“ One should not be too proud of, or too engaged in, one’s hobbies; ideally, one would have none.”
Maybe I’m missing context but as written I find that almost offensively wrong. I don’t really have activities I consider to be hobbies, but usually when people attack hobbies they are attacking private leisure - the enjoyment and contentment one experiences when engaged in the activities which make one happy alone or with one’s close friends and family. There is this sick idea that all of our lives are supposed to be “useful” and “productive” and that private happiness is wrong, because it gets in the way of public-spiritedness. This is a downright Soviet idea - all citizens must at all times and places demonstrate their loyalty to The Cause in all things they do. Here in America, our founders believed that God gave each of us inalienable rights which include “liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and that this is a good thing.
That would indeed be offensive, but I don't think he had public-spiritedness in mind here, but rather the pursuit of truth and the quest for meaning. Since I posted it, though, I've thought about how some of my activities - cooking, for instance - that I only do avocationally, have been very healthy for me, as someone haunted by anxiety.
At least we found it thought-provoking and discussion-worthy. Maybe something to pursue in some essays!
Moreover, much of what is done in the name of public-spirit and being concerned with the “community” and not just our own private lives is downright harmful and inimical to free society. Many people when they turn to “do some good” actively make the world a worse place and maybe we would be better off if everyone just left each other alone most of the time and quit meddling in private affairs.
“ One should not be too proud of, or too engaged in, one’s hobbies; ideally, one would have none.”
Maybe I’m missing context but as written I find that almost offensively wrong. I don’t really have activities I consider to be hobbies, but usually when people attack hobbies they are attacking private leisure - the enjoyment and contentment one experiences when engaged in the activities which make one happy alone or with one’s close friends and family. There is this sick idea that all of our lives are supposed to be “useful” and “productive” and that private happiness is wrong, because it gets in the way of public-spiritedness. This is a downright Soviet idea - all citizens must at all times and places demonstrate their loyalty to The Cause in all things they do. Here in America, our founders believed that God gave each of us inalienable rights which include “liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and that this is a good thing.
That would indeed be offensive, but I don't think he had public-spiritedness in mind here, but rather the pursuit of truth and the quest for meaning. Since I posted it, though, I've thought about how some of my activities - cooking, for instance - that I only do avocationally, have been very healthy for me, as someone haunted by anxiety.
At least we found it thought-provoking and discussion-worthy. Maybe something to pursue in some essays!
That makes sense. Activities which are solely entertainment aren’t as enlightening to the soul as productive leisure.
Moreover, much of what is done in the name of public-spirit and being concerned with the “community” and not just our own private lives is downright harmful and inimical to free society. Many people when they turn to “do some good” actively make the world a worse place and maybe we would be better off if everyone just left each other alone most of the time and quit meddling in private affairs.