|
You may find Abraham Maslow's classic "hierarchy of human needs [^] ... a diagram here:[^] ... paradigm a useful concept to organize your thoughts about the fact that people for whom basic survival is under threat (food, shelter, safety) money is a very different thing than it is for someone who, further "up" the hierarchy, has relative security around survival issues. Do keep in mind, though that Maslow did not see the "levels" as something one "moved through;" rather, he described them as operating simultaneously ... yet, there is still the implication that if you are under survival threat, you probably are not going to be considering how fulfilling your social life and leisure-hours are.
Perhaps consider that perceived "freedom" increases as one has fulfilled their needs at other levels in the hierarchy, but, also consider that fulfillment in the social sphere, in relationships, in intimacy, may require very different attributes and behavioral skills than those demanded by "how do I make the rent this month."
And, to what extent is "happiness" a matter of self-appraisal which, for most of us, has a lot to do with our habitual patterns of self-talk we use to construct our social self ? The degree to which any individual stakes their self-esteem on the external trappings of wealth, or the artifice with which they present their physical person/body ... do these vary greatly depending on the life-cycle ?
It is a very wonderful thing to get to the place where the work you do is the work you would choose to do based on your "heart's desires:" that's an ideal ... for many people, the ideal is not attainable, and they learn to live with compromise so the house mortgage can be paid, the kids sent to college, etc. imho, such happiness short-of-ideal should never be mocked, or considered less than ... another's.
Something I really like about Maslow's "hierarchy" is that it was, and is, a paradigm that leaves room for transcendental experience, and for "spiritual" meaning; in this way it was, for its time, one of the first challenges to the dry quantitative reductionist "science" of the behaviorist reward-punishment-reinforcement school that came to dominate American psychology in the 1950's and into the 1960's.
I believe that many of you here have shared the experience I've had where periods of very hard work that wasn't all that pleasant, or rewarding, were "grunted through" to get to the place where the work I really wanted to do was available to me, and I could do it, and get paid, well.
My failure success at this has enabled me to become a bum living in Thailand, answering questions on CodeProject, exploring the nooks and crannies of C#, pretending to be a 19th. century "man of letters" drinking deep from the cup the Muses offer, and coughing up novels, poems, stories 
"I think to myself: what a wonderful world" Louis Armstrong [^].
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
modified 6-Aug-16 8:24am.
|
|
|
|
|
I have bookmarked this for many reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Slacker007,
Watch for the jagged lip if you drink from the cracked cup offered by a crackpot teacher
Speaking of "teaching:" there was a mendicant person in northern India about 5000 years ago who is reported to have said to the inhabitants of a village he came to who asked him how they could recognize a "true teacher" when, they said, various teachers kept coming through, one saying this, another contradicting the teaching with different views. The mendicant, a former Prince, it is said, answered:
Quote: "It is no wonder that a man gets puzzled and confused when he hears teachings contradictory to each other, but I tell you this: don't accept a thing merely because it is handed down by tradition, don't accept a thing merely because many people repeat it, don't accept a thing merely on the authonty of the sage who teaches it, don't accept a thing merely because it is found in the so-called scriptures, don't accept a thing merely because probability is in its favour, don't accept a thing merely because you have imagined it, or that it is
inspired by some supernormal agency.
After examination, after testing it for yourseff, if you find it reasonable and is in conformity with your well being and the well being of others as well, then accept it and follow it."
cheers, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Do they accept the mendicant's teachings. Since its existence contradicts itself, aside from a recursive explosion, will they not be even more confused?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Do they accept the mendicant's teachings. Since its existence contradicts itself, aside from a recursive explosion, will they not be even more confused?
You'll have to have a conversation with the sage within yourself to answer those questions, or to realize that asking them was never necessary.
And, for said wandering mendicant ? Well, who knows; he had a student named Malunkyapatta who kept trying to get him to answer questions like those; the dialogue between them where he dances nimbly around Malunkypuatta's entreaties while subtly pointing to the more profound direct experience of "truth" always available is a great read, even for a mind as clouded as mine.
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
What we are 'allowed' to do often influences our choices of what we 'choose' to do.
If you live in a society with a liberal social services policy, you may 'choose' to do something that is personally rewarding, but does not actually provide enough income or resources to live off of - so, you rely on social services to fill the gap.
