[HN Gopher] How to Do Nothing with Nobody All Alone by Yourself ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How to Do Nothing with Nobody All Alone by Yourself (2014)
        
       Author : fbn79
       Score  : 244 points
       Date   : 2022-07-11 07:09 UTC (15 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.themarginalian.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.themarginalian.org)
        
       | sitkack wrote:
       | The author has another equally wholesome book, "Where Did You Go?
       | Out. What Did You Do? Nothing."
        
       | walty8 wrote:
       | thanks, my son would love this :)
        
       | nonrandomstring wrote:
       | This article caught my wandering attention today during an
       | intermittent fast. Normally I'd take a light exercise day to burn
       | a bit more, but a minor injury is telling me to take it easy.
       | Reading HN and tinkering with code isn't enough. Fasting makes me
       | restless. I almost never get "bored", but this brings it on. I
       | want to break the link between boredom and waves of hunger. How
       | we manage solitude and how we manage hunger seem connected.
        
       | burnaway wrote:
       | meta -- i'm just wondering if the OP found this blog post through
       | the https://projectnaptha.com main page screenshot of the book.
       | these two posts are side-by-side on HN now and it gave me the
       | chills "what a coincidence" - perhaps not.
        
         | fbn79 wrote:
         | I confirm your suspect! =)
        
       | NoGravitas wrote:
       | "Boredom is insight into the essentially void nature of our
       | existence and the existence of all things" -- Keiji Nishitani
        
       | thyrox wrote:
       | This post reminds me of the life of Christopher mccandless, the
       | protagonist of into the wild.
       | 
       | McCandless had happily escaped humanity his whole life, only to
       | find that happiness itself can only be amplified when shared. One
       | of his final quotes being:
       | 
       | "Happiness only real when shared."
        
         | silicon2401 wrote:
         | I interpret that in the complete opposite way: he was a deeply
         | unhappy person who didn't realize it until he really
         | experienced being alone. I can be just as happy alone as when
         | I'm with people so the sentiment certainly doesn't apply to
         | some people
        
         | Otek wrote:
         | This is something many people overlook when they glorify this
         | character
        
         | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
         | I feel like describing him as a protagonist of book/movie
         | misses that he was a real person.
        
         | DIARRHEA_xd wrote:
         | Let's pretend his passion was Nascar driving...
        
       | bigDinosaur wrote:
       | Even better, do these things with someone else! You're always
       | existentially alone, so no need to make practical life too
       | lonesome either!
        
         | Ma8ee wrote:
         | Some of us really like our own company, our own streams of
         | consciousness without interruptions.
        
           | Dudeman112 wrote:
           | I went hiking yesterday. I really, really wouldn't have liked
           | if someone nagged me when resting while peacefully gazing
           | over the valley
           | 
           | I find it amusing how for some people the thought that
           | someone might enjoy just being alone a while is some
           | unthinkable Lovecraftian madness
        
             | wetmore wrote:
             | When I'm outdoors I often notice an internal conflict
             | between enjoying the ability to spend the time doing
             | exactly I want to do, and wanting to share the experience
             | with someone.
        
             | clsec wrote:
             | I don't get lonely, I enjoy my solitude.
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | There is a difference between lonely and alone. You can
               | be very lonely while being with a whole bunch of people,
               | and you can be very much not lonely being all with
               | yourself.
        
         | teh_klev wrote:
         | > Even better, do these things with someone else
         | 
         | Sure but that's missing the point of the book.
        
           | smokey_circles wrote:
           | People are not meant to alone. If the book is advising to do
           | things alone, I advise not reading the book
        
             | bigiain wrote:
             | If you never do things alone, I suspect you don't read
             | books anyway. So I'll just go ahead and ignore any advice
             | from you about what books I should or shouldn't read...
        
               | closedloop129 wrote:
               | Could it be that books are the technology that made being
               | alone possible? Apart from monks, have people been alone
               | before the invention of books? Without books, would
               | people learn to stay by themselves and make it a habit?
        
               | yamazakiwi wrote:
               | People have spent a multitude of hours doing other
               | activities alone as well--painting alone, looking at the
               | stars alone, practicing dance alone, using the restroom
               | alone...
        
             | the_gipsy wrote:
             | Meant by who? You? God?
        
