per person), more alone, eat out a lot more, drive cars with far more horsepower, and have a supercomputer in their pocket.

Re: You are not your job

#346

Post by ap99 »

tvier wrote: post #316
abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

This comment defines value as what people pay for things, then comes to the conclusion that they way to value people must be based on what people will pay for them. That's not insightful, that's just circular reasoning, and it fails to explain normal human behavior. Does a child have no value to it's parents because it's "easily produced"[1] and "disposable and replaceable"? [1] I imagine OP has never given birth

I think it's more trying to say, if an individual cannot support themselves or provide value to others who can support them then those other intangible factors don't matter too much.

In the first world we have a ton of excess value so we can do things like homeless shelters, charity, socialized medicine, etc.

But if we suddenly don't have that excess value to spread around and it becomes either I eat today or you eat today and I'm the one who farmed the wheat and made the bread -- me and my family are going to eat today.

We go back to "fair" very fast.

Re: You are not your job

#347

Post by sjsdaiuasgdia »

BobbyJo wrote: post #135
throwaway-11-1 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren’t valuable to markets, but like I have neighbors who are treasured by the community and genuinely bring joy to everyone. But no, I guess they aren’t economically important. I actually don’t like how every soul has been reduced to an efficiency metric, surprised how much I find forums like this accept that framing.

> But no, I guess they aren’t economically important. I actually don’t like how every soul has been reduced to an efficiency metric, surprised how much I find forums like this accept that framing. Efficiency is the metric of nature. Thinking about human life in any other terms than input and output is objectively a luxury, afforded only to societies with surplus resources. Calling it "framing" feels a little disingen…

It is a luxury we can, as a species, afford!

We actually have the capacity and capability to house, feed, and clothe everyone on the planet, and then some.

The frame can shift because our capabilities have increased.

Re: You are not your job

#348

Post by Gareth321 »

jplusequalt wrote: post #320
Gareth321 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an intractable problem is economics which is how to assign value to a thing. It's probably more of a philosophical debate. One arm of the debate is something called marginal utility. That is, a think is worth a different amount to different people. I value a particular guitar more than my neighbour does. I think it's worth $100. He thinks it's worth $50. Who is right? Authoritarian nations use top-down econo…

>Prove to me that this value exists. Prove to me it can be measured. To pre-empt your reply, I don't think you can. Why does any of this matter? Do you require a person proves their utility to you before you hold the door open for them? When a child falls and scrapes their knee, do you ask about their grades in school, or parents net worth, before lending them a hand? My point: human society is deeply interwoven with…

> Why does any of this matter?

If you're going to make the claim that people hold intrinsic value, people are going to challenge you for proof. Holding a door open for someone and asking questions doesn't necessarily indicate value. It could indicate personal interest. Empathy. Projection. Self-interest. The concept of altruism doesn't necessitate the belief that other life holds value at all. Altruism by its definition is giving without the expectation of return.

I think you make a good point re culture and tradition. Humans like many "valueless" activities. Some of these are hardcoded into our psyche through evolution. Some are for sentimental reasons. Some are religious. Some are enforced. Some are situational. Etc. I am not suggesting we eliminate those. I am simply agreeing with the top comment which is that we cannot force people to place any value on them. Some people do not see value in those traditions (or in other people). There is no objective way to prove them wrong.

Re: You are not your job

#349

Post by lynx97 »

amiga386 wrote: post #317
lynx97 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't afford a $10 plastic container for growing plants? If that is true (which I doubt), I would be willing to drop you a few bucks via PayPal.

A $10 plastic container doesn't have nearly enough space for sustenance farming. Neither does a typical city home's garden. And for health reasons they're not going to let you raise animals (there are pretty funky diseases you and your neighbours can get from even just poultry, never mind pigs and cattle) You can certainly grow various fun things in buckets - tomatos, herbs, etc. But you can't survive on it . Not wit…

The person I replied to wrote about indoor gardening. So sustainability was always out of the question. Besides, you dont have to go back to preindustrial times. My parents had enough "land" to grow food for us. It basically ended around 1985 when they finally realized it was far easier to just buy stuff at the supermarket, because, as you already mentioned, growing your own food is very time consuming. Around that time, almost everyone I know stopped to try to be self-sustaining.

Re: You are not your job

#350

Post by tvier »

ap99 wrote: post #346
tvier wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment defines value as what people pay for things, then comes to the conclusion that they way to value people must be based on what people will pay for them. That's not insightful, that's just circular reasoning, and it fails to explain normal human behavior. Does a child have no value to it's parents because it's "easily produced"[1] and "disposable and replaceable"? [1] I imagine OP has never given birth

I think it's more trying to say, if an individual cannot support themselves or provide value to others who can support them then those other intangible factors don't matter too much. In the first world we have a ton of excess value so we can do things like homeless shelters, charity, socialized medicine, etc. But if we suddenly don't have that excess value to spread around and it becomes either I eat today or you eat…

I think that is a more clear framing of what the OP was saying, and if they had written it that way I probably wouldn't have bothered replying. It just had a very fatalistic tone I didn't agree with.

I still disagree though, the relationship between scarcity and generosity is very complex.

And as an aside, homeless shelters and socialized medicine are cheaper than the alternatives in developed nations, so I would argue those are the sign of good governance rather than excess value. Although that depends on your definition of value...

Post reply on HN