|
|
|
|
|
by Clubber
3222 days ago
|
|
An individual does not owe the world 100% productivity. An individual doesn't owe the world any productivity. The only time an individual owes productivity is when there is an agreement for services in exchange for money or something else of value. People commonly use productivity to try to quantify something in dollars, but it's always struck a nerve. It seems like when using that argument, the arguer assumes the world is owed any type of productivity by nature. In your argument, you say you are worried that Facebook use results in a loss of productivity, as if the world is owed productivity. It is not. I'm not criticizing you, it's a common argument, but it is based on a misconception. If a person wants to spend almost all their time reading Facebook, or reading literature, as long as they are neutral with the system (pay for themselves in some way), that's perfectly fine. |
|
I think you can actually reconcile both views in terms of happiness i.e. the global economy measured in terms of happiness generated. With this sort of model in mind, both you and person you are replying to can both be correct in that it is possible that social media is sub-optimal compared to some alternative that delivers some combination of increased immediate happiness and/or increased probability/reliability/sustainability of future happiness.