               | ano88888 wrote:
               | evolution. It is in our DNA to be social. Most of us will
               | die without social connections
        
               | DocTomoe wrote:
               | People without social connections die earlier
               | statistically, but that can be explained by outside
               | effects (e.g. if you do not live in a family structure,
               | chances are you'll be found too late after suffering from
               | a heart attack or stroke; less people around you means
               | less immunisation for common diseases; no friends means a
               | house fire may stress you out more and you becoming
               | homeless ...). Calling that "most would be dying from no
               | social connections" still seems a bit a far reach.
               | 
               | Also, the "we need to be around people at all times"
               | seems to be less determined by genes, but by culture:
               | people in other cultures and at other times seem to have
               | been fine with extended periods of no human contact.
               | Think the 'forest dwellers' in Hindu culture, or monastic
               | hermits.
        
               | 93po wrote:
               | To prove humans need social connection, all you have to
               | do is look at the heartbreaking (and thankfully rare)
               | cases of children that grew up completely neglected and
               | sequestered. As in, locked in a room with no attention
               | for the first decade of their life. When they're
               | discovered, they're not what you think of as human. They
               | never developed language. They never developed the
               | ability to form relationships. They know nothing about
               | the world and have virtually never interacted with
               | anyone. There is no amount of therapy that will ever turn
               | these young people into functional humans and in the case
               | I remember most vividly, they will never develop any real
               | language or ability to communicate either.
        
               | yamazakiwi wrote:
               | Your argument is different from your explanation. You're
               | speaking about complete isolation. Children need some
               | socialization for them to adapt to the modern world.
               | That's different than proving humans need social
               | connections in the long term. Almost all people want some
               | form of socialization, some less, some more. It's
               | extremely rare a person would want complete isolation
               | forever in perpetuity and I say that as a person who can
               | only handle about an hour of socialization before I want
               | to climb in a hole. What no one talks about is when too
               | much socialization can impair growth.
        
               | havblue wrote:
               | I wonder if the causation is reversed when people talk
               | about living a shorter life with fewer social
               | connections. If someone has mental health issues or
               | substance abuse problems they're likely burning through
               | their social connections and their health at the same
               | time.
        
               | the_gipsy wrote:
               | But that's extreme. We don't go back to living in a cave
               | and bashing each other's skulls in with rocks, just
               | because that's where evolution took us. Our minds are
               | above and beyond some aminoacids (or whatever) now.
        
               | cossatot wrote:
               | This book is about learning how to entertain yourself
               | alone during your free time, not mandating that you only
               | recreate alone, much less disconnecting yourself from
               | society altogether.
        
             | OezMaster wrote:
             | People are meant to be bored though.
        
             | N-Krause wrote:
             | No need to see everything in black and white. There are a
             | lot of shades of gray. You're correct that humans work in
             | groups, doing things alone is inefficient, harder and
             | possibly dangerous.
             | 
             | But being alone and learning to deal with your own feelings
             | and thoughts is a good way to mature and know oneself
             | better. Also, there are a lot people that need time alone
             | to recharge and regain energy that they spend socialising
             | and interacting with people.
             | 
             | So there are benefits of being alone.
             | 
             | BTW: haven't read the book and do now know what exactly it
             | is about.
        
       | taffronaut wrote:
       | I borrowed this book from a library at age 10 or so - 50 years
       | ago. As a kid, when we went on holiday as a family the first
       | thing we would do would be to visit the library at our
       | destination and get 'visitor tickets'. I was an only child (still
       | am) and was expected to amuse myself. The title is perfect for an
       | only child. I read this book pretty much cover to cover one
       | holiday and remember making darts out of sewing needles and
       | matchsticks.
        
       | memcg wrote:
       | I am reminded of James Thurber's short story "The Secret Life of
       | Walter Mitty." So much of my life has required just waiting, so
       | daydreaming, people watching and hyper-focusing on my
       | surroundings have become valuable skills.
       | 
       | These skills allow me to "be there" for others. My mom had many
       | surgeries and I would go to the hospital and just wait with my
       | dad. We said little. He would read paperback fiction, a pastime
       | he learned riding in carpools, but he was not alone.
        
