Maximum productivity, and what people want to and have to produce It goes like this really: When the economy is working at maximum productivity, people in the economy don’t want and don’t have to produce more than what is produced now, or else… Cause any other option is this, if it really goes: When the economy is working at maximum productivity, people in the economy want or have to produce more than what is produced now, but… But you have to really think, how it really goes: If in the end, when the economy is working at maximum productivity, people in the economy want or have to produce more than what is produced now, then it doesn’t seem to me why they are saying that the economy is working at maximum productivity over and over in reality, does it seem to you?
Maximum productivity, all the same for all the people regarding something they say they want or say they have to do It goes like this really: When the economy is working at maximum productivity, people in the economy cannot all have the same productivity over and over in time, regardless of what they say they want or say they have to do, or else… Cause any other option is this, if it really goes: When the economy is working at maximum productivity, people in the economy can all have the same productivity over and over in time, regarding something they say they want or say they have to do, but… But you have to really think, how it really goes: If in the end, when the economy is working at maximum productivity, people in the economy can all have the same productivity over and over in time, regarding something they say they want or say they have to do, then it doesn’t seem to me that the universe could keep all people in the economy have the same productivity throughout their entire lives regarding breathing regardless of what they say they want or say they have to do, over and over in human history, does it seem to you?
Hope for any productivity over and over in time in the economy, regardless what people say they want or say they have to do
It goes like this really:When the economy is working at any productivity honestly over and over in time, there are the ones below the ones in the middle, and the middle are the ones below the ones above, and more than half of all the money in the economy is in the middle, or else… Cause any other option is this, if it really goes: When the economy is working at any productivity honestly over and over in time, either there aren’t the ones below the ones in the middle, or the middle aren’t the ones below the ones above, or more than half of all the money in the economy isn’t in the middle, but… But you have to really think, how it really goes: If in the end, when the economy is working at any productivity honestly over and over in time, either there aren’t the ones below the ones in the middle, or the middle aren’t the ones below the ones above, or more than half of all the money in the economy isn’t in the middle, then it doesn’t seem to me that the least productive people don’t have more than half of all the money in the economy over and over in time, that the least productive aren’t allowed in the economy to dream to have more than half of all the money in the economy over and over in time without being more productive for the entire economy over and over in reality, and that the most productive people understand what productive over and over for the entire economy really means, does it seem to you?
Hope for a fun economy, which seems fair over and over in time. It goes like this really:
When the economy is fair for most people over and over in time, the economy is fun for most people over and over in time, or else… Cause any other option is this, if it really goes:
When the economy is fair for most people over and over in time, the economy isn’t fun for most people over and over in time, but… But you have to really think, how it really goes:
If in the end, when the economy is fair for most people over and over in time, the economy isn’t fun for most people over and over in time, then it doesn’t seem to me that the economy is fair to the universe over and over in time, which had to make the laws of the universe to be fun for living beings over and over in time before living beings existed, as anything dead would anyway behave over and over as the universe planned, so that the living don’t have to spend more time and effort over and over in time than what they really had to, to really have fun, as that really seems fair to me, does it seem to you?
When I say original image, I mean the image in which every player is made. If every player chooses to treat every player as the original image, they will not make each other take more time and effort to do the same thing with the same amount of money.
So BIF, I don’t really understand what you’re getting at, and I have a ton of questions. When I analyze your OP, I first note this: it seems to be split into 4 sections:
Each section consists of 3 propositions:
…each one describing (I think) what must logically follow from a specific condition having to do with the economy working at maximum productivity. The first considers how things really are, the second any alternative, and the last how things really are (again?) but according to “how one has to really think”.
Honestly, I don’t know where to begin. I won’t even go into the content before I’ve understood the structure. Can you explain the structure? Why these 4 sections? And for each, why these 3 types of propositions? How does it all tie together? And once tied together, what is the conclusion we are drawing?
And if you can, please explain how “It goes like this really” differs from “But you have to really think, how it really goes”?
I can guess, but I’d rather hear it from the horse’s mouth.
Here’s some initial questions with answers regarding the word economy, let me know if this helps or if you had something else in mind to begin with…which I hope not since then you knew where to begin, but you simply didn’t say it…
What does economy refer to in your text?
An economy refers to society and what people in it have to do in reality, in order to coordinate their actions in a fun way for them that can happen over and over in reality.
Why is the word economy meaningful to people in reality?
When people are trying to coordinate their actions in reality, they are free to try every way that they imagine, but not all ways take them the same time and effort to follow together over and over in reality, and the ways that take people the least time and effort to do together over and over in reality, is what the word economy is all about in reality.
How does the word economy happen in reality?
