
What happens when your career becomes your whole identity - r0n0j0y
https://hbr.org/2019/12/what-happens-when-your-career-becomes-your-whole-identity
======
nugget
In my experience extreme workaholism can often be a way to avoid or defer
major life decisions that someone doesn't want to make or even consciously
recognize. High status careers are often structured, full of positive feedback
loops, and well compensated, all of which can strengthen the urge to defer
existential questions about meaning, purpose, community, and identity until
some unspecified future date, even (perhaps especially) in highly rational or
analytical thinkers. Eventually the debt comes due but sometimes not until
many decades later.

~~~
alexpetralia
To play devil's advocate, what is to come of deliberating on existential
meaning at great length?

Do you think you'll find an answer, rationally speaking (that is, using the
tools of reason and logic)? Notably, Godel's incompleteness theorems suggest
these tools may be insufficient. More specifically, if you try to rationally
"justify" what you ought to be doing, you will always be able to -
legitimately! - impugn its logical foundation.

This suggests that consciously reasoning about what someone's fundamental
purpose is may not be the best way to go about things. Rather, just as how we
make most decisions, an intuitive and heuristical approach may be better. In
other words, "do what feels right."

What feels right may materialize as a family, as charity, as building a
business, or even building a career. My point is that all of these can be
challenged as "deferring existential questions" \- again legitimately -
because they cannot be justified rationally. (All of these, equally, can be
criticized in hindsight as being "wrong": wrong marriage decision, wrong way
to raise children, wrong work-life balance, wrong charitable/activist cause.)

As a result, I don't think the criticism that a career - even an all-consuming
one (as a family may be) - is somehow less justified. This is not to invite
pure relativism: some things do seem to be more meaningful than others.

But! It is precisely that this "seems to be" is intuitive, and not rational,
which constitutes the foundation of our belief. And so if a career-focus seems
"intuitive", then I think it's meaningful enough.

\---

EDIT: One other thing to note is that people who are fairly content with their
lives don't often ponder _why_ their life is meaningful. They've specified a
priori assumptions for what makes it meaningful (e.g. charitable giving,
helping others), or intuitively feel what is meaningful (e.g. family, friends,
happiness), and that is that. It's precisely the people who end up endlessly
questioning these assumptions - facing the meaning of their life head on -
that seem to be most depressed. This is because it's an intellectual deadend -
it cannot be deduced rationally. One way, then, to answer this existential
question is to simply defer: don't question, do what feels right, and avoid
what doesn't.

~~~
nugget
Ignorance may be bliss, but only if you can remain ignorant until the absolute
end. I see evidence of a paradox whereby the most powerful analytical minds
are able to most effectively construct defensive counter arguments to their
own inherent existential needs, allowing them to defer these needs until a
criticality is reached and existential crisis manifests as a state of limbic
terror which is impossible to ignore. The crisis is ultimately inevitable, and
thus the ignorance only temporary, because they are in fact smart enough to
realize deep down that something essential is out of balance. A polish
psychiatrist named Dabrowski labeled some of these experiences 'positive
disintegration' and wrote prolifically about their role in psychosocial
development.

~~~
idclip
After nearly 500 hours of meditating in relative isolation, i promise you, the
collector collects.

Something inside us, wild and free, wants to be happy, and we stand in its
way.

