> Philosophically, man is happy only when exercising his facilities
> But in either case the notion of perfecting some craft-work. In particular, this should further some functional inter-relationship with the outside world
> These are good arguments, in many ways. Enough so that the burden of proof should be on those putting for completely contrary ideas
I respectfully disagree. My instinct is to question your premise that "man is happy only when exercising his facilities." I'm assuming that this has roots in ancient Greek philosophy, and I'm not well versed enough in that area to refute the reasoning that leads to that premise, but I will say that I'm hesitant to accept it at face value. Even if scientific studies indicated that man is happy only when exercising his facilities, it would only indicate that exercising your facilities has instrumental value in providing us with satisfaction, not intrinsic value.
To me, this idea that productivity is an objective Good seems like a statement of personal values rather than anything fundamental to the Universe. Of course, personal values matter; I'm just trying to draw a line here between productivity as a means to an end vs. productivity as intrinsically necessary. If someone is able to achieve happiness without "exercising his facilities," I don't think we can assume that their happiness must be impoverished compared to those pursuing more mainstream paths, even if our gut instinct tells us otherwise.
And to reiterate: this is ignoring, for the sake of argument, the topic of negative externalities. Obviously, if unproductive behavior has a detrimental effect on others, the issue becomes far more complicated.
> But in either case the notion of perfecting some craft-work. In particular, this should further some functional inter-relationship with the outside world
> These are good arguments, in many ways. Enough so that the burden of proof should be on those putting for completely contrary ideas
I respectfully disagree. My instinct is to question your premise that "man is happy only when exercising his facilities." I'm assuming that this has roots in ancient Greek philosophy, and I'm not well versed enough in that area to refute the reasoning that leads to that premise, but I will say that I'm hesitant to accept it at face value. Even if scientific studies indicated that man is happy only when exercising his facilities, it would only indicate that exercising your facilities has instrumental value in providing us with satisfaction, not intrinsic value.
To me, this idea that productivity is an objective Good seems like a statement of personal values rather than anything fundamental to the Universe. Of course, personal values matter; I'm just trying to draw a line here between productivity as a means to an end vs. productivity as intrinsically necessary. If someone is able to achieve happiness without "exercising his facilities," I don't think we can assume that their happiness must be impoverished compared to those pursuing more mainstream paths, even if our gut instinct tells us otherwise.
And to reiterate: this is ignoring, for the sake of argument, the topic of negative externalities. Obviously, if unproductive behavior has a detrimental effect on others, the issue becomes far more complicated.