
A minimalist lifestyle does not make you a better person - shawndumas
http://qntm.org/less
======
edw519
_A minimalist lifestyle does not make you a better person_

But a minimalist coding style _does_ make you a better programmer.

I really don't mind a few extra Philips screwdrivers, kitchen knives, or pairs
of shoes in my house, but I every superfluous bit of code in my repository
drives me nuts.

Others say I go overboard and they're probably right, but I can't help myself.

If a 6 character variable name can be shortened to 5 characters without losing
meaning, then I do it. Same thing with labels and function names. If I find
the same line of code twice, I write a function (but only after whipping
myself). Complex If Statements are replaced by Case. Complex Case Statements
are replaced by arrays and pointers. Two programs look alike? Replace them
with one parameter-driven program. Two forms look alike? Replace them with a
flexible form app. Reports? Same thing.

Old data? Archived! Old programs? Archived! Old notes? Archived! And not one
trip to Goodwill, just to my e: drive. I'm so proud of myself when I can fit
the software needed to run a $100 million company on a 256K thumb drive.

There must be a 12 step program for people like me. But then, by the time I
was done with it, it would be a 7 step program.

~~~
Raphael_Amiard
> If a 6 character variable name can be shortened to 5 characters without
> losing meaning, then I do it

While i totally agree with the general sentiment of your post, i'm really not
sure about this one.

Or rather, im rly not sure abt dis one ;)

It's all about balance really, and very often this balance is only subjective,
even if we generally don't like this idea

~~~
tome
Sure, but to be charitable to edw519, it's possible to interpret the remark as
"can be shortened ... without _compromising_ meaning".

~~~
Raphael_Amiard
Definitely, that's why i said i agreed with the general sentiment. I generally
reason in exactly the same way so i understand from where GP is coming from.

------
jfager
_A minimalist lifestyle can have many legitimate motivations. Sanctimonious
anti-consumerism isn't one of these, nor is saving money._

Why not? A minimalist lifestyle can save a ton of money. I have a year-long
runway to work on whatever I want full-time because I kept a pretty minimalist
lifestyle for the last 3 years.

~~~
dagw
Are you sure you're not mixing together minimalist and frugal? I have an
acquaintance whom I'd consider very minimalist, however everything she does
buy is top of the line and very expensive. When she goes out to eat, it's
Michelin star restaurants. When she travels she considers 4 start hotels
slumming it. At the end of the day minimalist and frugal or pretty orthogonal.

~~~
city41
Frugal implies you are sacrificing quality or desire in the name of money.
Minimalist implies you find joy in simpler things and a simpler life and
therefore don't need or even want outlandish luxury.

I'm just as content sleeping at a Best Western as I am at a 5 star hotel. My
Scion gets me to the grocery store just as well as a BMW would, etc. I'm not
sacrificing anything, I simply don't feel a need for excessive luxury.

And I agree with the OP of this thread. Thanks to my minimalist lifestyle I
too have plenty of leeway to do whatever I want for quite some time. It's a
great feeling.

~~~
gaius
OK but minimalist could also be a Patek Phillippe Calatrava instead of an all-
singing all-dancing Casio Pathfinder...

~~~
hugh3
In other words, if you feel like congratulating yourself on your minimalism,
you can pretty much justify anything as minimalist.

Personally I'd say that the minimalist wristwatch option is none at all. I
don't think I'd be happier with no wristwatches, though. While my wristwatches
bring me only a minimal amount of pleasure, congratulating myself on my lack
of wristwatches wouldn't bring me much pleasure either.

I prefer "vaguely appropriate scale"-ism to minimalism. No wristwatches is too
few, ten is too many. Pick something in between and stop fretting.

------
roel_v
Pedantic note:

"There is one Phillips screwdriver in my house."

Uh oh. Philips screwdrivers come in varying degrees of bluntness, with the
very blunt ones for the very big screws and very pointy ones for small screws.
Phillips screwdrivers are not the right area to avoid redundancy. (buying one
with variable bits that fit on it would be a better option).

~~~
brk
Depends on how frequently you use it, and even then it may not be a big deal.

I do tons of home repairs, automotive repairs, build things, take stuff apart
and so on. I have enough tools to equip a small production woodshop, plus a
growing collection of metalworking equipment. And even after all that I
probably use a #2 phillips screwdriver on 99% of anything that has a phillips
head screw.

For a "typical" person, a #2 phillips will probably serve all their reasonable
needs.

~~~
roel_v
We're going off on a tangent here, but I don't agree. I mean, most people do
have only one or two Phillips screwdrivers and use them on all screws they see
that have a 'cross' on them, and I guess it'll work in the majority of cases
like you say, but it's uncomfortable to work with the wrong size, and will
damage your screwdriver and/or screws to boot. 'right tools for the job' and
all. Having 3 sizes is not excessive IMO, and having only a #2 is not an
example of a minimalist lifestyle. For disassembling an Xbox or other piece of
consumer electronics you need a #1, for putting up drywall a #2 and for
mounting a heavy bookshelf a #3. All fairly regular tasks I'd say.