~~~
taurath
> the collector collects

Can you expand on this?

~~~
idclip
—— Short answer ——

I experienced some things in meditation, consistent with Buddhist cannon.

I encountered a “judge” mechanism, that manifested as an emotion. It “knew
everything” (makes sense, it was basically me pointing the finger at me) and
it wasnt interested in talking things out. It wants to be happy, and it blames
me for its unhappiness. It was a terrifying feeling, very painful.

I believe non-meditators experience this during death, and that “wild part” of
us comes back to have one last conversation, and a settling of debts.

——— Long answer ———

Ive spent some time doing vipassana, exploring my inner world -

I also read a lot of carl jung, and come from a family of non religious mental
health practitioners. So i dont consider myself clueless, or particularly
naive or impressionable.

After that intro ... i experienced some deeply disturbing things: bodily
convulsions and pains, which subsided after some time too, and were
experienced on an emotional level (meditation shuts/slows down thinking
mechanisms, to stop generating mind chatter) -

when the silence increases inside our head, mind chatter disappears but
something else takes its place .. emotions, deep intense emotions start to
rise - its during those moments of deep mind silence that some pretty bad
feelings start to arise inside me, of something deeply unhappy about how im
living my life, because it wants to be happy, and i am in this body, is its
tool. it wasn't just angry, it was full of grief, and so scared to the point
of terror.

Again, it wasn't a discussion, i got the feeling it a prt lf me that wasnt
interested in talking things out (it knows everything about me already, its
me) it was a deep emotion of intense meaning, and terror and loneliness.

I didn't give my feelings significance before, im also still an atheist - but
i now think/believe that being human has a truth we are blind to, and some of
these truths are experienced at death, so if you lived a life against your
“conscience” - if you ask me, id say it will hold you responsible for its
happiness. (I havnt experienced the other part where its happy about what i
do, in a way it was a corrective self-bitchslap. Life is still ongoing - so
its not all terrible, yet)

------
hackworks
Analogous to “putting all eggs in a single basket”, the risks are very high.

You end up becoming hyper sensitive at work, start taking everything personal
-well, it is your identity or ego at stake. Leads be becoming very closed,
guarded and aggressive. Everyday becomes a fight for survival.

I personally went through this phase for a long time. Looking back, some of my
managers exploited this by reinforcing. They knew if they compare me with
anyone, I would up the competition and perform even better. This did not cost
them money since I had invested myself, my identity and ego 100%. Overall,
resulted in a highly competitive team but extremely stressful and caustic!

After changing teams, I decided to take a step back and make a fresh start. I
now work for the love of my work and do not let it represent who/what I am. It
is my identity at work. Back home or with friends, I have a different
identity. Having multiple things to fallback has made me more resilient and
lot more positive.

~~~
mmsimanga
I wonder if it is an age thing. Paraphrasing but there is a quote along the
lines of the difference between experienced people/managers and inexperienced
people is they know which battles to fight. Sadly this is a right of passage,
you need to fight the wrong battles first before you realise this. I am in my
forties now and so much better at selecting which battles to fight.

~~~
tartoran
You’re absolutely right. Around this age if not a bit earlier people have
seen/experienced enough to see things more clearly. I wonder if this is the
reason most SV companies prefer fresher meat.

------
mmsimanga
We have a saying back home that goes, "umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu" which
literally translates to a person is a person because of other people. So in
effect in Africa we care more about people than our jobs. Trouble is when your
job is managing national electricity company it isn't a good approach because
we tend to put our relationships above our jobs. Result is patchy electricity
supply. It is one (just one not the main reason) of the reasons we are behind
when it comes to development. Development as in clean running water,
functional clinics.

I sort of straddle both worlds. In software development you need to get it
right. At home people are more important. As an example just today in-laws
visiting where supposed to go to see touristy sights at 11 in the morning.
They eventually left at 3pm because we all had loads to catch up on. People
first :-).

~~~
grecy
Do you mind sharing from what country you come from and what language that is
in please?

I just spent three years driving around Africa, and I usually say "People
treat people like people" to describe everything that is amazing about the
people there. It sounds awkward, but it's the best way I have to describe what
you're talking about. I'd love to quote your saying, if you don't mind!

~~~
gustavpaul
South Africa. And I guess Xhosa/Zulu. The electricity provider mentioned is
Eskom. It's complicated.

~~~
mmsimanga
Yes it is South Africa. Born in Zim to descendents of Mzilikazi who left South
Africa during Shaka Zulu's reign.

