Skip to main content

Podcast of restraint

"There is something good about the life that explicitly identifies itself within certain limits" says Scott Stephens, co-host of The Minefield podcast.

The Minefield covers philosophy and ethical dilemmas. This series is on good virtues that seems less popular today and this episode's virtue is restraint.

So what's restraint?

We're not talking seatbelts. Restraint is simply the idea of being satisfied with what you have, even if you're able to have more.


In today's culture it might almost seems like heresy - to suggest not getting, doing or buying every single thing you want. Consumer culture says to have as much as we want of everything we want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

As I write this I have several leftover Easter eggs on the table - the tiny ones. I'm leaving one until I finish writing this. Even that felt a little counter-cultural. It's right there. It'll taste good. Why not eat it?

Opting out

Recorded during Ramadan, the podcast episode looked at short-term fasting like Lent and Ramadan, to focus on the spiritual, and the ongoing Jewish and Islamic traditions of not eating bacon.

"These are forms of daily restraint. And that cultivates an ethic doesn't it" says Waleed. "The ethic of not bowing to every whim - I think that is something ... that creates a better person, that creates a better life, that creates a better series of dispositions."

Cruel Optimism

Podcast guest Christopher Mayes talks of "cruel optimism". That's when we're presented with life goals that supposedly would fulfill us, but "the pursuit of those goals often ends up denigrating or eroding the life that is supposedly going to be fulfilled and flourish".

He gives the example of owning a house in Sydney. It might be nice thing to have, but (given Sydney prices) if it means two people working 50+ hours a week for 30 years, is it really worth it?

(Side note on this topic: Check out this clever house action satirical ad)

Capitalism

Restraint can be described as the opposite of desire, greed and envy. "But that's the very engine of capitalism" remarks Waleed - the idea that we are entitled to whatever we want. Capitalist economy works by inventing new problems so that new products can be sold back to us. "I don't know how to articulate that as a moral way of living."

"The environmental catastrophes that we continually unleash on the planet are a direct consequence of this mode of thinking, the absence of restraint."

So what to do?

It's not necessarily about living "like a pauper" but for some living simply and frugally is a way to benefit both others and themselves. I guess the point is to live a life that isn't merely seeking every self-serving desire that enters our head (or that advertising puts in there).

I guess it's about having purpose, and sometimes forgoing immediate pleasure or personal benefit for the benefit of others - or even for the benefit of ourselves in the future.

Perhaps I'll leave that remaining egg for later - or for my wife. :)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to waste a year's wages

A friend recently asked me why it is that so many people (on good incomes) are struggling to save. Often the big three money areas are housing, transport and food. In one sense these are necessary items. But what we spend on them is often way more than necessary. I crunched some numbers on how much extra my wife and I could spend on these things - if for some reason we wanted to burn our money. 1. Housing Our apartment is fairly nice, but also cost-effective. I've mentioned how choosing it saves us $1,800 per year , compared to a similar one we saw. The high end of 2-bedroom apartments in our suburb is $305 per week more than our apartment. Not $305 per week. $305 per week more than ours is. I cannot get over that. Sure it's new and modern-looking, but that's a lot of money. It's an extra $15,860 per year above what we pay. 2. Transport The Australian Automobile Association lists the costs of owning and running a car. It includes many often-overlooked c

Don't dump on charities

Netflix causes mass dumping. Here's an alternative. January is usually a big month for physical donations to charity. In 2019 it's been over-the-top (literally) as charity donation bins have been overflowing with items. The Netflix series "Tidying Up" by famous declutterer Marie Kondo (see her book ) has inspired many to declutter their homes. But in the process they've cluttered the streets. What's so bad about donating? When the bins overflow the extra items are thrown away. Having been in the weather, the rain and on the ground, they are classified as contaminated and cannot be sold. To make it worse, much of what fills the bins is not good enough to sell, and is also dumped. Bad donations hurt charities 13 million dollars. That's how much it costs charities to deal with all the junk we dump on them - 60,000 tonnes a year. Lifeline says half its stores have stopped accepting donations. We might think we're helping, but that's a lot

This could all be yours

This cartoon kind of happened to me on the weekend. Joking about death My dad has his own unique sense of humour. Flippantly he joked that when he passes away, the first thing I'll need to do is get a rubbish skip (maybe two) and jam it full with all the junk from the garage. I was reminded of Marie Kondo, who says in her book that we have to deal with items either now or later; so it might as well be now. For people who have retired, I guess there's a third option: Ignore it for a few more decades and let descendants deal with it. Don't get me wrong - my dad has plenty of years left yet. But from his joke I'm guessing he's reasonably happy to let it all sit there while he enjoys retired life. Why not deal with it? I can kind of understand. It's an overwhelming task (even to look at). There's also the "I might need that" factor. Which is fair enough, but even if an item is needed, is it findable in amongst everything else? About half the