[HN Gopher] Ikigai: What We Got Wrong and How to Find Meaning in...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ikigai: What We Got Wrong and How to Find Meaning in Life
        
       Author : pmzy
       Score  : 159 points
       Date   : 2024-03-21 12:50 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (nesslabs.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (nesslabs.com)
        
       | throwaway_08932 wrote:
       | > Japanese do not need grandiose motivational frameworks to keep
       | going, but rely more on the little rituals in their daily
       | routines.
        
       | ljoshua wrote:
       | This was a nice reframing of the concept of ikigai as I've heard
       | it, and a quick consult of Wikipedia for ikigai [0] shows that
       | it's largely accurate.
       | 
       | I'd also throw out there that one can derive a lot of purpose and
       | meaning in life from religion as well. I certainly do. There are
       | many motivating factors in life, and some core religious beliefs
       | can do this quite effectively, in a positive manner.
       | 
       | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikigai
        
         | 47282847 wrote:
         | Spirituality != Religion
        
       | graemep wrote:
       | This is hardly a novel idea in the rest of the world. It is an
       | ancient one and widespread. It is discussed by many philosophers
       | and is discussed in many religions.
       | 
       | It strikes me that westerners have lost the roots of their
       | culture and are having to relearn it from elsewhere.
       | 
       | "ikigai doesn't limit someone's value in life to career and
       | financial status"
       | 
       | Ancient Greek philosophers and their successors frequently
       | discussed happiness and how to live life.
       | 
       | Assuming it is being explained correctly here, that is less anti-
       | wealth than Christianity ("it is easier for a camel to pass
       | through the eye of a needle" etc) but similar in rejecting
       | financial status.
       | 
       | Buddhism regards wealth as an attachment so I would have expected
       | a slightly different attitude.
       | 
       | From middle eastern (possibly Hellenised) culture before
       | Christianity read the book of Ecclesiastes.
       | 
       | "What does a man acquire from all his labor and from the anxiety
       | that accompanies his toil on earth? For all day long his work
       | produces pain and frustration,) and even at night his mind cannot
       | relax! This also is futile! There is nothing better for people
       | than to eat and drink, and to find enjoyment in their work."
        
         | mistermann wrote:
         | > This is hardly a novel idea in the rest of the world. It is
         | an ancient one and widespread.
         | 
         | This (like so many other things) is a very ontologically tricky
         | proposition due to the deceptive distinction between abstract
         | and concrete "is-ness". It is true that _at least one_ Human in
         | each country possesses _at least some_ knowledge of such
         | things, _but how well distributed is the knowledge_? The so
         | casually deployed symbol  "is" _makes no distinction_ , and
         | Humans generally _do not have the ability_ to consider such
         | things.
         | 
         | Even weirder: Hard Whorfism "is" "false".
         | 
         | > It strikes me that westerners have lost the roots of their
         | culture and are having to relearn it from elsewhere.
         | 
         | Absolutely agree....perhaps this is (at least in part) because
         | _we never learned in the first place_ (other than abstractly,
         | and even there only for a small percentage of the population)
         | the difference between abstract and concrete  "reality",
         | because such things are not taught in standard curriculum in
         | school (see also: financial planning, how to be nice,
         | categorization in general (ontology/taxonomy), etc).
         | 
         | I often wonder if all of the sub-optimalities in our "advanced,
         | 'scientific' culture" are _purely_ coincidences  / oversights.
         | That people seem to so reliably (in frequency, _and form_ )
         | have an innate and very strong aversion (a lot like how
         | religious or anti-religious people get nervous/agitated if one
         | is to call into question the truth of scripture) to discussing
         | such matters _in the context of concrete reality_ makes me more
         | than a little suspicious.
        
