Life is not a conveyor belt

http://alexwarren.co.uk/2013/07/08/life-is-not-a-conveyor-belt/

by alex-warren • 13 years ago

29 39 13 years ago

alexwarren.co.uk

user246• 13 years ago

Not quite sure what the point is... wake up sheeple?

You might see me with my degrees, career, dog, child, wife and house and think I'm just another conveyor-belter, but hopefully one day you will realise that every person has a unique story to tell. Even the ones who might seem boring to you.

You don't have to make a grand gesture of differentness in your clothing, music taste, beliefs or lifestyle to actually be different. We are all different by our very nature.

In fact, proclaiming your differentness so loudly could be viewed as more oppressive than seeming to 'conform' to your perceived conveyor-belt.

Life without progress is stagnant. We each choose our own path. It just happens that there are some broad trends amongst the things humans value; like company and security. Marriage, kids, a stable career and a house go a long way towards satisfying those needs. And, without wishing to patronise, those needs do become more acutely felt as you get older.

k__• 13 years ago

Yes, if you go into detail, all people are different. But overall, most people aren't, at least not in a way that matters.

But I have to admit, those who make the difference aren't those who "proclaim their differentness".

PavlovsCat• 13 years ago

Yes, if you go into detail, all people are different. But overall, most people aren't, at least not in a way that matters.

That reminded me of this:

"I have expressed my strong interest in the mass of the people; and this is founded, not on their usefulness to the community, so much as on what they are in themselves. Indeed every man, in every condition, is great. It is only our own diseased sight which makes him little. A man is great as a man, be he where or what he may. The grandeur of his nature turns to insignificance all outward distinctions."

-- William Ellery Channing

thewarrior• 13 years ago

I think OP should take a look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

user246• 13 years ago

I was going to mention that myself actually.

alex-warren4• 13 years ago

I'm aware of the hierarchy - not sure how it adds to or detracts from my post though? Do you think we inevitably progress up the pyramid as we get older - because I don't think age or progression up a career ladder is particularly correlated with fulfilment of those needs.

user246• 13 years ago

I don't understand how you can not see a correlation.

The jobs 'higher up' the ladder are generally better paid, with better benefits and are more enjoyable.

If you're working 10 hour shifts with two kids and a tiny flat, you don't have much time or energy left to explore self-actualisation. You are living day-to-day, in a perpetual state of tiredness, stress and worry. The only way 'out' is to get a better job. Then you will feel pride, confidence, etc etc - most of the things on the hierarchy.

I can't help but think that you have never experienced poverty. That naivety is the only way I can understand why you'd think that "progression up the career ladder" is not correlated with fulfilment of Maslow's needs (or more broadly, the basic ability to live your life the way you want. To live freely.)

alenox2• 13 years ago

Every person I know, in their 20's, could have written the same post as OP... Myself included. Now they are all married with children... Myself included.

icebraining• 13 years ago

Really? As a person in my 20s, I have a reasonable number of friends who have plans of getting a house, spouse and children; many have had them since their teens.

Of course, nowadays those plans are less taken for granted, considering many can't even get jobs.

alenox2• 13 years ago

In my 20's, most of my friends and I were in one touring rock and roll band or another. A bunch of societal malcontents, dropping out of college and trying to do something else. Maybe that's not terribly common, but I really didn't know many people who pined for the family life... but biological urges are hard to fight... Not just the urge to procreate, but the urge to raise and nurture kids. The urge to nest and create stability. It's not for everyone, but it IS for most people. Not because of some societal constraint, but because of biological ones. Societal constructs just helps us to fulfill those desires more easily.

brador• 13 years ago

It's regret limitation. You can always buy things whenever, but if you want to see your kids grow up and not be too old to play then you NEED to have the kid in your 30's at the latest. Once you pass that point you can never go back.

You're not gonna live forever and you will change your opinions regularly throughout life. Using your time wisely, and investing in a solid future is the 'safe' regret minimising strategy.

jasonkester3• 13 years ago

One of the strange things about being 40 is meeting people my own age who have college-age children. It's amazing how little I have in common with people who chose that life track.