~~~
dagw
_All fairly regular tasks I'd say_

The vast vast majority of people I know have never done any of those things,
and probably never will. If their xbox is broken, they either send it off to
get fixed or throw it out and get a new one. If they need drywall or heavy
bookshelves put in, they call someone.

I would consider owning no tools and and getting other people to handle all
your repair work to be a fine example of a certain type of minimalism.

~~~
roel_v
"I would consider owning no tools and and getting other people to handle all
your repair work to be a fine example of a certain type of minimalism."

Ah yes, good point, and I agree. I guess I was too fast in making a
generalization on my own behavior re: the tasks for which one would use a
screwdriver. I guess I own many tools because I'm frugal :)

------
Qz
From the comments here, it's fairly obvious that people have multiple
conflicting ideas of what 'minimalist' actually means, which makes this blog
post moot because no one will ever agree.

------
nck4222
Maybe I'm missing the point of the article but...

"A minimalist lifestyle does not make you a better person. But it may make you
happier."

I would argue that if you're a happier person, you are a better person. So if
a minimalist lifestyle makes you happier, a minimalist lifestyle makes you
better.

Seems like an odd article to me.

EDIT: Seems like I'm getting flack for about "what if the person is evil but
happy, are they a better person?..."

Apologies for not explaining my argument well the first time. The author
argues that being minimalist makes him happier, less worrisome, less
irritable, and have less liabilities, but not a better person. If being
minimalist makes you all those things, then I think it does make you a better
person than if you weren't minimalist.

~~~
sz
I think the author meant better in the sense of morally superior, not happy.

~~~
BrandonM
And I would argue that an unhappy person is much more likely to be immoral. I
know that it's at least true for me.

------
adamhowell
And then you have a kid.

~~~
notauser
Why do children need lots of stuff?

My grandfather was one of seven children, and they had one drawer each for
toys and another drawer for clothes. They seemed to turn out OK.

Of course this kind of thing requires the co-operation of both parents, but
that's true of a lot of things.

~~~
adamhowell
I wasn't implying that kids need lots of stuff.

I was implying that then you have a kid and have more urgent things to worry
about than whether or not your life is perfectly organized.

Like how to get the kid to stop wiping their poop on the dog.

~~~
runjake
Try having triplets. A perfectly organized (and frugal) life suddenly becomes
a huge priority, whether you like it or not.

In my case, I also took a minimalist approach and work towards getting rid of
clutter, selling off spare computers or equipment for hobbies I don't have
time for anymore.

I haven't had a "singleton" (single born child), but I can imagine the same
organizational/simplifying demands are made of you, but to a lesser extent.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
Having had one and having seen friends with twins, multiples are definitely
harder. Yes there are certain economies of scale but I don't think they even
come close to balancing up the additional chaos, effort and exhaustion.

(And +1 for sympathy and respect that you've had triplets and are still here
to tell the tale).

~~~
runjake
In fact, my experiences (which contrast the article) are what has enabled me
to be here and sane. Before, we were fleeting, disorganized, and didn't plan.

Now everything is regimented and organized and "minimalized". That's how we're
sane and fairly happy (it feels like the movie Groundhog Day, often. And you
_really_ have to focus on marriage time.).

We're finding our experiences to be much more sane than others, when we talk
to other multiples parents. They haven't developed a simple life, and a simple
set of regiments.

------
sz
I've been wanting to start an inventory of every item I own with the goal of
going minimalist but it's so daunting I haven't started yet. And I'm a college
student! (Maybe there's room for an app here?)

~~~
ljlolel
Why would you do that?

Just open your closet and throw out each thing unless you used it in the last
week. Just throw it out now. Tomorrow is a euphemism for never. You can always
buy or borrow if you need it later.

<http://www.jperla.com/blog/post/stuff-minimization-framework>

~~~
SHOwnsYou
You might start kicking yourself when winter rolls around all you have are
cargo shorts and a few ironic t-shirts.

~~~
hugh3
Luckily I have a "I threw out all my winter clothes and all I kept was this
ironic t-shirt" t-shirt.