           | divinie wrote:
           | > a lot like how religious or anti-religious people get
           | nervous/agitated if one is to call into question the truth.
           | 
           | You're recognizing the same bias. It's not that there are
           | oversights so much as there are widespread ideas believed to
           | be definitive. Rather than teaching people the "right ideas,"
           | at this point I feel it's critical that people learn how
           | cognitive biases work, namely, authority bias. On the matter
           | of beliefs, Crony Beliefs is a gem
           | https://meltingasphalt.com/crony-beliefs/
        
             | graemep wrote:
             | I agree it is a problem, but I do not think teaching people
             | about cognitive biases will solve it. It is very hard to
             | apply it to yourself, and any kind of critical thinking is
             | hard.
             | 
             | A lot of people will not even make the effort. The
             | motivation comes from existing values and beliefs, which
             | will have been subject to biases themselves!
        
               | divinie wrote:
               | Not claiming this is ethical, but the biases can be used
               | on the person to generate the motivation and emotional
               | response to recognize that they don't want to suffer from
               | exploitation of the biases
               | 
               | As for the reason it would help the issue, if the person
               | is not susceptible to these, they will not be susceptible
               | to the industries, governments, teachers that exploit
               | these. They'll recognize it before falling for it.
               | 
               | As for the difficulty level, it could be made simple.
               | They aren't complex, they are just unknown
        
           | graemep wrote:
           | > I often wonder if all of the sub-optimalities in our
           | "advanced, 'scientific' culture" are purely coincidences /
           | oversights. That people seem to so reliably (in frequency,
           | and form) have an innate and very strong aversion (a lot like
           | how religious or anti-religious people get nervous/agitated
           | if one is to call into question the truth of scripture) to
           | discussing such matters in the context of concrete reality
           | makes me more than a little suspicious.
           | 
           | I think you are right, but I am not sure what the underlying
           | problem is. I wonder whether there is a bit of cowardice
           | there and a fear of where the line of thought will lead - not
           | wanting to turn the stone over for fear of what you will
           | find. Our scientific culture is afraid of facing facts.
        
         | mihaic wrote:
         | Sometimes truths have to come from the outside for them to be
         | accepted by the closed minded.
         | 
         | As the Enlightenment already absorbed eastern concepts into the
         | western plane to some degree already (see the roots in Hume for
         | instance), the relationship of westerners with eastern concepts
         | as like hiring a consultant to tell you all the things that
         | your employees were already saying, but which were ignored
         | since they were merely grunts.
        
           | geye1234 wrote:
           | Is the history of the Enlightenment's link with eastern
           | concepts documented anywhere?
           | 
           | Clearly Hume uses eastern concepts ("I" am just a bundle of
           | thoughts; causality is just a projection; etc). And the anti-
           | Aristotelianism of the Enlightenment (hostility to concepts
           | such as substantial form) could be seen as eastern too. I'm
           | not sure if this history has ever been documented though.
           | 
           | The Enlightenment is seen as paradigmatically western, and in
           | a way it is, and yet it tried to reject pretty much the
           | entirety of western philosophy that came before it -- perhaps
           | even under eastern influence.
           | 
           | Stuff is never simple, is it?
        
         | FrustratedMonky wrote:
         | Yes.
         | 
         | With all of these examples. The trick seems to be in 'how'.
         | Everyone can read this article, or a Buddhist text, or some
         | Stoic essays, and agree and think it would be a good idea.
         | 
         | The 'how' to get there, seems to be the gap.
         | 
         | Everyone agrees having 'purpose' is great. The 'how to find a
         | purpose' is the problem. Not just intellectually 'decide on a
         | purpose', but 'believe in a purpose'.
        
           | hosh wrote:
           | There is no procedural method or recipe in which would lead
           | to someone finding their purpose like that. This purpose
           | isn't a purely objective and externalized thing. To do
           | otherwise, it would be no different than partaking in one of
           | those FB quizzes that would, based upon some input, spit out
           | which Harry Potter House you belong to, or what kind of D&D
           | class you have.
           | 
           | You have to take the time to allow yourself to be aware of
           | what's going on within yourself, and what's going on in the
           | community around you. This "awareness" isn't the same as
           | collecting data, or constructing thoughts that interpret
           | things. It's not an easy thing to convey, since many people
           | will take what I'm saying here and turn it into yet another
           | recipe. And if I then say, it's more like mindfulness
           | meditation, then all sorts of ideas and interpretation gets
           | added to that, making it far away from I'm saying here.
           | 
           | I'm not very articulate about this. But maybe Carol Sanford's
           | _Regenerative Life_ would better able to convey just how to
           | find your unique contribution to that which is greater than
           | yourself.
        
