Comment by CodeMage | Hacker News Reader

Comment by CodeMage | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Too many words to express a worn out platitude: "See every day as an opportunity to learn something that you didn't know yesterday".

Here's the only part of the article that I really agree with: "Don't waste your time hating your job and doing it badly." That right there is the real reason why hating your shitty job only makes it worse: because you're wasting your time hating it, instead of looking for a way to either change it or quit.

As for the idea that "at the very least you'll make your days more pleasant with a positive attitude", I wish I could construct and program an army of little robots whose only task would be to kick the people who spout this crap in their shins.

If you subscribe to this "positive thinking will solve all your problems" mantra, I encourage you to watch this RSA Animation of a talk by Barbara Ehrenreich: http://y2u.be/u5um8QWWRvo

Finally, I'd like to answer the last question in the article. Did I enjoy this article? No, I didn't, because it had too much emphasis and I found that very annoying.

I largely agree with what you're saying, but I do believe that making an effort to be somewhat positive can have positive effects. Too much negativity in a workplace can be toxic and can have a paralyzing effect not unlike depression at the individual level. It seems a common retort around here would be, "just find another job," which is not a bad idea, but it's not always that simple.

I appreciate the link to the Ehrenreich talk. Her point on the anesthetizing potential of too much positivity is a good one. Realism and dissent are important for productive change in the workplace. But dissent can often be accompanied by a whole lot of pessimism and negativity (as she mentions), which isn't necessarily good for anyone. Striking a balance is important. As is often the case, it's a matter of moderation... which brings us back to that bold text.

That's exactly the thing though - - the corporate positive mindset isn't about avoiding needless negativity, it's simply enforcing causeless positivity and optimism. You might be the type of person who simply isn't a bucket full of sunshine all the time without necessarily being "negative", though in the corporate world you'd be considered that if you are anything less than super positive.

I don't think it's a question of "is negativity good or bad", I see it as more of why can't we just let people be themselves? As long as we have a healthy mix, we should have all types of views and personalities represented, en though that are slightly more negative.

Ecclesiastes 9:10 is more concise.

Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes+9%3...

Sounds like an atheist, more so in the KJV version. I thought the bible was pro-heaven? http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes+9%3...

  Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work,
  nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.

Ecclesiastes is in the Old Testament. The possibility of eternal life in heaven was only offered by Christ.

No, it's not something introduced by Jesus. There is "everlasting life" in Old Testament:

"And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt."

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=daniel%2012:1-12...

However, any reader of Old and New Testament should know that both "books" are in fact the collections of the hand-made copies of the texts written by different authors in different times. The idea of everlasting life is more recent, so it isn't present in the older texts, unless some copyist decided to "correct" that. Book of Daniel is believed to be quite "recent" compared to the most of Old Testament texts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel#Authorship_and_d...

Still it predates the times of Jesus for up to 200 years.

Theologically, that would probably be a prophesy that was fulfilled by Christ. Historically, you're correct.

Also "theologically" according to the Jews their (older) Bible simply mentions "everlasting life" in the "Book of Daniel" at least century before the birth of Jesus. But they believe that the texts about Jesus written and collected by that newer sect that called them Christians simply don't prove that he's Messiah, as they are often based on misreadings of the Hebrew Bible, see for the example how NT came to use "the son of man" expression:

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10342-man-son-of

Of course, there's more than one "theology," even among different "Christians."

I'm just saying you can easily reconcile Ecclesiastes with the Christian notion of heaven by considering its context. I don't know if there's any such problem to be reconciled in Judaism.

My response was always to your claim that "the possibility of eternal life in heaven was only offered by Christ" and all my responses were to demonstrate that it's not "only by Christ" but an older and very known concept. They weren't supposed to help you reconcile that fact with your favorite theology.

I'm an atheist. I don't have a "favorite theology" but I understand some religions better than others, the original point of this discussion was a supposed inconsistency in one of them, and I find the subject interesting as an intellectual exercise. Now will you stop being needlessly confrontational?

Also important: Ecclesiastes 9:11 to counterbalance this piece of patronizing drivel.

I thought the whole bible was patronizing drivel personally.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com