       | WA wrote:
       | I spend quite a lot of time alone by myself. I usually go for a
       | walk or ride my bike. Going to the library is another way to fill
       | your brain with other peoples' ideas, just like scrolling social
       | media.
       | 
       | But I have to be honest: there are zero profound thoughts when
       | I'm alone. I sometimes get ideas for what I could work on. Write
       | this article or that, make a standup comedy show. Write some junk
       | porn novel. It's entertaining while it lasts and after a while,
       | the thoughts are gone and having thought about them, the drive to
       | implement them is gone, too.
       | 
       | It's literally like writing things on a TODO list and feeling
       | good about having it written down, but the desire to do them is
       | gone.
       | 
       | So, since I don't get profound motivation or breakthroughs or
       | whatever, I treat time alone as some kind of mental garbage
       | collector. At least I get to move my body.
       | 
       | So, what's the lesson here? I don't know. Maybe that being alone
       | to _improve_ something is bullshit. Go out alone if it suits you,
       | don't expect profound thoughts. At least that's how I am :)
       | 
       | Edit: last paragraph
        
         | rubslopes wrote:
         | It's the same for me, and that's when things go well.
         | Sometimes, when thinking alone, anxious thoughts take place and
         | I begin a spiral of bad thoughts about the past, things I
         | should or shouldn't have done... In these cases I think it'd
         | had been better to have listened to a podcast.
        
         | ffritz wrote:
         | That sounds very normal, at least it's the same for me.
         | 
         | Sometimes I spent a considerable amount of time brainstorming
         | an idea or concept over and over during alone times, and then
         | at some point it won't return to my thoughts again, but
         | something new replaces it. Sort of like I am "done" with that
         | thought and my brain wants to move on.
         | 
         | I don't know why that happens, but I guess I get stimulation
         | simply from that iterative thought process. Thus your garbage
         | collector comparison seems accurate to me.
         | 
         | Secretly though, I do hope to get _that_ business idea at some
         | point via that process. Not sure if that's ever going to
         | happen, but that's okay too.
        
         | garyrob wrote:
         | "Go out alone if it suits you, don't expect profound thoughts"
         | 
         | Often, I consciously decide to use time along to think. I don't
         | think anything would happen without that conscious decision.
         | But I've gotten some good results from that conscious decision.
         | Once in the '90's I was driving back to my home in Maine from
         | an internet conference in Boston. I had come up with a
         | mathematical technique to recommend things to people based on
         | their interests, and at the conference, there was a session on
         | how it was hard for web sites to get advertising because they
         | had to have "space salesman" to find advertisers.
         | 
         | On the drive I asked myself, what do I know that might be able
         | to help solve problems I saw at the conference? Before I'd
         | gotten north of Massachussetts, I had the idea that advertisers
         | could send their ads to a central hub that would distribute the
         | ads to web sites based on people's interests; so the web site
         | wouldn't have to do anything and ads would be chosen
         | automatically. Interests would be discovered by keeping track
         | of which ads people tended to click on and other factors.
         | 
         | But I didn't know how to keep track of those clicks. Over the
         | next couple weeks I looked into using Netscape's cookie
         | mechanism along with other possibilities. But cookies had
         | built-in privacy constraints. From my write-up at [1]:
         | 
         | """ At first blush, cookies didn't appear like they could help,
         | because they could only be written or read from the internet
         | domain from which they were written. So, if a cookie was
         | written by, for example, a CGI at golfing.com, it couldn't be
         | accessed by a CGI at boating.com. It followed that the idea of
         | having the servers for golfing.com and boating.com both
         | accessing a central server at some other location to track user
         | activity wouldn't work; there was no way to know that the same
         | user had visited both sites because any cookies written at one
         | site would be inaccessible to the other.
         | 
         | But as I looked further into the general topic of Web
         | programming, I noticed that a Web site running on one domain
         | could invoke a CGI running on another domain. And there seemed
         | to be no reason why that CGI, running on that other domain,
         | couldn't write its own cookie to the local computer. """
         | 
         | Now, Google owns the patent that came out of it (which did NOT
         | claim the "tracking cookie" on its own, but only using it with
         | MY particular mathematical algorithm for picking ads.) As far
         | as I know the patent has never been used offensively, but even
         | last year Google and Twitter were using it defensively against
         | a patent troll. ( In their petition[2] in that case, Twitter
         | and Google repeatedly refer to the tracking cookie as
         | "Robinson's Cookie.")
         | 
         | So anyway, my advice is that you consciously CHOOSE to think
         | when alone, while doing something like walking or driving.
         | Somehow that low-level, automatic activity makes a huge
         | difference to me in my ability to think, and most of the best
         | ideas I've had in my career have come while driving. Other
         | people have their best ones while walking. I don't HAVE to be
         | alone, but I pretty much have had to say to my wife in the
         | passenger seat, "Please don't talk to me now, I'm thinking."
         | She doesn't mind because the results have sometimes been good
         | in the past!
         | 
         | [1] https://www.garyrobinson.net/2021/07/did-i-invent-browser-
         | co... [2]https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/ptab-
         | filings/IPR2021-0048...
        
