Boredom, apathy and life fullfillment

My answer to that question is always going to be "Pay off my student loans faster."

i would buy a huge fish tank!

Good idea of you also paid someone to clean it!

*if

xpost to pandemic. What is nothing though? Just sitting and staring? There's a pet theory that says that the human psyche suffers from a kind of perpetual ambient torment - a kind of mental tinnitus - that can only be drowned out through sleep or stimulation. A lack of stimulation, i.e. boredom, is therefore detrimental to the human soul.

very true! xpost!

yeah i don't really go in for the 'human soul'

or what have you. come on man, i can't parse "I would do nothing" as an answer - you'd go mad if you literally just sat there wasting away.

by do nothing i mean nothing like any of the activities mentioned in this thread, classes, activism, exercise, travel, blogging etc etc etc. When not at work I watch tv, listen to music, read about football. That's about it.

lol that's quite close to home

would also add drink wine

perpetual ambient torment - a kind of mental tinnitus = the superego's minatory complaint that you must enage in 'meaningul' 'structured' 'rewarding' 'activities' in lieu of just say drinking a couple of bottles of wine with a friend or watching hard target

I would buy a big big house in terrible repair and undertake some kind of renovation scheme. For fun. With some kind of balance between hiring out the technical work and making myself do the rest. Right now I'm so tired of my job eating my life that I could be happy for a long time just waking up when I'm ready, making my own coffee, and drinking it in a place where there is sunlight while I plan my day.

xp that is my animus

that isn't to say that isambard kingdom brunel should have spent more time lazing about and less time building bridges, rather that the ardent hobbyist who builds cantilever bridges out of cereal boxes in their garden is not deserving of any more esteem than the person who would rather just do nothing

house renovation like laurel's is tempting* but i'd fear i'd get the building weatherproof and one room habitable and then not bother with the others.

* and people make a good living from exctly this, buying, renovating, selling at a profit

my problem with this thread is the 'boredom' bit. i don't go out much, or seemingly do much, but i have a high boredom threshold and just don't register this inactivity as a problem.

^^^

you can tell you people aren't from the uk because television programmes about people renovating old houses are pretty much the only thing that exists here

(but i am!)

(very much in the kevin mccloud camp rather than the sarah beaney camp though - at least his criticisms are done on camera at the time and not voiceovered afterwards like hers seem to be.)

hahaha so true

i was otm'ing the high boredom threshold not anything involving renovation

I don't want to make a profit, though, I want to make a "statement" and a home. Having my own home that I decide things for is like some unlivable dream to this renter.

Once the renovation was done, I'd start on the garden. At night I would host northern soul all-nighters in my barn and drink a lot.

Funny how, when asked about what they would do if they had more money than they could spend in a lifetime (or some equally astronomical figure that would genuinely allow them to think of money as no object), the answer a lot of people give seems to lead to the eventual creation of MORE money (e.g. starting a business, or investing in land, or renovating a house and selling it at a profit). It's not that I don't blame anyone for saying this, but the idea of profit and gain appears to be depressingly inherent in so many people's minds, even when presented a situation where money (or the value of money) practically ceases to exist.

xpost that was nothing to do with Lauren's choice because "having an idyllic home to live in" is the ultimate aim in her case, but working towards building it is part of the satisfaction.

I also watch TV, hang out with friends, watch movies, go to the opera, read lots - I don't really think of those things as "nothing," but more like "quiet leisure," which I think is just as important (or more!) as active leisure like classes or home improvement projects or volunteerism. For me, the shit job was really eroding the enjoyment from the quiet leisure activities since there wasn't a balance with more active stuff that I enjoyed.

Quiet leisure is still doing stuff - far from doing nothing.

My 2nd favorite thing to think about if I had fuck-off wealth is ways to give it away. (1st favorite: never work for a paycheck again)

If I had big funds I'd buy us a perfect house outright, set up a fund to give an income adequate to allow us to buy food and new stuff (clothes, culture, recreation, etc etc), set up a travel fund, and then do what I do in my leisure time all the time - cycle, play football, write, read, cook, etc - and probably take on some more hobbies besides. I enjoy my job, but its not a vocation - I do it so I can afford to do that other stuff anyway.