------
overgard
I was just rereading this Last Psychiatrist article that this really reminds
me of:
[https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/01/randi_zuckerberg.htm...](https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/01/randi_zuckerberg.html)
(Like with all of TLP it meanders a lot and will probably piss you off. It's
also highly entertaining!)

This is the important bit:

> One of our time's great sociological questions is why we filled downtime
> back up with work, and the reason is it's better than alcoholism. At some
> point during the Truman Administration home life became more stressful than
> work life, where stressful is defined either as hysterical drama or
> rheumatismy boredom, and by Reagan II the home was no longer a respite from
> modern society's incessant demands to produce or at the very least a place
> to get a nap. ...

> Part of the reason work and home keep mixing despite our professed desires
> is that that's how Americans were taught to see an aspirational adult life.
> In every TV show and movie after Leave It To Beaver the gimmick has always
> been that the protagonist's job and personal life overlap-- doctors in love,
> CIA agents defending their family, late nights at the office trading zingers
> or abuse stories. While we no longer think we want the overlap, the shows
> reinforced the false psychology that a person is something, all the time and
> everywhere, and the backdrop world "sees" it, accepts it. This applies just
> as much to negative depictions of work/life overlap, e.g. the obsessed cop
> whose wife is now divorcing him because of the job: the point isn't that the
> overlap is "good", that's not the aspiration; the point is that the
> structure of these depictions represents the fundamental narcissistic
> fantasy: a fixed and clear identity-- a character-- seen by a potential
> audience. This is why home is not relaxing: _we are working to not let it be
> all that we are_. [emphasis mine]

~~~
marmaduke
That was a great read. I think structures mentioned therein like the medium is
the message, the form of the argument vs consequences are excellent examples
of cognitive or linguistic framing, ripe for hacking

------
JMTQp8lwXL
My pursuit of financial independence consequently led to my career becoming my
identity. I've optimized for raising my income and savings to reduce "time to
FI", that by the time I get there -- about 4 years, give or take -- that I've
become the thing I explicitly set out to remove from my life. It's not that I
don't like working, but I wish to do so on my own terms. Maybe that means
short-term contracts a few months out of the year, and having that reduced
income cover my living expenses, supplemented with investments. I've done the
numbers many times, but I've spent little time considering what I'll do with
all that extra time.

~~~
WalterBright
> I've optimized for raising my income

I've had a lot of behaviors that would save money. One day I realized that the
time I spent saving money was much less productive than time spent making
money. I.e. by spending more time making money I had more free time.

~~~
ip26
Depending on the behavior, you can get some fun out of it. I enjoy snooping
around the house looking for leaks & thin spots in the insulation.

~~~
WalterBright
If you enjoy doing it, that's another thing entirely.

------
zomglings
This is a thinly veiled advertisement for the author's psychological services
- the company they _had_ to start to solve this problem.

It is hard to get anywhere in this world without working your ass off. It is a
sign of extreme privilege to even have the freedom to complain about it.

~~~
OldGuyInTheClub
Well put. The specific case was not compelling and I wonder whether it is even
real. A son of highly achieving attorneys learns that corporate law is
stressful? Do tell.

I was reminded of Tom Lehrer's quip about the fictional inventor of the
gallbladder, "He soon became a specialist, specializing in diseases of the
rich. He was therefore able to retire at an early age."[1]

[1][http://www.casualhacker.net/tom.lehrer/evening.html](http://www.casualhacker.net/tom.lehrer/evening.html)

