 |
| Island of Poros |
Indeed, one might imagine that the second introductory question after 'what is your name' might well be 'what do you do?'
Perhaps we can break down the criteria that give this secular identity its weight.
What drives identity? Is it ...
- Compensation (Top X%)
- Title (eg. Supreme Commander of Allied Forces. As titles go, this one is pretty cool)
- Size of organization you manage (Or perhaps just the business division you work for is a Fortune 500 in its own right)
- Size of organization you belong to (Top 10 - Toyota, GM, Exxon etc)
- Reputation (eg. Google, Apple)
- Production (Stock price improvement, number of papers published, patents filed)
- Innovation (e.g. Finding a cure for cancer, designing new weapon system)
- Impact (e.g. Disaster relief, non profits)
- Career growth trajectory (e.g. Tenured professor by age 29, making Partner at your firm in record time, skipping grades up and being promoted earlier)
- Mentees influenced (eg. Feynmans teacher did not get a Nobel, but several of his students did)
- Legacy (e.g. Lincoln, Gandhi, Mandela)
- Job satisfaction (e.g. Career counselors, Teachers who see their wards do well)
- Glory (e.g. Pulitzer, Bharath Ratna, Freedom Medal, Order of Merit, BOE)
- Creativity (e.g. the Arts)
- Survival (e.g. Toll collector, Stamping Machine Operator - I can't think of any other reason to do this job!)
- Adventure (e.g. Oil rigs, Deep sea diving)
- Independence (e.g. Entrepreneurs)
There are more criteria, I am sure.
 |
| Maslow's Hierarchy |
And in this sense one's identity worthwhile . . .
However, that entire discussion above is meaningful only if you buy that the question, "What do you do," has weight.
What if you do not? What if the question of identity, below the surface is not secular but meta-physical? i.e. the question is, 'no, really, who are you?'
The great English Philosopher David Hume tried to answer this question by positing that we are the 'sum of a bundle of perceptions' of our five senses and then ended up being frustrated (and reports have it, threw his hands up in the air!)
 |
| David Hume |
Hume eventually concluded that: “of the section concerning personal identity, I find myself involved in such a labyrinth, that, I must confess, I neither know how to correct my former opinions, nor how to render them consistent.”
So, rather than risk, throwing up our hands in the air like Hume, we might retreat to the secular question of identity.
But that retreat still leaves us with a task. To answer the question for ourselves. What is the meaning of work, and which criteria are most apt to drive this meaning?
The answer is going to be different based on what we like to do personally, which stage in life we are in, the opportunities afforded to us. But it would be a wilful waste if, having been afforded the chance, we choose the wrong criteria to express our (secular) identity.
5 comments:
It is indeed a difficult question to answer and in my opinion, there is no simple answer. This is because of the following reasons.
First of all this question can be asked only to a person to whom all such opportunities exist. Very few in the real world have all such opportunities. The second is the pedigree, upbringing and the environment in which a person is brought up. These make an enormous difference. For example a son of a military father will be inspired by his father and may aspire for glory which may not be the case of a merchant's son who may be more interested in improving the business. Then, there is the question of opportunity. Even if a person has a desire to achieve any or all those aspirations, there may not be avenues available to achieve any one of them. In many cases, even getting the basic needs may be a priority.
So, in a nutshell such questions are relevant only to a few lucky persons who have the right pedigree,right opportunity and right ability to achieve even a few of them.
Great reflection... your observation that it is the 2nd question asked by many is a cultural one informed by our US practices, yes?
My understanding is that this question is considered quite rude in some cultures. I also see a lot of external factors identified in your list. Again, I think many of these are culturally influenced and weighted. I think its sad that so many are tied into material wealth which has led (I believe) to a bankruptcy of spiritual fulfillment by many workers.
My two favorite quotes on "work"
Khalil Gibran in The Prophet:
Work is love made visible.
Carlos Castenda in the Teachings of Don Juan: a Yaqui Way of Knowledge
Before you embark on any path ask the question: Does this path have a heart? If the answer is no, you will know it, and then you must choose another path. The trouble is nobody asks the question; and when a man finally realizes that he has tkaen a path without a heart, the path is ready to kill him. At that point, very few men can stop to deliberate, and leave the path. A path without heart is never enjoyable. You have to work hard even to take it. On the hand, a path with heart is easy; it does not make you work at liking it.
Hoping that you have all found a path with heart!
This list of criteria brought to mind an Arthur Conan Doyle quote from a review of Michael Dirda’s book, On Conan Doyle: Or the Whole Art of Storytelling, titled Gigantic footprints by Alexandra Mullen:
Conan Doyle once filled out a questionnaire that asked his ideal of happiness: “time well filled.”
Identity and happiness are not the same thing. But somehow or other they’re related I think.
I could not find a criteria behind, but yes remembered the childhood rhyme':
"Row Row Row Your Boat
Gently Down the Stream
Merrily Merrily Merrily Merrily
"Life is but a Dream",..!!!
The above song is more meaningful for my Life to Sail thro !!!
I agree with your Dad ... subbu
Post a Comment