When people trying to coordinate their actions in reality, put their time and effort to find a way that takes them the least time and effort to reach their ends, that way has to be happening over and over in reality in a fun way for all people affected by this way playing out as a story in reality, or people end up thinking this way is not fun to happen over and over in reality, and then this way isn’t worth their time and effort to follow over and over in reality.
You may find it strange that I start from this question (since you asked it after your text below in your original text), but here’s the explanation for this and bear with me. “It goes like this really”: When you read this part, what really happens is written, but the reason why that happens is not yet written. “But you have to really think, how it really goes”: When you read this part, how what is written doesn’t really make sense is written in a fun way, but what really happens has already been written.
“Cause any other option is this, if it really goes”: When you read this part, why I already know what I am explaining to you is written, but how you will find this out is not yet written.
So, how do you find this out?
The easiest way for you to do so, is to read what I wrote in the order that it is written, and think whether I am rightfully claiming that none of you know what money does in the economy, or I am crazy to make such a claim here and you can argue against what I wrote. Why?
Because any other way it will take us more time and effort to coordinate our actions and make sense, it seem to me, does it seem to you otherwise?
Why the three types of propositions is already written above.
Maximum productivity, and what people want to and have to produce: Regardless what you say that you will produce in reality , what you can produce over and over in reality with the least time and effort spend is what you want to produce, but only if you know how you have to produce it reality, or else it will take you more time and effort to produce it if you ever do so.
Maximum productivity, all the same for all the people regarding something they say they want or say they have to do: Regardless what you say people can produce in reality, what people can produce over and over in reality with the least time and effort spend does not take the same time and effort for each one to produce it, or else people don’t have the freedom to rest in reality when they choose to as their bodies tell them to do so, disregarding freely the same productivity mandate of some that the universe didn’t really have to abide with.
Hope for any productivity over and over in time in the economy, regardless what people say they want or say they have to do: Regardless what you say, some people produce less and some more over and over in reality, but how much it is fun to produce over and over in society is what the people in the middle of society do, and this is why more than half of the money belongs to them, or else society is split into pieces and then it takes people more time and effort to coordinate their actions together.
Hope for a fun economy, which seems fair over and over in time.: Regardless what you say, most people have to be having fun in the economy over and over, or else people start complaining that the economy is not fun, and then it takes people more time and effort to coordinate their actions together.
I am simply making arguments in this text claiming that all you reading and thinking otherwise regarding the economy are wrong, regardless the space and time you inhabit.
In order for it to tie together, one has to have many read what money does and understand that, or else we are spending more time and effort coordinating actions together in a fun way for us.
Many have to then follow the below way regarding what money does in reality.
The way of money in reality in a fun way for us together.
When people trade with one another,
In general they do “I do this for you, you do that for me”,
And specifically whatever “this” and “that” is for the specific occasion and instance, so now…
Player do you know what money does…
Money doesn’t do what those who have money say…
Money reduces the time and effort to trade…
Or we are stuck with idiots wasting our time and effort, with their endless money stories…
Have you ever really thought of that?
I am trying to start a global revolution so that all humans understand what money does, which is already crazy enough to say for anyone, but the problem that I really have is that I have to do this in reality using through internet, and this is what I have for you below. https://www.facebook.com/AlexandrosTsolis/
Here’s some initial questions with answers regarding the word economy, let me know if this helps or if you had something else in mind to begin with…which I hope not since then you knew where to begin, but you simply didn’t say it…
What does economy refer to in your text?
An economy refers to society and what people in it have to do in reality, in order to coordinate their actions in a fun way for them that can happen over and over in reality.
Why is the word economy meaningful to people in reality?
When people are trying to coordinate their actions in reality, they are free to try every way that they imagine, but not all ways take them the same time and effort to follow together over and over in reality, and the ways that take people the least time and effort to do together over and over in reality, is what the word economy is all about in reality.
How does the word economy happen in reality?
When people trying to coordinate their actions in reality, put their time and effort to find a way that takes them the least time and effort to reach their ends, that way has to be happening over and over in reality in a fun way for all people affected by this way playing out as a story in reality, or people end up thinking this way is not fun to happen over and over in reality, and then this way isn’t worth their time and effort to follow over and over in reality.
You may find it strange that I start from this question (since you asked it after your text below in your original text), but here’s the explanation for this and bear with me. “It goes like this really”: When you read this part, what really happens is written, but the reason why that happens is not yet written. “But you have to really think, how it really goes”: When you read this part, how what is written doesn’t really make sense is written in a fun way, but what really happens has already been written.
“Cause any other option is this, if it really goes”: When you read this part, why I already know what I am explaining to you is written, but how you will find this out is not yet written.
So, how do you find this out?
The easiest way for you to do so, is to read what I wrote in the order that it is written, and think whether I am rightfully claiming that none of you know what money does in the economy, or I am crazy to make such a claim here and you can argue against what I wrote. Why?