~~~
DonHopkins
A specialist in diseases for the rich might have to come out of retirement to
treat himself.

~~~
OldGuyInTheClub
But, could he afford it? See this from The Flintstones:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkPzDxd09I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkPzDxd09I)

------
jblow
Bad article, in part because of the incomplete title. It should be called
"What happens when your career becomes your whole identity, when you don't
like your job and think it's a waste of time". If this latter part is not
true, there is much less of a problem, but for some reason current mainstream
American culture wants to extrapolate all the way to "work should be
compartmentalized and minimized".

The problem is, work is where a lot of people find meaning in life. For those
people, more work means more meaning, and you're hurting them by telling them
otherwise, especially if they are too young to know better than what you are
telling them. And you're also preventing young people from becoming outliers
... what would be the cost to our society, and to the individuals personally,
if Einstein, Dirac, Pauli, or whoever had been told to cut down on the amount
of time they spend thinking about physics stuff, they need to achieve good
work/life balance.

A lot of people in China are working pretty hard. If you want your country to
get whomped by China economically and geopolitically, spread the idea that
it's bad to work hard.

Americans in the past, back when America was able to coordinate to do
ambitious things, worked pretty hard. So if you want to have a country that is
unable to recreate glories of the past, spread the idea that it's bad to work
hard.

All this only happens if you have an idea of work as a draining thing, a net
negative on the individual doing the work. But I am happier because of the
work that I have done. I am a better person than I was before.

Nobody goes to the kung fu school and says "hey it's bad to exercise this
much, you shouldn't kick so high or punch so fast, just make sure not to train
that much, okay?" But for some reason we have decided it's okay to give people
this advice in other realms. You know what, I never felt as good physically as
I did when I was in serious kung fu training. (Never looked as good either).

If you are in a job that actually _is_ damaging if you do it too much for too
long, then by all means, minimize that -- but you know what, in today's world,
there are always proximal things you can do that are not damaging that will
improve your job or your ability to do your job over time.

But advice like this does not make the distinction between jobs that are
damaging and jobs that aren't. We're losing the idea that the latter thing
exists, and I think that is very bad for the overall development of our
society.

~~~
MaulingMonkey
> what would be the cost to our society, and to the individuals personally, if
> Einstein, Dirac, Pauli, or whoever had been told to cut down on the amount
> of time they spend thinking about physics stuff, they need to achieve good
> work/life balance.

I think Einstein's balancing of work (at the Patent Office) / life (his
academic hobby in Physics) served him well.

> Nobody goes to the kung fu school and says "hey it's bad to exercise this
> much, you shouldn't kick so high or punch so fast, just make sure not to
> train that much, okay?"

Overtraining is absolutely a thing:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtraining](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtraining)

> in today's world, there are always proximal things you can do that are not
> damaging that will improve your job or your ability to do your job over
> time.

There's always an opportunity cost, even if those proximal things don't
directly cause damage. For your impassioned knowledge worker, this might be
not getting enough sleep, or not practicing your more general interpersonal
skills, or not having enough downtime to let your subconcious mull over work
problems from new angles. Working hard is great... to a point. Doing _nothing
but_ working hard can have some serious side effects, including to your
productivity, that one should be cognizant of. Yes, even if you seem to enjoy
your job.

------
adamredwoods
For many years my career was my entire identity: I really, really wanted to be
a designer. I thought it was the coolest thing EVER.

Then my son was born and I couldn't quite make this designer career/life that
I wanted. I also realized I wasn't AMAZING at it, but I was GOOD at it. I
couldn't quite get over that threshold. So therefore, not being at the top of
my game and trying to feed my family became a problem.

I gave it up and became a programmer, which I don't attach myself too as much
these days. I tell people I'm a parent first, board gamer second, programmer
third. Whereas before, I was a designer-everything.

Life is always changing-- change with it.

------
2T1Qka0rEiPr
My mother was very much like this. When she retired, she found it quite hard
to re-adjust. Fortunately she has a few hobbies to fall back on.

Personally, I find it quite a hard balance to get right. On the one hand,
tying your identity whole-heartedly to your profession seems dangerous. On the
other, being entirely apathetic about it seems like a waste of a life (that
is, one spent mostly _at work_ ). I try to hang somewhere in the middle, but
it's something I try to stay on top of.

~~~
ryanianian
Love your job and you'll never work a day in your life. Live your job and you
won't have any love left to give.