           | WA wrote:
           | Thanks for sharing, maybe the intention does make a
           | difference. Or maybe I'm a bit too self-critical. I probably
           | get some kind of breakthroughs or profound thoughts after
           | all, but only on a fraction of all walks and rides - which is
           | okay.
        
             | garyrob wrote:
             | Yes, expect to have _major_ insights on only a small
             | proportion of walks or rides! :) But that 's fine! Just
             | make the conscious effort to solve problems, usually using
             | pieces you already know about!
             | 
             | For me, it's fun. There have been a number of times I've
             | done the 5-hour drive from Boston to my Maine home, and
             | then didn't want to stop, because I was chasing interesting
             | ideas in my thinking!
        
         | fleddr wrote:
         | You need to let go of the idea that every moment of your life
         | needs to have purpose or some productive output. Luckily you
         | already come to that conclusion: a way to reset the brain and
         | moving your body is always a good idea.
        
         | Kiro wrote:
         | I feel the exact opposite. I only get profound ideas when I'm
         | alone. Spending time with others is leisure but does nothing
         | for my creativity. So definitely not bullshit for me.
        
         | romanovcode wrote:
         | But isn't the idea to be alone and have no important thoughts
         | in itself is good?
         | 
         | For example, you have this huge complex problem that you cannot
         | solve, then don't think about it and relax for one day and then
         | all of a sudden you get an easy solution without even thinking
         | hard about it. Happened to me quite some times.
        
         | lubesGordi wrote:
         | Holy smokes I feel bad for you. What happened to your curiosity
         | (wo)man? I really can't empathize at all with comparing a
         | library with scrolling social media. That's apathy to the max.
        
         | ratww wrote:
         | I think the scope of what you think matters.
         | 
         | For me it's the same as you, but only with "big" ideas that
         | will require a lot of effort to get off the ground.
         | 
         | But I have been able to have a lot of great (to me)
         | breakthroughs by focusing on smaller ideas: melodies or lyrics
         | for a song, ideas for an algorithm or architecture for
         | something I'm working on, perhaps planning a whole talk or
         | presentation.
         | 
         | I believe most of us who are developers do that at work
         | already, so it's not too hard to extend it to alone time or
         | exercise time.
         | 
         | On the other hand, I had the idea for a business I'm currently
         | starting on one of those walks. So there's exceptions.
        
         | koonsolo wrote:
         | Are you a developer or somehow creating complex things?
         | 
         | Because for me, I get a lot of solutions when I'm alone (eg.
         | shower). Sometimes I get stuck on a problem, or don't find a
         | solution that feels right. A lot of times during these quiet
         | times, some solution pops out of my (probably unconscious)
         | brain.
        
         | voidhorse wrote:
         | That's consonant with my experience and I think that's kind of
         | the point. Being alone is more about getting the necessary
         | space we need for our brains to reset for once and not have to
         | focus on anything or waste cycles on distractions. I often feel
         | more refreshed after sitting around doing nothing outside for a
         | second than I do after sleeping.
         | 
         | I think this is another reason being outdoors during solitude
         | is great, it's like a relaxation and brain refresh force
         | multiplier.
        
         | andreilys wrote:
         | It all depends on whether you're getting sufficient external
         | stimulation.
         | 
         | If I go through an entire week of interesting
         | experiences/conversations/etc. then spending a day alone will
         | yield all kinds of interesting ideas/concepts/revelations.
         | Usually because I didn't have time to reflect during my busy
         | week.
        
           | bardworx wrote:
           | Out of curiosity, when you're spending time "alone" are you
           | day dreaming, actively thinking, or actively day dreaming, or
           | something else entirely?
        
         | ly3xqhl8g9 wrote:
         | i do not believe being alone is meant to be the source of
         | profundity, but of serenity * it is much cheaper (energy/time)
         | to obtain profundity from others, but serenity can only be
         | obtained after acknowledging that whatever i call I is always
         | already locked in some kind of inside and only by being alone i
         | can regulate this inside in such a manner as to be(wel)come
         | (the) serene => alone not to improve, but to survive
        
         | cableshaft wrote:
         | I sorta get that, in that I can get a lot of game and story
         | ideas that realistically will never make it into a full game
         | (and recently it's been way worse, I need to fix my environment
         | to facilitate creative work), and I have way more ideas then
         | I'll ever have time to make into games or stories, but I've
         | gotten plenty of ideas from those walks that I have
         | successfully executed on afterwards.
        