DL - yes, definitely, but I think that people often consider quiet leisure as "doing nothing."

hmm, i do, but only because my 9-5 is my designated quiet leisure time

yeah quiet leisure can be pretty sweet - in my original post I was referring more to doing stuff that I don't even particularly enjoy that much or at least don't bring me anything: drinking with the same people I've seen the day before and the day before that one, watching a series out of habit because I can't even seem to be able to commit to a challenging feature length DVD. I think my problem might be somewhat interlinked with mild ADD symptoms tbh.

"Quiet leisure" is no more or less fulfilling or indulgent than partaking in amateur sport (I'm talking about walking, cycling, having a hitabout - not marathon running or whatever). It's a welcome pastime with certain benefits, but ultimately achieves little in the long-term rather than a superficial sense of "that was a great run and I feel better for it" or "I really enjoyed that book and I feel better for it".

Lots of little triumphs can and do outweigh one big one, sometimes.

Yeah, especially since most of us are going to live our lives without big triumphs, or with very few. Life is the lots of little triumphs for 99.999% people.

And there's nothing wrong with small triumphs. None at all. In fact one of the biggest causes, as Aimless alluded to upthread, of unhappiness is expecting to experience massive beneficial sea changes in one's life. In my experience such changes happen infrequently and are usually the result of an equally major crisis such as a redundancy or a break-up.

ultimately achieves little in the long-term rather than a superficial sense of "that was a great run and I feel better for it" or "I really enjoyed that book and I feel better for it".

Feeling better for it is the name of the game, though, if you don't HAVE to work for anything? Apart from contributing to causes or setting goals for yourself somewhat arbitrarily, aren't your own feelings like the major indicator of whether a thing is "good" or not? If quiet leisure makes you feel better, clears or calms your mind, gives you time to process, mull, whatever, then it is "good." If you feel enervated and unsatisfied, then it is "bad." That seems embarrassingly simple, tbh...?

Another question is "If you were given the option of utter financial security and comfort (so for example you could build that dream home and never have to work again for the rest of your days), except you would in turn never be able to do the one thing you enjoy most that you do today (in my case I would lose the use of my ears and therefore not be able to hear music again) - which would you choose?".

I don't know for sure what the one thing I enjoy most that I do today is, but this is a total monkey's paw question so I'd decline the utter financial security and comfort. Like, if I accepted the security, the one thing I enjoy most would be spending time with Jeff and he'd be hit by a bus and I would win millions of dollars in settlement money from the city. Not going to risk it.

Or it would be sleeping, and I would die cackling and mad in my luxurious Lakeshore Drive mansion, surrounded by concerned servants (including the fish tank cleaner).

Feeling better for it is the name of the game, though, if you don't HAVE to work for anything? Apart from contributing to causes or setting goals for yourself somewhat arbitrarily, aren't your own feelings like the major indicator of whether a thing is "good" or not? If quiet leisure makes you feel better, clears or calms your mind, gives you time to process, mull, whatever, then it is "good." If you feel enervated and unsatisfied, then it is "bad." That seems embarrassingly simple, tbh...?

― check the name, no caps, boom, i'm (Laurel), Tuesday, 28 August 2012 16:09 (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

It is simple, but it depends on whether ultimately one is satisfied by fleeting short-term satisfaction until one's dying days, or whether one feels they have a more long-term calling. If hunger, strife, debt were completely cancelled out, would we spend our days sitting around picking our bums, shagging each other senseless and watching Friends re-runs or would people end up getting frustrated? Would the idea of work-fulfilment and achievement beyond winning a game of 5-a-side eventually seep out of the global consciousness or are human beings so innately narcissistic that many would feel unhappy without the concept of a higher calling?

There are as many answers to that as there are people, of course.