Because any other way it will take us more time and effort to coordinate our actions and make sense, it seem to me, does it seem to you otherwise?
Why the three types of propositions is already written above.
Maximum productivity, and what people want to and have to produce: Regardless what you say that you will produce in reality , what you can produce over and over in reality with the least time and effort spend is what you want to produce, but only if you know how you have to produce it reality, or else it will take you more time and effort to produce it if you ever do so.
Maximum productivity, all the same for all the people regarding something they say they want or say they have to do: Regardless what you say people can produce in reality, what people can produce over and over in reality with the least time and effort spend does not take the same time and effort for each one to produce it, or else people don’t have the freedom to rest in reality when they choose to as their bodies tell them to do so, disregarding freely the same productivity mandate of some that the universe didn’t really have to abide with.
Hope for any productivity over and over in time in the economy, regardless what people say they want or say they have to do: Regardless what you say, some people produce less and some more over and over in reality, but how much it is fun to produce over and over in society is what the people in the middle of society do, and this is why more than half of the money belongs to them, or else society is split into pieces and then it takes people more time and effort to coordinate their actions together.
Hope for a fun economy, which seems fair over and over in time.: Regardless what you say, most people have to be having fun in the economy over and over, or else people start complaining that the economy is not fun, and then it takes people more time and effort to coordinate their actions together.
I am simply making arguments in this text claiming that all you reading and thinking otherwise regarding the economy are wrong, regardless the space and time you inhabit.
In order for it to tie together, one has to have many read what money does and understand that, or else we are spending more time and effort coordinating actions together in a fun way for us.
Many have to then follow the below way regarding what money does in reality.
The way of money in reality in a fun way for us together.
When people trade with one another,
In general they do “I do this for you, you do that for me”,
And specifically whatever “this” and “that” is for the specific occasion and instance, so now…
Player do you know what money does…
Money doesn’t do what those who have money say…
Money reduces the time and effort to trade…
Or we are stuck with idiots wasting our time and effort, with their endless money stories…
Have you ever really thought of that?
I am trying to start a global revolution so that all humans understand what money does, which is already crazy enough to say for anyone, but the problem that I really have is that I have to do this in reality using through internet, and this is what I have for you below. https://www.facebook.com/AlexandrosTsolis/
[/quote]
Well, that’s a different concept of “economy” than what’s conventionally taught. Conventionally, an economy is defined as a social system that aims to reallocate resources such that they are put to their best use. For example, an apple growing on a tree is put to better use if it is plucked, sold, and put in someone’s fridge so that they can eat it later. A person’s skills is put to its best use when it can be applied to a job that allows him to pay the bills and renders a service to society. Your definition may be a different way of saying the same thing, but I’ll have to understand it better to say.
And what do you mean by “fun”? Do you mean happiness? Enjoyment? Fulfillment? Maybe you could give an example?
And over and over means that they want the opportunity to repeat the fun as often as possible, correct?
And why do you always qualify your statements by noting that they happen in reality? Are you trying to contrast this with lies? With the way we think the economy/money works but is wrong?
It sounds like your explaining the word “economical”–as in, the most economical way to produce something–meaning the way that requires the least amount of resources, effort, and time to produce the highest quality and quantity of the product. It’s efficiency, cost-effectiveness. Is this correct?
Hmmm… are you pointing out a discrepancy between the most efficient (economical) way to produce something and the most enjoyable (fun) way to produce something? Are you say that they don’t necessarily always align?
I can see maybe what you’re getting at now. Are you saying our focus on producing the most we can produce is the cause of the widespread misery in the West? That because we are treated like drones, like cogs in the wheel, repeating the same boring routines over and over and over again, it takes a toll on our psychology? But that we’re stuck with these routines because they happen to be the most efficient way to produce the most we can produce?
A perfect example is the clerk at the grocery store. All she does for 8 hours a day is scan people’s groceries and put them in bags. And this will repeat every day for the rest of her life or until she quits. I can’t think of a more boring routine to go through over and over and over again. I’d go crazy after a while. But we’ve gotta get those groceries out. We gotta make money. So she’s stuck working that routine.
I mean, there are plenty of less efficient ways of doing this that might be more fun. For example, why don’t the clerks tag along with the customers as they shop around? When he (the customer) grabs the bananas, for example, the clerk is there to scan them. Her scanner keeps a tally of the prices and when he’s done, he pays her the total. That might be a bit less boring. For one thing, you don’t have to stand in one place all day. You also get to socialize with the customer a bit more in-depth, taking the time to get to know them. ← That could be more fulfilling. The problem, of course, is that you’d have to pair each customer with a clerk, and that would be very costly to the grocery store as that would require hiring way more clerks than if they just stood at the cash register all day. Not to mention the amount of time it would take to service each customer–way more than if you just rush them through the checkout line.
I think I’ll stop there for now and see what you say.