Or, perhaps, you have a congenital condition that limit what you are able to do, and, perchance, limits your ability to earn a living wage; again, social services may fill the gap.
If you don't have social services, your 'choose' list may be much more limited.
Personal examples of people I've known:
Someone chose to be a published poet, and, as I've been told, it was good. However, his sales and speaking fees did not provide a living income, therefore social services filled the gap.
My younger brother was born with a nerve condition that affected his eyesight; he was able to get employment as a hardware clerk where he could use public, subsidized transportation. As long as he lived with my parents, even as an adult, he could survive. After they passed, and the house was sold, he moved to a rural community and earned money cutting/selling firewood. He relied on a disability pension due to his eyesight to fill the gap.
My mother encouraged me to be a teacher; instead I chose computers. I was able to find employment in a field I enjoyed that also provided a living wage. I chose my path and I've no regrets.
A former colleague was pressured into becoming an engineer because her father was one, and her three older siblings didn't go into engineering. She didn't want to be an engineer, but family pressure affected her choices.
Do what you want if it is legal, moral, you enjoy it and you can provide for yourself. Don't rely on the social safety net - that is putting your welfare squarely in the hands of the masses.
|
|
|
|
|
You make good points. And I've always thought though the phrase went "Don't do it solely for the money", which means your primary objective should be something else, like what you said: to provide for your family, a livable lifestyle, etc.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.
|
|
|
|
|
How fortunate we are to have you here with us to explain God and money using very tired cliches ! 
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Rowe (of Dirty Jobs) has an excellent video about "following your passion": Don't Follow Your Passion - YouTube[^]
I also remember an article from the early 80s where the writer said that it is important to distinguish between what you think you want and what you really want. His example was that he thought he wanted to be a college president. He worked hard and achieved that goal. And hated every second of his achievement. Being honest with yourself can be really brutal.
I've also learned that you can become passionate about some things, while tolerating other aspects of that thing. Many software engineers are passionate about software, but not so much about bureaucracy. You live with one to enjoy the other and ultimately enjoy the fruits of your labor.
I will add that working with developers that have no passion for the craft can be very tedious, so say the least.
|
|
|
|
|
A professional is, by definition, someone who does it for the money. On one hand, a person who chooses a career he will be happy in without examining the prospects of making a living in that career is being short-sighted. On the other hand, a person who chooses a career that he hates only because it has good prospects will be unhappy; it is very difficult to work 40 hours a week at something that you hate.
The early twenties are a time when it is permissible to make mistakes; if you discover that your chosen career is not to your liking, you can usually change careers with no serious penalty. However, you should be settled in a career by the time you reach 30.
(This does not mean that changing careers later on is impossible; it just means that it comes with much greater costs)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Find you Ikigai[^]
What you love
What you're good at
What the world needs
What you can be paid for
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I'm considering trying to create a game. I have no experience.
Is Unity the way to go? Are there other game design tools I should consider? Resources?
Thanks
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't given game developement nearly enough time.. too focused on my current never ending home project.... So I can't really give an informed answer...
At any rate I would advise to also have a look at the following alternative engines:
Xenko Game Engine | Home[^]
CRYENGINE | Crytek[^]
Me think you might love Xenko! 
|
|
|
|
|
The mobile Hitman game for Android is done in Unity. What platform are you wanting to start off with - mobile, web, or PC games?
|
|
|
|
|
When I researched this I found that Unity and Unreal were the 2 biggest engines and the biggest difference it came down to is that you can do C# in Unity but not in Unreal, it uses C, C++. That made the decision for me. I've been doing Unity for a little while now and it is very easy to get started on it.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.. Did you see Dan's answer?[^]
Have you seen any issues I should be aware of?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: Did you see Dan's answer?[^]
I have not gotten into it at a level like that yet. I just do it for fun.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Where do I go to get Unity? Is it part of Visual Studio?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awesome. Thanks
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
So I'm thinking of recreating this game[^].
Any reason you can think of why Unity wouldn't work for this?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: Any reason you can think of why Unity wouldn't work for this?
Nope, in fact, this may be a head start for you: Unity - Tanks tutorial[^]
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
An acquaintance of mine does unity game dev professionally. He regularly rants about GC stalls screwing up his steady frame rates and about how badly mono performs. To minimize the GC pressure he says he has to avoid linq and foreach loops in favor of simpler constructs; and is eagerly awaiting the first stable version with MS's recently open sourced run time instead.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