I know my answer tends towards the narcissistic option. If not I'd be a lot happier in my life since going to work would not feel like so much potentially wasted time. I would go home each day looking forward to doing everything I was put on this earth to do - work and play. Sadly I've never felt like this.

this thread is hitting many of my buttons at the moment.

following the recent death of my wife, i am actually in a position whereby i never need work again.

it wouldn't be a life of luxury, but we would be able to cope quite easily.

i have taken a few months off in order to deal with the summer holidays with the intention of heading back into the office when the kids go back to school.
as it is, i'm still undecided as to what to do.

problem 1 : my job bores the life out of me.
problem 2 : the daily logistics re kids/school etc, mean that work + single parenting = chaos i just cant face.

however, money would be tighter than ever before, and i do like the social aspect of work (sort of), and not working and just doing the kid thing would drive me f*cking nuts and suspect i'd end up very very bored ..

yet i feel that this could all be viewed as an exciting opportunity, just that i am not in the right place yet to figure out what it is i would actually like to do with this opportunity.

What about part-time work in another field? If the income is mostly supplementary, you might have quite a wide range of choices?

Is working in a different job, if not right now then a bit down the line, feasible? You say finances would be tight but you would be easily able to cope, so I think taking advantage of that and giving yourself some more time would make sense. You have to take care of your social needs somehow to keep yourself from going crazy in the meantime, though.

xp - yeah, what Laurel said!

and thats it .. what else would i want to actually do.

due to constant kid kaos for last 6 weeks i haven't really had the space in my head to give it much thought, but its definitely an option.

also, i do fear stepping out of the 'proper' job market at the age of 44 as it would be very difficult to get back in should there be a need later on.

and then there is the other aspect of this thread : would i feel fulfilled if i became a 100% dad and gave up work altogether.

some days i think that could be good for us all if i just did the proper parenting thing, and then there are others when i dream of office boredom.

its quite a headf*ck of a situation to find yourself in.

i remember talking in the office a while back, and everyone saying how if they could pack it in if there had no money worries, and yet, when you find yourself in that position, the reality is not that straightforward.

some Zizek 101 here, but a good point well made:

happiness is a conformist category. And moreover, none of us really want it. Which is a good thing, since the pursuit of happiness is an Enlightenment value that gets at only one aspect of what it means to live a good life.

"Let’s be serious: when you are in a creative endeavor, in that wonderful fever--'My God, I’m onto something!' and so on--happiness doesn't enter it," he says. "You are ready to suffer. Sometimes scientists, I read in a history of quantum physics... were even ready to take into account the possibility that they (would) die because of radiation. Happiness is, for me, an unethical category." It's also boring.

You can be happy without being moral. You can be happy without being interesting or engaged in the world around you. You can be happy without having a single creative idea or interest or passion. You can get everything you desire, and still not be happy. So why even focus on finding bliss?

i remember talking in the office a while back, and everyone saying how if they could pack it in if there had no money worries, and yet, when you find yourself in that position, the reality is not that straightforward.

I have had this conversation as well, particularly as it pertains to coworkers of mine who are old enough to have retired 20 years ago but stick around. I always insisted that I would retire tomorrow if I could, but whenever people ask what I would do, it usually involves working, just somewhere different.

Leaving the job market at 44... yeah, that's daunting. There's so many variables - your line of work, what kind of pension benefits you have coming to you (so if you couldn't get back into the workforce, it would be okay), the job market. If you did, you would probably have to find a way to stay current in your field, but if you do that, why not work? Bah. So much to consider.

exactly my point(s) carl.

so much to consider, and all that while dealing with the fall out from the emotional intensity and demands of day 2 day stuff for the kids ..

still could be worse ..

i suspect ILX has got a pretty 1337 cadre of people with these skills

we could create a poll, but i kinda don't care

what is the difference between boredom and apathy? is apathy just general boredom at nothing in particular? while boredome is directed at a particular thing/'interest'/hobby?

I can be apathetic - generally disinterested in doing things - without being bored, i.e. i can sit around the living room gazing out the window at people walking/cycling by while not necessarily feeling that my lack of activity is tedious.

Yeah i love my apathy time tbh