They seem "old" to me, even though they're often several years younger than me. As though they've lived a lot more life than me, but not the "good" parts of life. I can't imagine how tough it must be to raise a family on an entry-level job, and simultaneously try to progress your way out of that entry-level-ness without the ability to ever roll the dice and not have to worry about feeding anybody else but yourself if things don't work out. Or the ability to put it all on hold and piss off to backpack around Southeast Asia for a year. You can see the shadow of that still on a lot of folks like that, even 20 years on.

It never occurred to me back then how good a decision it was not to get married and start a family right away. Now, raising kids with 20 years worth of leveling up behind me and the resources to do it "right", I think I'm going to have it a lot easier.

kaybe• 13 years ago

But, you know, you're priviledged here because you're a guy. For a woman it's not the best idea biologically to start having kids at 40.

kabouseng2• 13 years ago

For a man aged 40 it is also not the best idea. The risks for children with birth defects increases substantially with older men as well.

nasmorn• 13 years ago

I could not disagree more. For me children (first at 27) were the red pill. Before I was a video gaming pop cultured nerd who was too privileged to be really hungry yet too scared of failure to try anything grand. My daughters made me embrace my mediocrity. I do more interesting things now than before even if it is much harder. For me postponing children too achieve something greater is like not having sex because you think it is going to make you like Newton. You either have it in you or you dont.

wbond• 13 years ago

It is true how your choices in life make for distinct personalities. I'm not even 30 yet and have a seven year-old. I can't imagine waiting until 40 before having kids. It really depends on what you define "good" as.

It is pretty easy to flip around the "old" label, for instance: some could say a 50 year-old parent seems "old" - now 40 years removed from their 10 year-old child. How many 50 year-olds do you see getting down and dirty with their kids playing and being carefree?

But, seriously, people of any age can be great parents and lots of different people have different goals in life. Some people seek money, some love, some fame, some recognition, knowledge, excitement, stability, fun, etc.

resplin• 13 years ago

Some of my best experiences as a parent have come because I started young and had to struggle about which priority in life was most important. It changed who I am. I wouldn't trade the extra time I have to be a father and grand-father for the freedom and flexibility I could have enjoyed. I find deeper joy in the "boring" slog of being a dad.

ThomPete• 13 years ago

You can't escape the conveyor belt, whether you end up with children or you end up alone or something completely different.

You are always part of a much bigger group than you might think. If nothing else physics will take it's toll and you as you get older.

noonespecial• 13 years ago

Lots of things in life seem ordinary to the point of tediousness. Marriage, the birth of a child, recognition on the job etc. These things happen to most everyone at one point or another.

I'm here to tell you that these things can be quite extraordinary when they happen to you.

Even if everyone in the line rides the same coaster, the plunge is still a thrill.

silves89• 13 years ago

Utterly extraordinary. Watching my daughter play in my friends' gardens made me want to move out of the town and into the suburbs, so she can have space for a paddling pool. I'll buy a bigger, duller car for her and her impending sibling, without thinking twice about it.

weego• 13 years ago

I'm not sure how applicable the key stage point is here. Children generally have little to no exposure to the fact they are part of a key stage or how that affects them until they get to the GCSE/A Level stage where clearly it's impossible to not feel the exams looming. Key stages are more a strategy thing for DfE/Local Authorities.

tome• 13 years ago

There are infinitely many different lifestyles you can live that still involve employment, houses, marriage and children.

insuffi2• 13 years ago

I would've expected somewhat differently inclined comments from the hackernews community.

Instead, everybody is just saying the same thing expressed in different wording - safety.

His point is not to bypass the entire family, house aspect of your life. The point is to not move along life as if you have no choice but to move to the next "stage".

Progress is not moving up the stages - getting a house, getting a family, a dog, a kid. Those are just arbitrary checkpoints defined to make you feel like you're making something of your life. The american dream, eh? :)

Progress is to construct a life not defined by limits and boundaries. Living it to the fullest - travel, do great big, inspirational things.