         | maskedinvader wrote:
         | yeah this sounds normal and a lot like what I feel too, No real
         | profound ideas or aha moment still, but I do end up spending a
         | lot of time alone, either walking or biking or swimming , the
         | best I can get out of that time is the ability to fill my nice
         | to have todo list with some random diy projects, or web tools I
         | know I wont prioritize building ever. But I do still like to
         | spend that time alone lost in aimless thoughts as I feel it
         | enables me to feel happiness and pleasure when I do have
         | company or I am interacting online with friends and colleagues.
        
       | donkeyd wrote:
       | A couple of years ago, I was going through a short stint of burn-
       | out. I needed some time away, so I put a mattress in the back of
       | my car and went to Germany for a few days. I loved the idea of
       | not having to go anywhere and not having to discuss the next
       | location with anyone. If I saw a place with a nice view around
       | dinner time, I'd just stop there, warm up some food and eat,
       | enjoying the view. Those couple of days were zen. I need to do
       | this again some time, but for some reason when not burnt out,
       | people are less accepting of this kind of thing.
        
         | hef19898 wrote:
         | Sounds like a great vacation! And never mind other peoples
         | opinions, some even call what you did "Vanlife", I know it as
         | camping. If you enjoy, just do it!
        
         | tinsmith wrote:
         | There is something to be said for the recovery that comes with
         | just experiencing a place in the world without any agenda or
         | accountability beyond simply being a living being. I'm glad you
         | got to experience that. i've achieved this maybe a handful of
         | times in my life, and it seems significantly harder to do in
         | the US than elsewhere.
        
         | mikepurvis wrote:
         | I did a spiritual retreat a few months ago at a Jesuit centre,
         | and I think it was a bit like this-- just leaving my phone in
         | my room and spending the entire day taking everything an hour
         | at a time with no obligations or timelines or goals at all.
         | 
         | Obviously the religious side of it isn't going to be for
         | everyone, but absolutely the "hard break from the real world"
         | side can be.
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | "All human evil comes from a single cause, man's inability to sit
       | still in a room."
       | 
       | -- Blaise Pascal
        
         | makeitdouble wrote:
         | Then our cultures will actively penalize people who can sit
         | still and be happy doing nothing. "laziness" is a cardinal sin
         | and "lack of ambition" a critical issue.
        
           | goldfeld wrote:
           | However possibly he meant sit still usefully, otherwise why
           | sit rather than lounge in an ottoman? sit still, that is,
           | sustain study, or read literature, or have creative idylls,
           | write, comtemplate the inner realms. Sounds to me like the
           | quote is the classical ideal of useful employment, by which
           | comparison much social interaction or being glued to a phone
           | is judged as laziness or, anachronically, dissipation.
        
             | makeitdouble wrote:
             | The sitting part is actually not in the original quote
             | ("Tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui
             | est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos dans une chambre").
             | It was just about staying at rest in a room.
             | 
             | Note that "at rest" being specified, it really was about
             | doing nothing. And sure, Blaise Pascal was extremely
             | active, extremely prolific since his very early days, and
             | he probably couldn't stay still doing nothing for long.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | A great deal of human bonding is based around frothing each
           | other up about a topic that either doesn't really matter, or
           | the group present has absolutely zero control over.
           | 
           | I'm sure most people notice this, but if you have freshly
           | improved skills in 'sitting still in a room', this phenomenon
           | is quite noticeable and, if I'm perfectly honest, somewhat
           | alienating.
        
       | ianferrel wrote:
       | I read this book as a child in the 1990s. I think I picked it up
       | at a garage sale, along with another of his books _" Where did
       | you go?" Out "What did you do?" Nothing"_, an entertaining memoir
       | of his youth and all the nonsense he got up to with the other
       | kids.
       | 
       | Highly recommended by 12-year-old me.
        
       | ribs wrote:
       | "[The Internet] also grows exponentially worse at helping us
       | discover what we don't yet know we ought to know, those
       | invaluable unknown-unknowns."
       | 
       | Really? Has the author ever been to Hacker News, I wonder.
        
