Redefining the successful life

[omni550]

NYT article on questioning what we actually mean by success...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/15/y...efine-the-successful-life.html?pagewanted=all

omni

 

[Amethyst]

Just the sort of article one expects to see as the population ages. I seem to recall that during the 80s, such artlcles were about getting better organized and more efficient, so you could do more work faster, so you could have more time for workouts and such.

Amethyst

 

[marko]

Just the sort of article one expects to see as the population ages. I seem to recall that during the 80s, such artlcles were about getting better organized and more efficient, so you could do more work faster, so you could have more time for workouts and such.

Amethyst

There's also the gen x,y mentality of 'why kill yourself with work when you can be satisfied with what you can easily achieve'. Less can be more.

There is a notable shift to valuing free time to hang out and enjoy life vs running the corporate treadmill. Less emphasis on material gains.

 

[Midpack]

Not a bad article, though it's a little curious using conspicuously high net worth folks as sources. They have earned their success, but I am sure Ms Huffington, Bergen & Jarrett have more options WRT balancing the money aspect of life versus other aspects than most. Nevertheless, most of us could probably benefit from some balance in life.

The quote (below) from the article seems like a good general definition to me. YMMV

The top ways people define a successful life, according to the study: Being in good health, finding time for the important things in life, having a good marriage/relationship and knowing how to spend money well.

 

[Amethyst]

We think alike - I also found myself thinking "What about all the people who have no choice but to work 2 or 3 jobs?" I've known a few. They all wished they could have more leisure time!

Amethyst

Not a bad article, though it's a little curious using conspicuously high net worth folks as sources. They have earned their success, but I am sure Ms Huffington, Bergen & Jarrett have more options WRT balancing the money aspect of life versus other aspects than most. Nevertheless, most of us could probably benefit from some balance in life.

The quote (below) from the article seems like a good general definition to me. YMMV

 

[dmpi]

I both agree and disagree with the article. We are all born with a individualized set of skills and talents. It's our duty to ourselves and others to expand and enhance those talents as far as they can go. Eisenstein could have sat around and done nothing rather than work on relativity. Our understand of the world is far better becuase he chose to work. Where I do agree with the article is that society often motivates you to expand your skills in which you have no real interest or talent in. Many people became engineers, doctors and lawyers simply because they were well paying job. I don't blame them becuase a person has to eat, they need a roof over their head and they need money to raise a family. But if you're going to do something for thirty or forty years that you don't truely enjoy or have a passion for then you're going to feel ground down and disillusioned in the end.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Good grief. The economy must be all better if companies like Huffington provide two nap rooms.

 

[haha]

But if you're going to do something for thirty or forty years that you don't truely enjoy or have a passion for then you're going to feel ground down and disillusioned in the end.

Hence the popularity of e-r.org.

Ha

 

[NanoSour]

I'm just so happy these people have the luxury to sit around and disgust these issues so us common folk can benefit from their dutiful wisdom.