           | chasd00 wrote:
           | > The 'how to find a purpose' is the problem.
           | 
           | zen would say the harder you try the further away you'll be.
           | You do have a purpose only as much as you don't. ..."sense"
           | isn't the right word but it makes sense to me, it's more like
           | just something you realize.
        
         | Oioioioiio wrote:
         | Thats a very hard simplification in a complex modern world.
         | 
         | A world like now never existed before: Millions of people
         | living in cities were they are not able at all to live in
         | nature or can't afford to move away or into the cities.
         | 
         | A world with high speed communication.
         | 
         | A world with unlimited possibilities.
         | 
         | A world were you grew up without ever having to learn were your
         | water comes from and how your food is made.
         | 
         | The world doesn't need most of us, this was never the case in
         | the past. I'm a smart person, i'm not needed because there are
         | still enough even smarter people.
         | 
         | And regarding your quote of the Christians: They don't live it
         | either or never lived. The dark ages produced a lot of
         | christian focused 'art' full of gold.
         | 
         | And in the past, if you had any mental illness, you just might
         | have been killed or put in shackles.
        
           | hosh wrote:
           | > Thats a very hard simplification in a complex modern world.
           | 
           | Although I think the issues are complex, I disagree that the
           | complexity of the modern world itself leads to this.
           | 
           | One of the core features of modernization has to do with the
           | substitution of local communities with regional and global
           | institutions. That alone changed many things.
           | 
           | It also does not help that our civilization keeps making this
           | mistake: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/07/26/a-big-little-
           | idea-call... ... that is, the effort by modern institutions
           | to make sense of the world in a legible way leads to imposing
           | simplification on the world. The world was already complex,
           | even in pre-modern times.
           | 
           | > The world doesn't need most of us, this was never the case
           | in the past. I'm a smart person, i'm not needed because there
           | are still enough even smarter people.
           | 
           | If we take a person's worth as a _quantity_, sure. We can
           | reduce every person into a set of stats, similar to D&D
           | character sheets, and every person fits into roles based upon
           | those stats. Those stats make things more legible.
           | 
           | Each person, however, has a _quality_, and it is here one's
           | unique purpose and contribution can be discovered. I didn't
           | learn this from ikigai specifically; as one of the comments
           | talked about, some form of this was widely known in pre-
           | modernized cultures. Carol Sanford has been writing, talking,
           | and practicing this as applied to the modern world for
           | decades.
           | 
           | There's also the work of Christopher Alexander. His writings
           | and work convinced me that modernity did not have to be
           | designed this way.
        
             | UncleOxidant wrote:
             | I don't think that Oioioioiio was saying that each person
             | doesn't have intrinsic worth (quality, as you put it), more
             | like that each of us has such a small piece of the puzzle
             | now. In the past if you lost a community member who had
             | critical knowledge and skills it would endanger the
             | survival of the community. Now there aren't a lot of
             | communities where that would be the case.
        
               | hosh wrote:
               | I wasn't talking about intrinsic worth at all. That kind
               | of framing is still looking at things in terms of
               | quantity rather than quality. I'm talking about the
               | difference in the very worldview and paradigm. I am
               | certainly not just talking about the material production
               | someone can contribute.
               | 
               | The unique contribution someone can make isn't
               | necessarily about the survival of the community. When I
               | say unique, it means once that person has passed, there
               | will never be again that particular contribution -- at
               | the very minimum, the environment, relationship, and
               | moment is unique, as is the person. As such, the
               | community also grows and changes over time, a living
               | system as much as the individual people within the
               | community are themselves living systems.
        