~~~
galimaufry
The problem I have with this is that love is a complicated thing. I love
playing soccer, but without the social validation of my friends who also play
it I would absolutely never practice. Similarly for most careers, even highly
lovable ones.

~~~
abledon
same for jamming blues/jazz.

social communication without using words. amazing social cohesion.

------
minblaster
“ The test of whether people love what they do is whether they'd do it even if
they weren't paid for it—even if they had to work at another job to make a
living. How many corporate lawyers would do their current work if they had to
do it for free, in their spare time, and take day jobs as waiters to support
themselves?”

[http://www.paulgraham.com/love.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/love.html)

If you aren’t honest with yourself about why you got into a profession it may
wear against your psyche and burn you out. The lawyer knew chasing status
would require a sacrifice of happiness, time, and relationships but didn’t
want to admit it.

~~~
johnchristopher
I think there's a bias against (corporate) lawyers here. The ones I know would
definitely do something very close to their day job.

Also, it makes it seem like there's an endless supply of waiter jobs lined up
for the the taking.

But this has been debated at length on HN
[https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/07/find-
you...](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/07/find-your-passion-
is-terrible-advice/564932/?single_page=true) and
[https://www.theminimalists.com/cal/](https://www.theminimalists.com/cal/)

------
forrestthewoods
I love my job. My work is interesting. My peers are delightful. I’ve had great
jobs and a great career.

My job is not my whole identity. It is 0% of my identity. It’s just a job. If
I had FU money I’d peace out tomorrow and work on hobby projects in my spare
time.

These days I feel like I’m the oddball. I don’t associate my job or hobby with
my identity. I couldn’t tell you my “identity” if I tried. I’m a soup of
likes, dislikes, hopes, fears, and more. I don’t really understand why people
try to put their identity in a tight box with a neat label.

~~~
dorchadas
Completely agree with this. It's one reason why I like being a teacher (and
one reason why it'd be hard to leave, even if it's for a job that has a _much_
higher chance of allowing me to make FU money). I have several months off
(well, not _off_ as I do have to do stuff, but I can work from home mostly),
of the course of the year, to pursue hobbies and basically anything I want to,
even if it's just being super lazy. I really enjoy that, and it makes for a
much better work-life balance.

------
makecheck
I’ve seen a few “20 year” or “30 year” managers. I can’t help but wonder how
their methods might have varied if they had been exposed to even _one_ other
organization’s way of doing things. Also, do they subconsciously value
“company-loyal” employees over others with equivalent or superior experience?

Generally I feel that varied experiences matter more, even if you get unlucky
and spend a handful of years in a less-stellar team.

------
chriselles
I’ve often seen it with military personnel who fail in their transition from
their military to post-military lives.

Some people invest so much of themselves into just a singular self-identity
they are permanently anchored to it unless/until a forcing function compels an
existential change.

I believe competing interests for time such as passions/hobbies and side
hustles provide bridges from one employment career to another.

However, the mirror to workaholism is having too many passions/hobbies and
side hustles outside of work leading to distraction and dilution.

Broad, deep, and substantial focus on singular topics/areas is important, for
a time.

People want their lives to have meaning, often measured thru impactful and
measurable work.

But not at the expense of losing one’s option to seek balance and joy.

------
Causality1
I wonder what the money equivalent is of the term "first world problems".
Millions of Americans spend sixty hours a week at work and still worry about
whether they need to give up their health insurance this year so they can
afford to replace their fifteen year old car because they'll lose their job if
it breaks down and makes them late again.

~~~
rabidrat
I read this as "we should be content with being well-paid wage slaves because
there are lots of underpaid wage slaves". Having to give our best 40+ hours
every week to simply exist is soul-crushing and society-weakening. If you
"need" to have a job, you are more like those struggling millions of Americans
than you are like the moneyed elite, even if you aren't stressed about money
on a day-to-day basis. You still aren't free.

~~~
Causality1
Happiness scales with income until about the $200,000 mark where it levels
off. If you're making six digits you have more in common with Jeff Bezos than
you do with someone making minimum wage.