       | kashyapc wrote:
       | Quoting from a past comment[1]. This is from the late Mihaly
       | Csikszentmihalyi (of "flow" fame):
       | 
       |  _" The ultimate test for the ability to control the quality of
       | experience is what a person does in solitude, with no external
       | demands to give structure to attention. It is relatively easy to
       | become involved with a job, to enjoy the company of friends, to
       | be entertained in a theater or at a concert. But what happens
       | when we are left to our own devices? Alone, when the dark night
       | of the soul descends, are we forced into frantic attempts to
       | distract the mind from its coming? Or are we able to take on
       | activities that are not only enjoyable, but make the self grow?"_
       | 
       | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28942369
        
         | dinvlad wrote:
         | Very profound, thanks for sharing!
        
       | personjerry wrote:
       | I find that my computer is stealing all my time. My default is to
       | sit in front of my computer.
       | 
       | I'll write an email, jot a few notes.
       | 
       | Inevitably I will open up a video or a game and distract myself.
       | 
       | If I'm spending time with myself and I'm at home, I'm on my
       | computer.
       | 
       | I think it's a problem. I'm considering thinking about it some
       | more and writing a blog post on it.
        
         | glouwbug wrote:
         | Will you sit in front of your computer when you write your blog
         | post?
        
           | personjerry wrote:
           | Yeah. I mean that's the thing, sitting in front of the
           | computer is a necessity because you need to type ideas. So
           | your screen has to become a catalyst for your thoughts
           | instead of being a distraction.
           | 
           | You have to build an "environment" where you can "blog" or
           | w/e you deem productive. I've been looking at
           | https://kinopio.club/ to be my "default screen on computer
           | start" for organizing thoughts, but it's not perfect.
        
             | ratrocket wrote:
             | This _probably_ isn 't what you're after, but you can blog
             | via a pen & notebook with Paper website:
             | https://daily.tinyprojects.dev/paper_website
             | 
             | (no affiliation and haven't used it, but I love the idea
             | and that person's "tiny projects" are super cool!)
        
             | nobodywasishere wrote:
             | You could use a notebook and handwrite things instead, that
             | helps me.
        
       | gernb wrote:
       | Just at the start
       | 
       | > now more than ever, it seems -- have a profound civilizational
       | anxiety about being alone.
       | 
       | It seems to me the "natural" state of things is to NOT be alone.
       | Did cavemen survive if they were alone? It use to be common for
       | the majority of people in the world it live in single room
       | houses. I'd think the "natural = better" crowd would be very much
       | of the thought that being alone is a symptom of modern society.
       | I'm not personally saying that being alone is bad. Only that the
       | framing seems to be that not having alone time is bad and that
       | seems like a strange framing to me if for most of our existance
       | we were rarely alone.
       | 
       | Also, I notice almost none of the comments are about the "Do
       | nothing" part. They're all about "do something with nobody all
       | alone by yourself", not "do *nothing* with nobody all alone by
       | yourself"
        
         | fleddr wrote:
         | You're right. Being alone and the very idea of privacy is a
         | modern "luxury". It did not exist as hunter gatherers nor in
         | the "african village" model. In some cultures, it still doesn't
         | exist, think a multi generational home where rooms are shared
         | with many people.
         | 
         | I think indeed the emphasis should be on the "do nothing" part.
         | Which very much is natural. I've once read that hunter
         | gatherers "worked" for about 4 hours per day. As for the rest
         | of the day? Rest, watch the sun set, gaze at the stars.
         | 
         | Many animals also do fuck all for a considerable part of the
         | day.
        
       | crispyambulance wrote:
       | This is adjacent to the notion of a "Flaneur", someone who idly
       | wanders a city with nothing in particular to do, but who engages
       | with it intellectually and socially.
       | 
       | It very much requires a high level of privledge or, in more rare
       | cases (these days), the ability to survive in poverty looking
       | like a homeless person yet still be interesting and welcomed by
       | others.
       | 
       | For Gen-X, this was also known as being a "slacker". It was good
       | while it lasted.
        
         | mgdlbp wrote:
         | Just last week!
         | 
         |  _Flanerie: The Art of Aimless Strolling_ -
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32002486 (125 comments)
        
         | ThalesX wrote:
         | > This is adjacent to the notion of a "Flaneur", someone who
         | idly wanders a city with nothing in particular to do, but who
         | engages with it intellectually and socially.
         | 
         | I've recently started watching Seinfeld again. Kramer seems
         | like exactly this kind of character.
        
