|
|
|
|
|
by lacy_tinpot
1173 days ago
|
|
Productivity making you better or worse makes a needless moral judgement. What's better is that being productive allows you to accomplish the things you want. Then the real question becomes about your goals, rather than some vague ideas of "work". I think it's better to really consider what you want and don't want, and genuinely accept them. The productivity scale is not some inherent moral metric. This shrouds the intent of productivity, which is to accomplish goals. So you're not worse if you're not being productive, but you are worse if you aren't accomplish whatever goals you have for yourself. Not because it's some moral failure but simply accomplishing goals feels good and not accomplishing them feels bad. Further the goals themselves aren't universal. They're merely reflections of your innate desires, which you have to accept. If you feel like you weren't "productive", it's probably closer to say that you feel bad for not achieving what you set out to do. The simple problem here I think is goal setting. Not solely productivity itself. |
|
I would however challenge the corollary that that is an objectively more enjoyable life. I find many unhappy friends an colleagues grinding on a path of thejr choosing, to a pace of their own arbitrary selection.
In my experience, I am most happy when I am goal-less, but engaged. Open to happy accidents. Agile to respond to new inspirations. Free of burdens imposed either by others or myself. I pair this with a drive to bring my pursuits to a nice milestone if possible, ideally public like publishing a video. But I allow myself to move on if something doesn't bring joy anymore.