~~~
Hydraulix989
I don't think that's true in the Bay Area or New York. Having a house instead
of renting in either area, for example, has an appreciable boost in happiness.

------
sandoooo
Here's a common sentiment amongst those with too much time on their hands:

"When I am on my deathbed, I don't want to look back on my life with regret."

The deathbed part of your life isn't even that long. Probably a week or
something. And probably you'll spend much of it being distracted by morphine
and excruciating pain, leaving no room for feeling sad about how shit your
life was. Maybe you should just tell future-you to suck it up and let you play
your xbox in peace.

~~~
monoideism
> The deathbed part of your life isn't even that long. Probably a week or
> something.

Assuming you’re in a developed country, you’ve either been very lucky or
haven’t yet had many friends or family on their death bed. It typically lasts
several weeks to several months. If you have a family member who is dying of
Alzheimer’s (I have), it can last years.

One week would be very fortunate indeed.

That said, I do kind of agree with your sentiment. Even if it’s months, your
death bed is still typically a relatively small part of your life.

------
mathgladiator
I recently started therapy because I relate to this. I'm a definitely a
workaholic and I enjoy coding as an artform.

I found myself using work as an escape mechanism for my mother's suicide, and
it has taken me 11 years to realize that was a mistake and I should focus less
on career and more on being a caring social person.

I have a really nice job and I'm thankful for what it has given me, but it is
clear that I have to walk away and work on being happy rather than productive.

------
sandoooo
>As a psychologist, I specialize in mental health challenges associated with
high-pressure careers. People like Dan show up in my office every day — so
often, in fact, I had to build a company, Azimuth Psychological, to focus on
serving their needs.

Native advertising.

------
aSplash0fDerp
The 21st century should provide a new model for "lifestyle" and career choices
as longevity hits its stride and more studies are published.

Between self, relationships, health, career and hobbies, you can only
reasonably pick 2 or 3 for prime year successes (except for a
lucky/talented/free-rided few) and causes many to spread themselves too thin
keeping up with tradition to enjoy success on any them by their golden years.

Its hard to tell if its caveman logic or the females biological clock that
dictates rushing into everything at an early age, but career burnout, high
divorce rates and health/mental issues at an early age sacrifice too much for
the meager returns.

We'll have to compare notes at a later time, but digital natives may hit
critical mass this decade (or next) and kick much of the analog work ethics,
career timelines and family syncronization theories to the curb in favor of
delayed milestones (career and otherwise) as we inch closer to 100 year life-
spans with proper planning.

------
k__
I always feel a bit sad when I see people who are younger than me and much
more successful with their career.

But on the other hand I don't work much (<20h/week) so it's probably okay.