       | dmje wrote:
       | This highlights what bothers me most about today's [mobile]
       | culture. There are reams of other things to say about the damage
       | being done (I'd recommend Johann Hari's book _Stolen Focus_ [0]
       | for a great, if severely worrying, overview) - but to me the
       | ability to spend time doing nothing, being with oneself, being
       | alone, living with one 's thoughts - this is a hugely important
       | thing.
       | 
       | Other people on the thread point out that "not much happens" when
       | they spend time alone - to which I'd say: that's the point. Your
       | brain needs time to process, to chew through, to formulate, to
       | make sense of... all the things it has been spending time doing.
       | So yeh, sometimes ideas happen in these spaces (ideas certainly
       | _don 't_ happen where there's _no_ space!), but sometimes nothing
       | at all  "happens". And...that's important.
       | 
       | As well as that, the constant-always-filled-always-on culture
       | created by mobile devices takes you away from the present moment.
       | It's like the least mindful thing you can be doing, and given the
       | quantities of evidence around happiness, flow, focus, etc - just
       | _being in the world_ is a critically important thing.
       | 
       | The other angle is about the ego in all of this. One of the
       | strange things that comes out of a meditation practice is that
       | (and bear with me here, it sounds weird) - when you spend more
       | time with yourself, focusing on what your inner voice is saying,
       | without constant distraction, you actually become very much
       | better at being empathetic in the world. Because you understand
       | more about who you are (and, ultimately, who your "self"
       | isn't...), you get to understand more about other people and who
       | _they_ are. I wouldn 't be at all surprised if being good at
       | being alone also boosted this sense of empathy for others. It
       | sounds counter-intuitive, but I suspect it's true.
       | 
       | [0] https://stolenfocusbook.com/
        
       | bowsamic wrote:
       | > What I call zazen is not developing concentration by stages and
       | so on. It is simply the Awakened One's own easy and joyful
       | practice, it is realized-practice within already manifest
       | enlightenment. It is the display of complete reality. Traps and
       | cages spring open. Grasping the heart of this, you are the dragon
       | who has reached his waters, the tiger resting in her mountains.
       | Understand that right here is the display of Vast Reality and
       | then dullness and mental wandering have no place to arise.
       | 
       | https://wwzc.org/dharma-text/fukanzazengi-how-everyone-can-s...
       | 
       | Returning to the joyful ease of a child, not putting distinctions
       | and discriminations on play, or worrying about the next thing or
       | even doing the current thing well, is what we train by sitting
       | zazen in Zen Buddhism
        
         | tuxie_ wrote:
         | > not putting distinctions and discriminations on play
         | 
         | Honestly that stands out for me from your comment. What do you
         | mean? It does not follow logically, at least for me, from the
         | rest of the things you mention.
        
           | bowsamic wrote:
           | Zazen is about sitting without making distinctions. If a good
           | feeling arises, we treat it the same as a bad feeling, we
           | just let it arise and pass without judging it. Same for
           | distinguishing between self and other, etc. Zazen is a
           | practise for learning how to cultivate a mind that does not
           | attach to discriminations or distinctions between different
           | mental or physical states or objects.
           | 
           | We put distinctions on the world because we think it's
           | necessary to be able to actually live here, but actually if
           | you let go of distinctions you will find that life lives on
           | as normal and you still somehow know what to do but in a much
           | more liberated way.
           | 
           | "Not putting distinctions and discriminations on play" means
           | to play without making distinctions or discriminations, such
           | as: "am I playing right?", "am I being too loud?", "is this a
           | good use of my time?", "could I be doing something more
           | productive?", etc. Most adults cannot play without attaching
           | to those questions and being bothered by them. One way to
           | learn to not attach to those questions is to practise zazen
        
             | Dudeman112 wrote:
             | >We put distinctions on the world because we think it's
             | necessary to be able to actually live here
             | 
             | You'll find that living on the world without distinctions
             | in some places will get you shot or eaten by wildlife.
             | Which does make your life in the world a wee shorter,
             | yes... Although at that point I guess someone truly
             | enlightened wouldn't mind it
        
               | itronitron wrote:
               | You could make the same argument about listening to
               | music, that wandering around while listening to music
               | will get you shot or eaten by wildlife, and yet people
               | generally gain some benefit from listening to music.
        
