| I'll never say the word again |
 I'll never say the word again | 11. Okt 2010 @ 01:45  |
|---|
|
Surowiecki’s thoughtful summation: “[I]t might be useful to think about two kinds of procrastination: the kind that is genuinely akratic and the kind that’s telling you that what you’re supposed to be doing has, deep down, no real point. The procrastinator’s challenge, and perhaps the philosopher’s, too, is to figure out which is which.”
|
I've been putting off leaving a comment to this, but deep down my point might be that there might not be any real point, which is a point, so I end here with (a) full punkts.
Me again: Well it is a point as in a point of view. But is the purpose (point) to have a point of view? Is there any purpose to thinking about this?
I should really be getting on with some work.
Devoting thought to having no [predefined?] point or purpose seems a mildly reoccuring thing in your posts and comments every now and then, if you don't mind me saying so. ;)
To me it is obvious (even if wrong) that there can be no possible external point or purpose of anything — only one that each of us invents and chooses, if he so requires.
Your first point is a fair point. The second point is a little lost on a middle-aged man with numerous dependents: (my purpose here is communication - I question the point/pirpose of what I am doing (for a living), but I am aware that overall it could be useful in a mildly organisational way, and it means there is food on the table, which I think is external to me to an extent (I'm refering to my dependents). Ah but.. No, nothing can be external to an extent, can it?)
Ah, but it all seems sort of worked out then?
Let us see, if I am wrong.
(1) You have assumed or decided to have a point or a purpose, perhaps, to care for your dependants.
(2) Insomuch as to fulfill that purpose, you have to provide the external extent of food.
(3) Insofar as you have different means of obtaining food, working for a living appears to be a viable option and you are therefore working.
(4) Which might not have any other purpose for you, but to fulfill the (2) and thus (1).
(5) Therefore, while the purpose of food on the table might be physically external to you in regard of its eaters [2], the purpose of providing that food and thus (more ultimately) the purpose of your actions is entirely and internally yours [1], I'd say.
P.S. No, nothing!
I like your working. I had got there in a more random manner (sort of emotional pinball-type logic gates), which explains the modest marks I got in mathematics I suppose.
|
|
| Top of Page |
Powered by Sviesta Ciba |
![[info]](http://klab.lv/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}