~~~
noonespecial
People tell me that I didn't "live up to my full potential". I say, "I know.
That would have been exhausting."

~~~
k__
Good point.

It's a bit sad about the missed opportunities, but my privat life is awesome,
so it's okay.

------
hyperpallium
_déformation professionnelle_
[https://wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9formation_professionnelle](https://wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9formation_professionnelle)

------
jariel
Furthermore I fundamentally believe that individuals in this state have their
social and political opinions shaped by their enmeshed, single professional
identity.

I believe professionals such as this are far more likely to only have opions
which avoid controversy or are on the side of a social current consistent with
those in their industry or customers at large.

Their personal choices become indistinguishable from that of a well thought
out PR team.

In particular I suggest this phenom is right at the root of a lot of localist
vs globalist antagonism. Most professionals would probably err on the side of
economic liberalism in the more general sense because it makes sense for their
enmeshed professional identity.

But the personal identity which is obfuscated may have much more connection
with the community,uch more likely to know and empathize with those affected.
Or maybe even just at odds with the professional identity for whatever reason.

When I left my very corporate job it took me months to realise how free I was
to have basically any opinion that I wanted and didn't realize how much I must
have been orienting my thoughts into a direction that would be acceptable to
my peers. (or what I thought would be acceptable).

I'm very supportive of the fact there is research on this.

------
bsanr2
I feel like many workplaces push you to do this, regardless of the prospects.
I've worked dead-end admin positions where I was expected to give inordinate
amount of myself - my time, my energy, my focus - to work that was, as per the
dead end-edness, not going to lead to positive renumeration vis á vis the
investment. There was no awareness of where the job, the business, the
industry really was, a predictable but unfortunate result of the decision-
makers being either people in one of the few positions or people gunning (with
realistic prospects of achieving) one. Just a sort of blind adherence to
corporate dogma. Meanwhile, the HN et al. line is, "Those are only transitory
jobs, it's okay that they don't pay a living wage or treat you with any
dignity, you're supposed to move on from them." Not within the organization,
apparently. So we're to betray the people who gave us the opportunity which
we're supposed to be so appreciative of? Doesn't that go directly against that
corporate dogma we're around every day?

The unspoken and contradictory of etiquette of the American workplace is
frustrating and demoralizing.

------
code4tee
Certain high achievers in their career use their career as a cover for general
failings in other parts of their life. I’ve seen it a few times and it ends
badly when it all finally catches up to them, often too late in life to do
much about it. Some people are very happy to have their career be their whole
identity, but most don’t think that way and define “success” as success across
multiple areas of their life.

------
Lynolix
It's better than your whole identity and existence constituting clinical
depression, video games and _no_ career—let alone work history.

~~~
octokatt
Different outcome, but similar cause. The high-pressure system of achievement
is a cause for both high-profile burnout and hikikomori [0] [1].

[0] [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/young-
people-j...](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/young-people-japan-
hikikomori-anxiety-a7329396.html) [1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikikomori](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikikomori)

------
hprotagonist
That drum major instinct is a real fucker if you don’t see it for what it is
and point it in the right direction. [https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-
papers/documents/dru...](https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-
papers/documents/drum-major-instinct-sermon-delivered-ebenezer-baptist-church)

------
0kl
I disagree that “enmeshment” is always bad. What we do, especially when we are
fortunate enough to choose and enjoy our careers, are fundamental to who we
are and the narrative that work is solely there to provide income is not
always true.

We spend the majority of our time, effort, and thought around our work. To say
that none of this should touch on our identity would be doing a disservice to
the majority of our time spent living.

It is true, that some people are not “enmeshed”, but are consumed with work,
but what about the people that do find happiness and fulfillment in their
“high-powered” job? Dan’s failure to recognize his own needs are not a
reflection of “enmeshment” being bad, but a reminder that if you do not pay
attention to your own wants and desires you will be unhappy, regardless of how
successful you are. That if you do need the job and hate it, to make sure
you’re making the right trade-offs to have a happy life - see the
recommendations in the article for how.

------
quotemstr
This anti-work ethic you see crop up once in a while is delusion. Success
comes from perseverance, not idleness or detachment.

A few days ago, there was an article from some CEO claiming that you don't
need to work hard to succeed. Today, we have an article from HBR cautioning
about becoming too invested in one's work. This sentiment is dangerous. It's
harmful to teach young people to be cynical, indifferent, and lazy, because
the vast majority of progress really is made by the passionate and dedicated
genius, not the detached crank-turner that HBR writers want impressionable
young people to become.

Have a few people succeed without trying? Sure. They were stupid and lucky.
Are you one of these people? Almost certainly not. Look at the history of
science and innovation: the truth that emerges is that breakthroughs come not
from relaxation, but from a combination of passion and hard work.

~~~
tuckerconnelly
It may be an effect of the economic bubble we're in. It's an ethos that
doesn't survive a crash :)

~~~
asveikau
Or maybe people are working harder each year for decreasing post-inflation-
adjusted wages and decreasing benefits, wages are not keeping up with costs in
many industries and places, they are stressed out and asking why they put
themselves through this.