           | UncleOxidant wrote:
           | > And regarding your quote of the Christians: They don't live
           | it either or never lived. The dark ages produced a lot of
           | christian focused 'art' full of gold.
           | 
           | There have always been Christians who at least _tried_ to
           | live it. They 're in the minority and they weren't and aren't
           | the ones you hear much about (or from) but that's kind of the
           | point.
        
           | graemep wrote:
           | So why were people considering these questions so long ago?
           | It s not the modern world that is the only problem.
           | 
           | > And regarding your quote of the Christians: They don't live
           | it either or never lived.
           | 
           | Lots of people have. Not everyone was perfect, but it was an
           | aspiration, and there are whole traditions of monasticism and
           | other service based on it. It is no accident that the word
           | organisations that help others is derived from a Christian
           | theological term, charity.
           | 
           | > The dark ages produced a lot of christian focused 'art'
           | full of gold.
           | 
           | The dark ages were not dark.
           | 
           | Art is one of the things that contribute to the community,
           | and its creation leads the artist to fulfilment. Public art
           | (which is what religious art usually is) is the opposite of
           | hoarding private art.
           | 
           | > A world with unlimited possibilities.
           | 
           | Very few people have access "unlimited possibilities".
           | Financial constraints, legal constraints, personal
           | constraints..
        
           | woliveirajr wrote:
           | > The world doesn't need most of us
           | 
           | Perfect. It isn't even a matter of being replaceable: it's
           | just that so many people might die, anywhere in the world,
           | and you don't even notice it.
        
             | nathan_compton wrote:
             | The world has never needed us, in my opinion. Other human
             | beings may find you useful, love you, whatever, and you may
             | find some kind justification for your own existence, but
             | the world itself has never cared about people.
        
         | UncleOxidant wrote:
         | Ecclesiastes, probably the first existential text that we have.
         | In a lot of ways it seems really contemporary.
        
           | graemep wrote:
           | There was a question some months ago on the Academic Bibical
           | Reddit asking what religious text non-religious people there
           | liked the most and it was by far the most popular with them.
           | 
           | I read a bit again recently because someone quoted part of
           | what I quoted with regard to work and education, and it
           | really does feel contemporary. That said, it is not that
           | uncommon for ancient texts to feel relevant. I do not read a
           | lot of ancient texts but one I did recently, pseudo-
           | Xenophon's Constitution of the Athenians had several things,
           | including a great passage about the rich and democracy.
           | 
           | There is a lovely reading of it by David Suchet that is on
           | Youtube.
        
         | jmbwell wrote:
         | Sure, but it's not like humans in all parts of the world
         | haven't been proposing models for understanding happiness in
         | some form or another since before the written word.
         | 
         | If it were possible to compare every model for happiness ever
         | conceived, they'll likely have a few things in common. Mostly,
         | they will propose factors that are familiar within a group's
         | common frame of reference, those factors will address that
         | group's common experiences and habits, and the formula will
         | project a roadmap for making changes in those habits to realign
         | the experiences with "happiness."
         | 
         | In other words, "we all tend to do one thing, but doing another
         | is probably better, and it's easy to forget, so here's way to
         | remember." If it's useful to anyone at all, it's of value. If
         | it's useful to larger group, then a utilitarian might say it
         | has greater value. But even the assessment of value is
         | culturally-dependent, so it's kind of pointless to argue about
         | the virtues of different models on the basis of their cultures
         | of origin.
         | 
         | So of course different cultures present things differently. It
         | doesn't have to mean anyone is losing the roots of their own
         | culture. Foucault would argue that being anything other than a
         | part of your own culture is impossible. Even if you reject your
         | own culture, you're rejecting the culture you're a part of, and
         | that becomes a part of that culture. You just can't _not_ be
         | who you are, where you are, and a product of your experiences.
         | 
         | If the differences in habits among various cultures become more
         | apparent in a direct comparison, that's mostly down to the
         | different frames of reference that determine the signs and
         | signifiers used to express and internalize the models. But
         | within each culture, the mechanisms themselves are often
         | fundamentally the same. We manage resources as a group, we
         | figure out who's us and who's them, we defend the group against
         | threats, and we generally aim to reproduce. Whatever else goes
         | on, our culture is how we communicate among ourselves what to
         | expect from each other as we all go about those activities. It
         | gives us the language we use, which Pinkerton et al might go so
         | far as to say shapes the very ideas we have about ourselves and
         | each other, including our "secrets to happiness."
         | 
         | The point is, there are many models for understanding
         | happiness. Some we know more about because they've established
         | a large socio-economic footprint, like the major religions, and
         | some are more academic thought experiments, like what the
         | ancient greeks tended to get up to. Others are more directly
         | products of and by their host culture. Ikigai is this. If
         | people find it accessible and useful, that's nothing but great.
         | Is it a very Japanese way of looking at it? Sure. Is it some
         | innate universal truth and wisdom? I dunno, but I bet someone
         | pushing that narrative has a book or a seminar to sell.
         | 
         | In any case, for most purposes, the meme is probably enough. Do
         | what you can to do what you love, that you're good at, that
         | helps you survive, that helps your group survive.
         | 
         | In "westerner" kindergarten, they simplify it even further: do
         | only what is necessary, helpful, and/or kind. Don't even need a
         | graduate philosophy degree for that.
        
