Approaching the simplification of my life as a ... hobby?
Wikipedia, that classic proxy for general consensus, presently defines a hobby as "a regular activity that is done for enjoyment, typically during one's leisure time." It is characterized as a pursuit of amusement, untethered from one's occupation (i.e., the source of income in a capitalist society that equates labour to self-worth, et cetera, yes this is going to be one of those posts).
Wikipedia adds: "Participation in hobbies encourages acquiring substantial skills and knowledge in that area." This is appealing, because it means immersion in a domain based on curiosity, and not because it is financially profitable. In other words, a good hobby is intrinsically rewarding.
This idea of getting good at something for enjoyment's sake is sorely needed during difficult times. It's food for self-determination, self-direction, self-discipline, self-esteem, self-awareness, and more concepts under the umbrella of feeling responsive and response-able in one's life. I distinguish this from responsibility because hobbies should not have that sense of "should" attached to it. Saddled with the obligations of modern living, we should (lol) each have a portion of our respective lives to do what we want. So long as, of course, doing so does not infringe on the capacity of others to enjoy their leisure and living. For instance, cosplaying as a fascist is a weird way to derive enjoyment.
It is with these thoughts in my mind that I pose a hobby for myself. It's an activity that I've dabbled with for most of my adult life but it came in spurts and was often framed as a chore or exercise. As suggested by this post's title, I refer to the act of simplifying my life.
At times it was a fondness for minimalism, at others a fixation on decluttering, the idea of simplification is a constant albeit nebulous throughline in my adulthood. However it is only at the present that I think it can be approached as a hobby. The definitions provided earlier work with this idea: it's certainly not a source of income, it does bring me joy to remove excess (in all ways) from my life, and as a practice of philosophy it can be instructive. Above all, to simplify my life is an active response to the conditions of my life. It is a subtractive response, not an additive one.
This reframing of life-simplification as a hobby means it doesn't have to be an obligation. I can approach it with a relaxed state of mind and tranquility of the soul, in order to, of course, further relax my mind and nurture my soul. I really believe there are philosophical implications to this, but I'm admittedly grappling with the ideas in real time as I write all this down!
Some examples are in order. Let me start with how I'm conceptualizing this.
The secretary problem AKA the best choice problem AKA the 37% rule suggests that we explore 37% of a pool of choices and then the next time an alternative emerges that is better than the first 37%, we stop exploring options and commit to that choice. There are some conditions to this framing, such as there being no way to return to an earlier option (e.g., one has already disqualified selecting a particular candidate for a position).
Please bear with my following interpretation. As I enter my mid-30s, I have pretty much lived (or explored) 37% of my life. At best, the woes of the world dissipate, my quality of life is extended by medical advances, and environmental factors are conducive to my leading a long and healthy life—in other words, the universe is rooting for my prolonged existence—and I should live to be 100. Even at best I'm approximately 37% finished with my "pool of allotted days". This means I should have some sense of what I'm looking for. What I like, and equally what I dislike. In those matters, I don't need to keep exploring or considering options: I have enough experience to make a decision!
So that's how I'm framing this idea of life simplication: that there are choices or problems that I can close the book on. Here's a briefly brainstormed list of examples of such problems.
- the genre of movies to watch. I dislike horror movies. I love murder mysteries (I hope Kenneth Branagh continues his run as Hercule Poirot and Daniel Craig his as Benoit Blanc). I'm not that much of a film buff to begin with, so let's say when I do spend time watching a film, it should be in a genre that I know I will enjoy. Extend this logic to books, video games, or anything else under the umbrella of 'consumed entertainment'. I've got backlogs in each of these domains—at this point in my life, seeking more alternatives is pointless.
- what to wear. Or, as the satorialists call it: style. I know what I'm comfortable in. I know what colours look good on me. I know my favourite brand and fit for denim. For the duration of my life, my wardrobe can be maintained by replacing what gets worn down. (With the obvious two caveats: first, that I live in a climate that my wardrobe has, well, acclimated to; and second, that no disaster strikes in which I lose large portions if not all of my wardrobe in one event.) There was a time growing up when I enjoyed learning about men's fashion and the trends. At this point? I've elected to stick with the basics and the classics, because going the rest of my life without having to worry about the right choice of tie sounds pretty neat.
- operating system (of my personal devices). The geeky entry. I highly doubt my quality of life will be improved by using Windows, and I'm increasingly dissatisfied with Apple. Having used Linux since circa 2013, I think my experiences provide clear evidence that open source technology is my preferred domain. The next time I get a smartphone (and it may be sooner than later if Apple maintains its hostility towards users), I'll be considering a device that can play well with GrapheneOS.
- relationships. Now we're getting serious. The original secretary problem presented a scenario in which candidates were vying for one spot. In real life, the scenario entails people being considered for friendships, marriage (if it is in one's disposition), and (if it is in one's disposition) situationships. There's an upper bound to the number of relationships one can have in life, based on time available, emotional stamina, emotional maturity, one's mixture of introversion and extroversion, et cetera. A broad range of possibilities, yet a limit does exist. At this point in my life, I strive to be deliberate with who gets access to me and my personality. To be discerning in such matters seems to me a form of self-respect.
No doubt there are more categories or types of "problems" which warrant careful reflection of experience. It wasn't my aim to create a typology (at least not here in this post). But I get the rather exciting sense that this sort of thinking is conducive to a good life. It gets at what Socrates called an examined life that's worth living. Note that I do not claim that my experiences or the commitments that result from them are ultimate for all (so, please, don't email me to defend Apple lol). They are ultimate to me, and I think treating the simplication of my life as a hobby—through which I cultivate and refine the skills and knowledge pertaining to living my life—is an interesting way of honoring my experiences.
To those who are in the exploratory phase of life (i.e., the approximate first 37%, however calculated): enjoy it. The sooner you learn to pursue activities based on your own interests and curiosities, the sooner you gain the experiences related to knowing yourself. (Of course, the prerequisite to this knowledge seems to entail ignoring this advice—I would know.)
To those who are in the exploiting phase of life (forgive such a dirty term—it is based on academic phraseology), I welcome feedback or guidance. I stand here at the supposed inflection point, and I am willing to learn.