Or perhaps, a scenario that will be familiar to many in tech and I know I have
personally witnessed, that some corporate cultures are so completely full of
narcissism, and they sweep people up until they think this sort of beast is
normal, having a toll on mental health.

------
JDiculous
The problem is that we're often expected to make our career our identity. If
you don't, then you get passed over for a promotion/hire while the workaholic
gets a promotion.

This problem is especially acute in the U.S. where one of the first questions
people ask each other when they meet is "what do you do"

------
AnimalMuppet
What happens? Your marriage suffers (if you have one). Your children suffer
(if you have any). And you suffer.

And it's not just work. If your side project becomes your whole identity, the
same is true.

------
quickthrower2
This is a framework for thinking about resilience
[https://www.theresiliencedoughnut.com.au/](https://www.theresiliencedoughnut.com.au/).

In a nutshell if you build all your esteem from work, you only get 1/2 of the
7 factors i.e. Skill, Money. But you need at least 3 and ideally more to
whether life's shocks. If you lose your job/career you might be left with
zero. But if you also invest in say friends and community, losing your job is
less of a blow.

------
mirimir
I've had four careers, and each one became pretty much my whole identity. For
some years, anyway. But eventually, I found myself becoming interested in
something else. And eventually, that something else became a career. After a
period of chaos, anyway.

And now my privacy/anonymity hobby has basically become a career. Except that
I mostly don't get paid. Which isn't an issue.

------
Nikaoto
The Art of Manliness podcast had a great episode about this:
[https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/podcast-547-achievin...](https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/podcast-547-achieving-
success-through-the-pursuit-of-fulfillment)

Made me think harder about the specific things I enjoy about programming.

The book Dark Horse expands on the topic.

------
sjg007
Everyone who defines themselves by their job should move to LA for a few
years. In LA everyone is an actor just working a different job until they make
it.

------
mrtron
I know many farmers.

------
not_a_moth
Think only problematic insomuch as your career doesn't equal your higher
calling, i.e. your career is status driven or following the herd.

~~~
coldtea
The problem is most careers don't really qualify as "higher callings".

Originally "higher calling" meant a much more important (e.g. scientific,
humanitarian, patriotic, artistic, priesthood, etc.) not some person working
up a management career in some BS enterprise selling BS through marketing...

So while a doctor might have his "higher calling" as career, I doubt that can
be the case for the millions of corporate drones...

~~~
cloverich
You might be surprised to find that many doctors fall into the very
description in this article. Higher calling is a social construct and the
reality is being a physician is a _lot_ of hours, a lot of BS, and a lot of
patients who need self help more than your help. Its in most ways just like
any other job, if you don't find some satisfaction in the actual work, you are
going to be miserable. Many are.

~~~
coldtea
> _the reality is being a physician is a _lot_ of hours, a lot of BS, and a
> lot of patients who need self help more than your help_

Sure. In the end though, you help people and occasionally save lives, you
don't market and sell sugared soda water, nor are you a middleman in the paper
market, or someone that devises new schemes to part people from their money
via convincing ads, or tap away at some Dilbert style cube job.

So it's more appropriate to be a higher calling (and has historically been
seen as such by many doctors) than some cube job.

Higher calling jobs still have drudgery and boring parts (plus useless
bureaucracy to fight).

------
dominotw
work as identity burnout as lifestyle - erza klien had a good podcast about
this llast year.

------
Animats
It beats changing diapers.

------
reddog
You can love your job but it will never love you back.

------
viburnum
If you’re the kind of person is always troubled by something (most people
are), directing that unsettled nagging feeling into your work is the best
thing you can do.