If you choose to have kids when you're 20, you are almost by definition limiting your life only to be somebody who takes care of your kids and works a stable job with a stable family(a stable car, a stable dog, a stable bed to sleep in, a stable tv and a stable view of the world). In other words, inexperienced and short-sighted.

alex-warren4• 13 years ago

It's not too surprising really - the comments are similar to those I got on my blog post from a couple of weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5951536 - although it is strange how "conventional" a lot of HN commenters are, you'd think we were more of an ambitious entrepreneurial lot really...

DanBC• 13 years ago

If you choose to have kids when you're 20, you are almost by definition limiting your life only to be somebody who takes care of your kids and works a stable job with a stable family(a stable car, a stable dog, a stable bed to sleep in, a stable tv and a stable view of the world). In other words, inexperienced and short-sighted.

You're missing the point of children - some people experience intense joy from raising their children.

insuffi2• 13 years ago

That may be true. A lot of people, however, choose to have kids only because they think kids will bring joy to their life, not the other way around, which makes for a terrible relationship dynamic.

In other words, a couple becomes bored of their stable life. They think - oh, maybe a kid will make our lives more exciting.

guylhem• 13 years ago

You're missing the point of drugs - some people experience intense joy from taking drugs.

user246• 13 years ago

everybody is just saying the same thing expressed in different wording - safety.

There's this recurring theme in what you and OP are saying, that you think buying a house, getting married, having kids, building a career is somehow 'safe' or 'boring' or that those that do it are 'risk-averse' (or worse, are 'robots', or 'sheep' or 'followers', like you have the answer and everyone else is blind).

How is it safe or not risky to commit the next 20 years of my life to caring for my child? Or to commit to providing for my wife through a secure well paid job? And I love my life, it's fascinating. Rarely a boring moment.

Or I can travel. Woo. Take lots of photos. Brag about how out-there I am. Inspirational things huh?

I agree that one shouldn't live life going through the motions. But take care that you don't see the 2.4 kids and assume too much about the person. What's the use of all your long-sighted experience if you're too quick to judge people?

I say again, each of us is a fascinating individual. You and your ilk seem to dismiss some life choices as less worthy - even going so far as declare them incorrect.

Is a mortgage and a dog and a kid 'limited'? I don't see why it has to be. Am I limited because I can't get up and move to Canada on a whim? I am free in myself. More than that I am building something greater than myself; my family. I've chosen stability and responsibility over the ephemeral pleasures of whimsy.

That is truly inspirational, isn't it?

jasonkester3• 13 years ago

I'm a big fan of substituting the word "and" into choices that traditionally involve an "or". "House Wife & Kids or Travel & Happy Instability" is the latest one for me, and it seems to work just fine doing both thus far.

In this case, I think the crux of facing that choice at age 20 is that you pretty much only get to pick one for financial reasons. By around 35, a fella can have enough banked away to happily do both at once.

grownseed• 13 years ago

"I would love for all of those years of school to teach kids these lessons instead: Don’t follow orders, don’t blindly copy what others are doing, and always keep your wits about you."

This, to me, is the essence of Education, or at least what it should be - equip future generations with the ability to think critically, to become more adaptable by developing themselves and their peers in the process.

In most of the countries I know of, School systems are self-fulfilling jokes. You have teachers sandwiched between layers upon layers of administration and the kids' parents. You have a lot of parents who've dumped all their educational responsibilities onto the schools. You have the administrations whose main purpose seems to be meeting stats. And after all that, you have the kids, awkwardly categorized by age, pushed through hoops with no clear purpose except to pass tests. This costs a tremendous amount of resources (not just talking about money here), and for what results?

We seem to live in an age where we think everything has to be, and is worth measuring. I believe the "Level up" system is a result of that, it makes it much easier to assess people's worth, whatever the hell that worth may be. Ironically (and sadly), the only way to get out of this is real Education, one that promotes curiosity and self-growth for the sake of it (and eventually for the greater good).

molbioguy• 13 years ago

Part of the problem with viewing life as a conveyor belt is that you build up expectations of what's ahead. I think that one of the OP's points was that you may be very disappointed (even feel a bit cheated) to learn that happiness is not inevitable, even if you follow all the required steps. So instead, don't just follow the steps. Question, think, break 'rules' if you have to. Make your own choices and don't just follow the prescribed path. You won't get a second chance.

Life is not a conveyor belt

Related Stories