[cantthinkofone]

There's something in human nature that finds meaning in turbulence, friction, conflict, movement. A sense of being challenged, pushing past limits, propelling into excitement and change. When you reach a state where you have all your needs met and don't need to go any further, there still remains a sense that there's more left undone. Comfort can be equated with stagnation. It's a Nietzschean notion. A will-to-danger (not to sound too crazy). There's a sense of being domesticated that adds a subtle discomfort to the comfort.

I've worked blue collar and white collar jobs, and it was the blue collar jobs that made me feel more alive, because I was around dangerous tools, hazards, and actuating my body like it was supposed to be outside exposed to the elements. I went home after and my rest felt deserved and truly regenerative, like my body was drinking it in. The white collar work, though it pays better and offers more comfort and is more cognitively demanding, feels at the same time too breezy, too safe.

It seems like a really stupid argument, that things can be bad because they're too good, affluenza and so on, but there's something to it.

[vfinn]

Sounds like the complete opposite of what Jiddu Krishnamurti would say. Krishnamurti would ask whether you can live without conflict, agony, turbulence, and yet, live more fully. To me, Krishnamurti is speaking from the position of sanity, such sanity, that nowadays seem to exist only on a small scale, in places, where the "what's the right thing to do" is not muddied in the accumulated daily problems arising extended from the human psyche and our current way of life.

Or are you saying that there is no way to be productive without the stress that is more and more present in our daily lives, in this environment of competition and constant yearning for more, for example?

Edit: deleted a phrase.