         | MenhirMike wrote:
         | > It strikes me that westerners have lost the roots of their
         | culture and are having to relearn it from elsewhere.
         | 
         | Rome defeating Carthage was legitimately one of the worst
         | things that ever happened in history.
        
       | koliber wrote:
       | I have not understood the need of a purpose in life until I found
       | myself in situations where direction evaporated. It is
       | discomforting, surprising, and enlightening. This happened a few
       | times, and I learned something new each time. It's a journey of
       | self-discovery. Thinking of it both in grandiose terms as well as
       | in the little habits was helpful.
       | 
       | It's also helpful to see what others do in such situations. Some
       | common situations where the purpose in life changes:
       | 
       | - retirement
       | 
       | - kids moving out of the house
       | 
       | - hitting a grand goal (i.e. buying a house, trip of a lifetime)
       | 
       | - financial sufficiency or independence
       | 
       | - finishing college
       | 
       | Ikigai is a neat lens for exploring this part of self.
        
         | oldstrangers wrote:
         | "until I found myself in situations where direction
         | evaporated."
         | 
         | This is the important part. Most people simply work themselves
         | to death and never find the time to ask these kinds of
         | questions. Or, they did ask themselves these questions at one
         | point and realized working themselves to death was a more
         | pleasant route than struggling with such existential problems.
        
           | balfirevic wrote:
           | Most people work themselves to death?
        
             | oldstrangers wrote:
             | Correct.
        
         | ProllyInfamous wrote:
         | >Some common situations where the purpose in life changes:
         | 
         | I have best heard these moments called " _now what?_ moments. "
        
         | lucidrains wrote:
         | "There are only two tragedies in life: one is not getting what
         | one wants, and the other is getting it." - Oscar Wilde
        
         | chasd00 wrote:
         | > - kids moving out of the house
         | 
         | I've been starting to think about this as i've got maybe 4-5
         | years left to prepare, it's not that comfortable of a thought.
         | I read an article in the WSJ about new empty nesters and one
         | guy described it as similar to getting fired. Like he had
         | worked so hard for 18 years and then one day he gets "by dad,
         | see you at Thanksgiving" and it was over. haha (but not really
         | haha)
        
       | agumonkey wrote:
       | Warning: depending on your life, the first reading about ikigai
       | might make you even more depressed (cause it may reopen wounds)
        
       | phkahler wrote:
       | There are 4 regions in the diagram that have no labels. These are
       | all one step away from the Ikigai. Each of these would be "close
       | but not quite" for a different reason.
       | 
       | Edit: Haha, as I read on it's not necessary to find the "one
       | thing".
        
