|
|
Post by marijose on Mar 12, 2005 14:24:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by marijose on Mar 12, 2005 14:31:53 GMT -5
How interesting. I just asked for a hold on this book at my local library. I'm online while taking a break from decluttering and packing - we are in the process of downsizing from our too-big, 3,000+ sq. ft. house to something of more reasonable size. Honestly I don't know what the big attraction is with these big houses. Our experience has been that they simply provide more room to amass more stuff and are nearly impossible to maintain. During my weekly trips to our local Goodwill drive-through donation center I am amazed that there is always a line of cars waiting to unload stuff and that what they donate is, many times, either in great condition or brand new.
At work, I decided many years ago that it just wasn't my life's ambition to be promoted to middle management, the little extra money associated with such a position isn't worth all the extra stress. I'm not the only one among my colleagues who feel this way.
I hope we have moved to our new place by the time OL/LN visit the DC area (hint - hint).
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam Solomon on Mar 12, 2005 22:29:22 GMT -5
It's interesting that individualism can, according to this professor, make us sacrifice what would really make us happy. That seems to me to be the complete antithesis of individualism, actually, as the principal aim of any individualist is their own happiness. Which is actually why any relationship between two people is absolutely individualistic--no person who is truly working for their own happiness will have a relationship with someone whom they dislike, simply out of charity.
Now, assuming that he is true in saying that the only things that can truly make us happy are relationships with others--which is not at all a universal truth and, while true for many people, is still just one man's opinion--he makes an interesting point. But then, it begs the question: is sacrificing happiness for material posessions really individualism?
|
|
|
|
Post by marijose on Mar 13, 2005 10:25:04 GMT -5
Good points, Adam. I haven’t read the book yet so it’s unclear what the author means when he refers to relationships with others. From the NYT article, it sounds like he is referring to family life. While I agree with him on that point, obviously not all relationships with others—whether they be significant others, family members, neighbors, etc.—are healthy, and being in unhealthy relationships, such as abusive relationships, can actually be detrimental to one’s physical health. According to an old Spanish proverb, it’s better to be alone than in bad company.
|
|