------
jrwoodruff
_It shouldn't be conspicuous and self-congratulatory_

Does writing a blog post about your minimalist lifestyle count?

~~~
qntm
No, but submitting it to HN does

------
aplusbi
I always wonder what the super-minimalists (< 100 personal items) do about
food. I easily have 100 (less if you consider redundancies: should I count
each fork individually?) things in my kitchen and most of them get used
regularly.

Either they are eating out all the time or they are using someone else's
kitchen, both of which seem somewhat antithetical to sub-100 minimalism.

------
futuremint
We don't spend too much time talking or thinking about it in my house, but we
do periodically clean/throw out old junk that piles in closets & the garage.

I agree with his point regarding being sanctimonious about it though. We don't
brag to anybody, or even talk about it much. Its just a matter of doing
something we know makes us feel better and thats about it.

However, over time it _does_ save you money, because if you have to move or
change your surroundings, you only need enough room for your body and not your
_stuff_.

We're moving to a new house that is only marginally larger than our current
house because we're planning a larger family (it also is a higher quality
house too)... not because we need more space for stuff. Its nice to only
consider your living space from the perspective of what you do in it, and not
have to also worry about how all of your stuff goes into it too.

------
iuguy
I'd say it does. I was a gadget fiend. I know I don't want an iPad, but I
would've _needed_ one if I hadn't have tried to declutter my life. Having done
so, my tiny house is now that much more spacious (but slowly clutter creeps in
and now and again I have to have a massive clearance) and as the article says,
I have less to worry about. In addition to this I no longer _need_ an iPad. In
fact I used one for a few hours and found it quite heavy.

This year I bought an ebook reader, not because I wanted one but because I was
going on holiday and wanted to read 10 books. The cost of an ereader was
cheaper than buying those 10 and losing the luggage space. I read 15 books on
that holiday, mostly from Project Guttenberg. I could've took a laptop and
read them on that as a compromise, but I wanted something my eyes wouldn't get
tired over, and a computer screen would've reminded me of work. My E-Reader
now sits in the kitchen until the next time I take it out - I'm in the middle
of Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five and I know I should read it but I
don't. Still, next year I'll take it out and I'll get my books for much less
than taking physical copies.

Last year I had a clear-out of all my old DVDs - and I used to have more than
my local Blockbusters (as a massive film buff a lot were obscure too) so I
gave them away to charity shops. If I can find epubs of my books I think I'll
do the same with them next year.

------
yason
I think that it's most important to know what _you_ want yourself first.

If you know that, then you can easily spend your money on the right things for
the right reasons and, thus, spare yourself from owning all kinds of cool,
new, luxury, status, or whatever objects that you only bought because you
wanted to be cool or successful or _you thought you wanted them_.

For example, I don't need a new car, a high-end mobile phone, or the ultimate
gaming setup with a ridiculously expensive graphics card. They wouldn't
produce much extra value to me so I don't feel justified to pay for them.
However, I do love photography so buying a new DSLR and a set of lenses
instead of a pocket camera was well justified even though the money spent on
the DSLR was probably ten-fold.

------
pvg
Same topic but with more funny -

[http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2010/09/minimizing-
windows-j...](http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2010/09/minimizing-windows-just-
call-me-aimless.html)

~~~
taylorlb
The bike snob anti-new-minimalism thread is highly entertaining and
informative. The idea that those suffering from extreme poverty are the
ultimate minimalists puts the recent "wearing minimalism on your sleeve" trend
in perspective IMO.

------
dockd
"I can't stand clutter"

That pretty much sums up the article for me. I'd rather hear from someone who
switched to a minimal lifestyle than from someone who apparently has always
favored it.

------
motters
A lifestyle without redundancy is a very precarious one. Without redundancy
any single failure could turn your day into a nightmare.

~~~
hugh3
That's why I have two hearts, in case one needs surgery.

Seriously though, what kind of redundancy are you suggesting? I _could_ have
two cars, or two ovens, or two hot water systems in case my first one breaks
down, but I can get by with workarounds for a broken-down car, oven and hot
water system anyway.

------
eiji
Reminds me of [Paul Graham]: <http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html>

------
balding_n_tired
"There is one Phillips screwdriver in my house."

How many screws do you strip by not having the right size of Phillips screw
driver? How many more can you not engage? Or have you gone really minimal and
guaranteed that you have only one size of head on all your screws?

------
sprout
I think the author means to say that a minimalist lifestyle does not make him
a better person.

He really has no idea who any of us are, or what our goals are, or more
importantly what our vices are. Some of us probably would benefit from a more
minimalist lifestyle.

------
devmonk
'A minimalist lifestyle does not make you a better person'

I'd like to understand why, but fixed-width, left-aligned layout at 1680x1050?
Fluid width or at least centering the text would be helpful.

~~~
jarek
HTML is a wonderful thing. It conveys structure; CSS conveys presentation, but
can be overriden at user's wish. Your browser should have a zoom function.
Your browser should have a CSS override function. Your browser should have a
"readability" function.

~~~
devmonk
But a user should not be forced into using any of those things.

imo, if I have an Apple monitor used by a large number of potential site
visitors set at maximum resolution, then the page should at least center the
div if you are going to do a fixed width layout, so 1/2 of the right side of
the screen isn't a plain otherwise empty blue background. That way at least
only 1/4 of the page is empty on both sides, which is less distracting.

Fluid width with adjusting fluid left/right % columns (divs, or table if you
must) also works.

~~~
jarek
A user maximizing his browser on a screen 1680 pixels wide is not a user whose
particular aesthetic preferences are worth accommodating.

If you choose to make your browser window wider than a line of text you'd
comfortably read, you also can choose to apply any settings that will make
sites look more to your liking.

------
nialo
generalization/key point as I see it: doing x for x's sake or as an excuse to
be self-righteous is bad, do things because they make you happy or make
something easier.

This is actually a really useful rule in a lot of other places too.