               | Dudeman112 wrote:
               | Yes, however people don't come up with philosophies about
               | hijacking your whole thought process so the only thing
               | left is listening to music
               | 
               | If someone is selling a fundamental truth about the
               | universe, it better damn well work in every situation
        
               | bowsamic wrote:
               | One way I gain confidence in it is to think about how it
               | has had 2500 years of research and development, and in
               | that time has not asked the majority of Buddhists to
               | accept a set of beliefs blindly. It has changed
               | drastically with time and culture: Japanese Buddhism is
               | very different from Chinese Buddhism, Japanese Buddhism
               | in the 1200s is very different from in the 800s. It is
               | allowed to evolve with what works for people, and I find
               | that quite compelling. Of course that alone is not
               | enough, I have to also actually do the practise myself
               | and see what happens
        
               | throwamon wrote:
               | Aside from the blind acceptance, how can you be so
               | confident in "it" if Japanese Buddhism is so different
               | from Chinese Buddhism? Haven't the other major religions
               | existed for almost the same amount of time and gone
               | through just as much "research and development"? Doesn't
               | that give you confidence in them? Have you practiced them
               | and seen what happens?
        
               | bowsamic wrote:
               | The difference is that the Buddha specifically taught
               | that the way to verify his teachings was to practise it.
               | Buddhism gives you a path to become a Buddha. In
               | contrast, Christianity does not give you a path to become
               | Christ, or even become sure of Christ. You are expected
               | to believe in Christ without ever seeing any evidence of
               | it. It is the same for many other religions, they do not
               | offer empirically tested methods for personally verifying
               | the teachings, but Buddhism does.
               | 
               | Japanese Buddhism is so different from Chinese Buddhism
               | because the cultural background of Japan is very
               | different to China, so people have different needs,
               | propensities, and capabilities.
        
               | bowsamic wrote:
               | Have you tried it? If you did you will realise that
               | actually it isn't our attachment to distinctions that
               | propels us, but there is an automatic animal decision
               | making process before we rationalise about it. We
               | actually do this a lot but we just don't realise it,
               | afterwards we think that our rational sense of "I" is in
               | the driving seat but really it is a bit different. As I
               | said, it's hard to believe that you could live a life
               | like that, but I promise you that after dropping
               | distinctions you will handle the person shouting at you
               | or the bear attacking you far more effectively than you
               | would if you were rationally deliberating over it. But
               | you'll have to try it to believe me perhaps, I was
               | surprised too. Part of the reason why enlightenment is a
               | long and difficult process is because we are so convinced
               | that we need to hold onto things to keep surviving. Some
               | people are so shocked by the realisation that they even
               | commit suicide, particularly if done in an unsafe setting
               | without support.
        
               | Dudeman112 wrote:
               | I don't think deliberate thoughts are the best tools for
               | all circumstances. That's not my point
               | 
               | Actually getting rid of distinctions requires an
               | overwriting of the non-deliberate thought processes too.
               | You won't "handle" the person shouting at you or the bear
               | attacking you more effectively, you won't handle anything
               | at all. You'll just be the cognitive equivalent of a
               | rock, but in human flesh
               | 
               | You seem to be using "distinctions" as a synonym for
               | deliberate thought (I could be wrong, of course)
        
               | bowsamic wrote:
               | Yes, by distinctions I mean rational deliberate ones that
               | arise from attachments to ideas that we have about the
               | world. For example the idea that I am me and you are you.
               | We are attached to this idea and act in a non-optimal way
               | due to it. Being before that mind is called "prajna" or
               | wisdom in Buddhism, prajnaparamita being the "perfection
               | of wisdom". I don't mean the distinctions made by our
               | material condition such as hunger or flight and fight, I
               | mean the reactions to those things.
               | 
               | It is the Buddha's parable of the two arrows: the first
               | arrow (pain) is unavoidable, however we also then take on
               | an unecessary second arrow (negative emotional reaction
               | to pain) that is totally avoidable. I'm talking about the
               | second part.
               | 
               | Letting go of our conscious attachment to distinctions
               | and discriminations we can play like children again
        
               | Dudeman112 wrote:
               | Might want to start using "deliberate thinking" (or
               | something like that) instead of "distinction".
               | 
               | Even if it's valid, "distinction" also has other meanings
               | that might come to mind first in the same context, which
               | can lead people to misunderstand what you are talking
               | about. It's what happened to me
        
               | bowsamic wrote:
               | Apologies, Buddhist terminology is extremely difficult to
               | translate accurately into English. For example the word
               | "suffering" is not quite right for translating the
               | sanksrit word "Duhkha". It's easy to forget to clarify
               | the translations, but that's part of why it is so
               | difficult to learn. When we get more Buddhist texts that
               | are written primarily in English first, it will be easier
               | to communicate
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-11 23:02 UTC)