Search the Community

Years old, client cancelled before viewing PO-EducationTool+Philosophy.docx.pdf

I am quite confused at this point in my life. I several roads I could possible travel, although two appeal to me more then the others. I am fascinated by so many things in life, and my current belief system tells me I only get one chance to live, and that's it. So I have about 60 years to cover as much as possible. I am currently on the road to pursue a career in neurotechnology. I am quite convinced that this will be a very viable field over the next couple decades. I have seen numerous research that is telling me we will soon have direct human/computer interfaces, and I am very interested in pursuing an electrical engineering/ neuroscience degree. Now here is the other side: I love making music. I admire skill more than anything, and I love seeing myself progress day by day with each practice session. My music teacher is fully convinced if I went to school for music composition I would do incredibaly well. I know I won't make anywhere near as much money as I would creating a neurotechnology company, but my life will be as fufilling, if not more. I can't really decide which would make me more happier, as I am so fascinated by both domains. Our attention is limited and I want to give the domain I pick 100% of my attention. I want to spend all day every day pursuing both domains, but I obviously can't. So tell me, how does an Objectivist pick a career?

Permit me to offer a Spinozan perspective into the debate regarding Walmart:in particular and coroprations in general: In his 'political tract' he noted that the '-cracy' in democracy, meant the people are empowered to change things,(kratos in greek means more like 'direct' than 'rule' as such). Having empowerment but not using it is a definite statement that one accepts the status quo--that there is nothing to direct. Walmart builds huge boxes, pays poorly and refuses to hire full-time--all in the name of economic efficiency. Oth, all corporations are chartered by the states, who have the power to set wage, full-time status, and assess large-scale efficiency againt environmentl impact and the sociocultural benefits of promoting smallness of business scale. Ditto for lobbyists as they're registered under a code of conduct

Could anyone offer advice or insights about how to justify and allow oneself time for leisure? I am overtaxing myself, not only with my career but also with several outside interests that I've turned into small businesses. Many times I feel compelled to stay up until 2:00 AM being productive-- updating my business website, making new crafts, seeking out new places to advertise, etc. When I'm eating dinner, I'm simultaneously reading or cutting out labels for the craft business, etc. I don't allow myself down time. The problem is I no longer feel able to relax, and feel GUILTY about doing anything just "for fun." Hobbies that I used to simply enjoy, I now only see as potential business opportunities, and feel like I should pursue them to make money. So begins another business venture, on top of the ones that I'm already sacrificing health for in order to pursue. Obviously this pattern is harmful because of the toll that overwork takes on our health. But what is the error? If "productive achievement is [man's] noblest activity," how can we excuse a moment of relaxation? How does one feel worthy of the day without being constantly maximally productive? Appeals to "moderation" don't seem right; if productiveness is a virtue, shouldn't it be pursued all the time? How can we feel pride and self-esteem if we spend so much as 30 minutes a day watching a TV show we like, or looking at a YouTube music video, or even talking with friends? Shouldn't our friends admire us for our accomplishments, and hence we need more and more achievements to prove our worthiness? Something is wrong here but I can't figure out what! Any insights from Rand or self-help psychology would be appreciated. :-)