         | irq-1 wrote:
         | https://management30.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/IKIGAI--...
         | 
         | They're labeled on the linked image.
        
       | ojo-rojo wrote:
       | This kind of reminds me of something Mariko told the Anjin in the
       | show Shogun. He wanted to leave Japan and be free of rituals and
       | she said something like "If you're always chasing freedom you'll
       | never find yourself."
        
       | JohnMakin wrote:
       | Dealing with this kind of angst most of my life, I've found great
       | value in this and similar philosophies. However, it should also
       | be noted that Japan has one of the highest suicide rates in the
       | world (not that far ahead of the US though).
        
         | ed_mercer wrote:
         | Japan's suicide rate is significant but not among the highest
         | in the world when compared with other countries
         | https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-r...
        
       | mattgreenrocks wrote:
       | For most of my life I kept thinking I was looking for financial
       | independence, knowing full well I'd continue to work if I hit it.
       | But this posed a problem: why work hard toward that if the day-
       | to-day wouldn't change much? Eventually I reconciled this when I
       | encountered Epictetus: I was actually looking for a mental
       | freedom to find my own meaning, identity, and grow my capacity to
       | choose the good on a daily basis. It was less about the total
       | dollar amount and more about the perception of my own agency.
       | 
       | In fact, I'd much rather grow the meta-skills that let me
       | flourish in life across multiple dimensions than have a bunch of
       | cash land on my doorstep. This is either wise or the type of
       | thing you tell yourself when you haven't had outsized success.
       | But, I also realize the former is 100% more resilient even if it
       | is much harder.
       | 
       | From here, the fog has started to lift, and I can continue the
       | work of uncovering my resilient core of personality.
        
       | ajkjk wrote:
       | It is amusing that the arguments for this are like "it reduces
       | anxiety" and "it's good for your heart". Like... yes... in that
       | it makes you happier or more fulfilled or whatever, and therefore
       | it has those effects? But if what draws you to a philosophy is
       | the health benefits... you're fucked.
        
         | tmountain wrote:
         | Seems like the health benefits would typically be viewed as the
         | byproduct of the practice. I doubt many people explore
         | philosophy directly for their health.
        
       | knightoffaith wrote:
       | I don't really understand. Is the article saying that how to find
       | meaning in life is by rejecting grand narratives and finding
       | meaning in small things? That sounds to me like saying that how
       | to find meaning in life is by... finding meaning in it. Don't get
       | me wrong, it does seem correct to stop seeking your one true
       | passion, embrace lifelong learning, letting go of lofty financial
       | goals, and stop feeling like your only goal should be saving the
       | world. But I'm not clear on _why_ or _how_ we should, in the
       | "ikigai worldview", find meaning in doing these things.
       | 
       | Really, it seems to me that the implication in the article is
       | that the question "how do I find meaning in life?" is basically
       | the wrong question to ask, that life is not the kind of thing
       | that has meaning, and that we should instead just focus on being
       | happy, which can be accomplished by small things. That would make
       | sense to me.
       | 
       | Though I prefer the western idea that there is a grand life
       | purpose. The 4 "ikigai principles" are perfectly compatible with
       | there being a grand life purpose - that there is a grand
       | narrative in which we are partaking doesn't mean that every
       | individual person has be some world-renowned entrepreneur or
       | something. An analogy - a team of stonemasons working on building
       | a cathedral may each individually be working on a small piece of
       | the final building that, to the individual, doesn't appear very
       | meaningful or important. But the sum total of the work of all the
       | stonemasons culminates in something grand and beautiful.
        
       | photochemsyn wrote:
       | Reminiscent of the Akira Kurosawa film 'Ikiru' (1952):
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikiru
        
       | freemanon wrote:
       | Looking at the term "Ikigai" as if it's some sort of dogma or a
       | way to improve one's life sorts of defeats the point. East Asian
       | philosophies are not for achieving "meaning of life" and other
       | mundane goals.
        
