How come I don't have an active passion for music like I used to?
I'm 27, and it hasn't been since I was 23, maybe 24 where I'd watch musician interviews on Youtube, debate and discuss artists with you fucker on Sup Forums etc.
What's going on with me? It can't be depression since I'm happier now than then, even.
1/2
35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.
36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.
37, Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.
SURROGATE ACTIVITIES
38. But not every leisured aristocrat becomes bored and demoralized. For example, the emperor Hirohito, instead of sinking into decadent hedonism, devoted himself to marine biology, a field in which he became distinguished. When people do not have to exert themselves to satisfy their physical needs they often set up artificial goals for themselves. In many cases they then pursue these goals with the same energy and emotional involvement that they otherwise would have put into the search for physical necessities. Thus the aristocrats of the Roman Empire had their literary pretensions; many European aristocrats a few centuries ago invested tremendous time and energy in hunting, though they certainly didn’t need the meat; other aristocracies have competed for status through elaborate displays of wealth; and a few aristocrats, like Hirohito, have turned to science.
2/2
39. We use the term “surrogate activity” to designate an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that people set up for themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us say, merely for the sake of the “fulfillment” that they get from pursuing the goal. Here is a rule of thumb for the identification of surrogate activities. Given a person who devotes much time and energy to the pursuit of goal X, ask yourself this: If he had to devote most of his time and energy to satisfying his biological needs, and if that effort required him to use his physical and mental faculties in a varied and interesting way, would he feel seriously deprived because he did not attain goal X? If the answer is no, then the person’s pursuit of goal X is a surrogate activity. Hirohito’s studies in marine biology clearly constituted a surrogate activity, since it is pretty certain that if Hirohito had had to spend his time working at interesting non-scientific tasks in order to obtain the necessities of life, he would not have felt deprived because he didn’t know all about the anatomy and life-cycles of marine animals. On the other hand the pursuit of sex and love (for example) is not a surrogate activity, because most people, even if their existence were otherwise satisfactory, would feel deprived if they passed their lives without ever having a relationship with a member of the opposite sex. (But pursuit of an excessive amount of sex, more than one really needs, can be a surrogate activity.)
huh
But yeah, I feel like as my goals in life have been brought to a more forefront of my life, that shit like debating about the best guitar tone in rock music seems less interesting to me
and I miss it.
I feel like if I try to debate like that though, it wouldn't be as authentic - an old man dressing in shorts and a shirt to try out skateboarding again
Sorry, meant out of 3. 3/3
40. In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one’s physical needs. It is enough to go through a training program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on time and exert the very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence and, most of all, simple OBEDIENCE. If one has those, society takes care of one from cradle to grave. (Yes, there is an underclass that cannot take the physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues that are not important for the activist personally, as in the case of white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These are not always PURE surrogate activities, since for many people they may be motivated in part by needs other than the need to have some goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive for prestige, artistic creation by a need to express feelings, militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue them, these activities are in large part surrogate activities. For example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that the “fulfillment” they get from their work is more important than the money and prestige they earn.
41. For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satisfying than the pursuit of real goals (that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled).
And your point is?
i'm older than you and for me it comes and goes
Being "into music" is a meaningless surrogate activity.
>Being "into music" is a meaningless surrogate activity.
Yeah, there are those weird, yet so precious human beings who we call musicians. And those people are quite "into music", right? It's hardly meaningless at that level.
bump
Who were your favorite artists back when you had passion?
Neoluddism is a bunch of pseudointellectual tripe borne out of economic illiteracy, and Ted Kaczynski would have been an asshole even if he wasn't a psychopath.
>fucking retarded kid who read the unabomber's half thought essay of aphorisms and, not even understanding it, took it to heart
>half thought essay
Unabomber's IQ is on an entirely different plane than yours, ese
It really isn't.
>In 1967, Kaczynski's dissertation (Boundary Functions) won the Sumner B. Myers Prize for Michigan's best math dissertation of the year. Allen Shields, his doctoral advisor, called it "the best I have ever directed", and Maxwell Reade, a member of his dissertation committee, said "I would guess that maybe 10 or 12 men in the country understood or appreciated it." Kaczynski published two journal articles related to his dissertation, and three more after leaving Michigan.
yeah nvm he's just a literal mathematical genius, I'm sure you're on his level. lmao
>STEM
>at all related to sociology or philosophy
And they have interests outside of music.
>experts in one field are experts in all others
Take an introductory critical thinking, logic or philosophy class FFS. What you've just said is literally no different than saying we ought to take David Beckham's thoughts on economics and philosophy seriously because he is far superior to us at football.
Mathematics is most certainly related to philosophy, you cretin
Lol, as if math isn't closely related to logic and experts in logic aren't also adept at math and vice-versa. Also philosophy is fucking easy. And maybe *you* should take a critical thinking class if you think comparing logic-based subjects with a physical sport is a good argument. You're really trying too hard to make an analogy and it just doesn't stick.
Also the reply was in response to someone who said their IQ was on par with Unabomber's. That's just laughable
Yeah. You also have to be wary of academic achievements. Just because someone hit the academic criteria well for a grade doesn't mean they actually have any worthwhile insight on anything or are capable of anything besides academic tasks.
Horrible writer. Horrible thinker. Just like the unabomber.
>High IQ means you are right all the time and no one on this board can have a high IQ
As an idiot who joined Mensa and gets sent their horrible magazines every month I find this logic hilarious - especially given that you are arguing about 'good' logic'
>horrible writer
Yeah I'm going for a Nobel Prize on Sup Forums threads. Or were you just projecting?
>no one on this board can have a high IQ
Never even implied that, but it's hilarious to think that a random user has a comparable IQ. And I never argued about "good logic" nor said high IQ means you're right all the time. And (You) are in Mensa? Wow