       | nox101 wrote:
       | I lived in Japan for 18 years. Japan is not known for people
       | following any of the advice in this article
       | 
       | > Stop seeking your One True Passion
       | 
       | 1000s of examples of Japanese people following their passion to
       | extremes exceeding most non-Japanese expectations.
       | 
       | A famous example would be Jiro from "Jiro Dreams of Sushi"
       | 
       | Japan is a place where lots people give their lives to their
       | company. I've met plenty of Japanese who work 10am with 90 minute
       | commute (so 8:30am) to 10pm (and 90 mins back) 5 days a week, all
       | year. These people have families but they readily admit they
       | spend more time with coworkers than family and are in many ways
       | closer to them.
        
         | geraldhh wrote:
         | > These people have families but they readily admit they spend
         | more time with coworkers than family and are in many ways
         | closer to them.
         | 
         | baring the closeness part, this seems rather ubiquitous
        
       | ChidiKajal wrote:
       | still not sure what to think about the popularized ikigai venn
       | diagram but thought this talk by Everything Everywhere All at
       | once directors at SXSW recently covered some interesting and
       | entertaining perspectives on the idea
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBANXz79fDg
        
       | xyzelement wrote:
       | This deeply resonates, but I am also inherently biased towards
       | seeking meaning and long-run impact. There are various western
       | schools of thought that add up to the same thing, eg Viktor
       | Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning.
       | 
       | Sometimes I see posts on HN and elsewhere that seem to be
       | divorced from a "meaning"-full perspective. I don't mean someone
       | who finds _different_ meaning than I do, but someone who doesn 't
       | think meaning matters at all. Sometimes it comes out as "I don't
       | understand why anyone would have kids when it's much easier to
       | just get brunch" or "I don't understand why work that impacts
       | people is more valuable than one that doesn't" etc. FWIW, I
       | sometimes check those folks comment history and they don't seem
       | to be particularly happy despite (or maybe because of) the fact
       | that they removed all onus of meaning from themselves.
        
       | dhosek wrote:
       | There's a recent (2023) novel translated from Japanese for which
       | this is a central concept in the plot (since I read it in
       | translation, I don't know if Ikigai is mentioned in the
       | original). It's entitled _What You Are Looking For Is In The
       | Library_ by Michiko Aoyama.
       | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1335005625/donhosek
       | 
       | I first learned of it thanks to reading all the shortlist books
       | from this year's Tournament of Books
       | https://www.tournamentofbooks.com
        
       | blueyes wrote:
       | I like the idea of finding micro-habits, activities and
       | relationships that are fulfilling.
       | 
       | While Ikigai may have been repurposed by the West, its new
       | incarnation and Venn diagram seems like a pretty valuable tool
       | for young people to navigate life, even if it's a radical
       | semantic shift from the original Japanese. It also has the merit
       | of trying to awaken peoples' ambition, to raise the ceiling on
       | what they think they might achieve, and how to get there, which
       | Anne-Marie's originalism lacks.
        
       | Zufriedenheit wrote:
       | This reminds me of the recent movie "Perfect Days". It's about a
       | japanese man who lives his ikigai cleaning Tokyo toilets.
        
       | schneebyte wrote:
       | I prefer "flexible" stoicism, like Seneca.
       | 
       | In the scale of the universe (time and space) we are all
       | insignificant, like tiny ants. One ant has more money than the
       | others. Another ant is famous.
       | 
       | Don't be afraid of death. Enjoy living in the present. Try to do
       | good.
       | 
       | Of course easier said than done.
        
       | _tk_ wrote:
       | Ikigai is one of these concepts, that I suspect to be mostly
       | substituted by western life coach BS, which mostly means common
       | sense application of modern-ish western philosophy to daily life
       | including work. Unfortunately, when it is presented through the
       | lens of someone who has lived in Japan for 7 months, this hardly
       | changes my biased view.
        
       | sevagh wrote:
       | Anybody else feel like you enjoy the feeling of "having had done
       | a thing" more than doing the thing?
        
         | aradox66 wrote:
         | Type 2 fun
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-03-21 23:01 UTC)