Let me use your first example: Apple example: an apple growing on a tree is put to better use if it is plucked, sold, and put in someone’s fridge so that they can eat it later. What I mean: in order for the apple to follow the story you mentioned (plucked, sold, end up in someone’s fridge), people in society have to coordination their actions so that:
There are people plucking the apple, and transfer it to the market.
In the market the apple is presented to potential customers (regardless that being an online or physical market), so there are people doing that also (in case of online market probably do the apple delivery also)
There are people buying apples who have money to do so and fridges to store the apples.
In order for the above to make sense in reality, people have to coordinate their actions so that the story of apples being plucked sold and ending up in someone’s fridge plays in reality.
In order for the story of apples being plucked sold and ending up in someone’s fridge to play in reality, that story has to play in a way that makes sense for people who have to coordinate their actions, and are free from their nature to choose to do whatever they like (though not everything people choose to do makes sense to happen over and over in reality).
In order for a story that plays in reality, to play in a way that makes sense for people who have to coordinate their actions to make that story play, that story has to be fun for people in reality to play over and over. Why? Because otherwise it wouldn’t be fun and then people start making their own stories which are fun to them and start losing coordination.
What is fun for people to happen in reality, people don’t really know before it really happens to them in reality, or else if people knew what is fun for people to happen in reality before it really happens to them in reality, then reality wouldn’t have to be really happening, for people to be really having fun, but this isn’t what really has been happening over and over since the beginning of reality.
To find what is fun in reality, one has to know the difference between what one imagines is really fun, and what is really fun in reality to happen over and over.
What is really fun in reality to happen over and over, is what makes sense in reality to happen over and over, and the human senses point to those stories over and over but…
…humans have to be free to make their own stories, in order for them to be free in reality, and so people are free to make stories that don’t make sense over and over in reality.
When humans make stories that don’t make sense over and over in reality, then humans have to spend more time and effort to make sense in reality, as they are already lost in their imagination, and not following reality.
When humans make stories that make sense over and over in reality, then humans have to spend the least time and effort to make sense in reality, as they are already following reality, where life for humans has a pace in order for life to be fun over and over.
When humans make stories that sometimes make sense and sometimes don’t, then humans have to spend some time and effort to think and clear out their stories in their minds, and start following reality.
The example follows after your following question.
Over and over means they have to have the freedom to repeat the fun as often as they want to. Why?
Because when they don’t want to, they don’t repeat the fun and they are free to do so, and…
when they want to, they can repeat the fun as often as they do what they have to ,do for that to be possible in a really fun way.
For example:
if you where holding my head in the toilet, letting me breathe from time to time, I do want the opportunity to repeat the fun of breathing as often as possible, and you are the one making that opportunity real for me over and over in that situation.
If I am writing to you my reply to your question, breathing whenever I want to, I a free to repeat the fun of breathing as often as possible, but…
if I start breathing and exhaling rapidly over and over, I will start getting dizzy, as it doesn’t make sense to breathe rapidly over and over, it is more fun to breathe calmly.
When one imagines something player, something else is happening around one in reality or it doesn’t seem to me where inside one really imagines something…does it seem to you?
People want to have fun in reality, but in order for people to be able to do that in reality they have to be able to make sense of reality, and in order for them to do that they have to follow their senses which point to a common end, them having fun together in reality.
When people don’t want to follow their senses, which point to the obvious fact that reality isn’t what they imagine exactly, reality is exactly something else than anything people can imagine since the beginning of reality, those people start making up stories regarding how reality is something that they imagine, and as long as they can have others believe their stories, they don’t care about reality…and then…
…people end up having to spend more time and effort to do whatever they want to do together in reality, as they follow unreal stories.
I am explaining nothing but the obvious, that out of all the ways that you have to do something in reality, the ways that take you the least time and effort to follow over and over in reality and are fun are the ways that over and over make sense in reality.
Efficiency and cost-effectiveness are similar words, but not exactly what I am talking about.
It may be efficient and cost-effective to kill young male chickens on a factory that produces eggs, as the male chickens don’t produce eggs and you have to spend money to take care of them in order for them to remain alive, but it is not fun to kill them for efficiency and cost-effectiveness reasons, and doesn’t make too much sense…as you will find if the consumers find out about you doing that over and over in reality in your factory.
The most economical way to produce something is the way that it is fun over and over to produce it. Why?
Because if the way is more fun over and over to produce than the people producing it can handle, then sooner or later people can’t produce that way at best, or hurt themselves over and over and end up being less productive over time.
And if the way if less fun over and over to produce than the people producing it want, then sooner or later people want to do something else, and end up being less productive over time.
I am saying that people don’t know what money does, and make up stories to explain what they think money does, which take us more time and effort to follow in reality. Why?
The most economical way to produce something is the way that it is fun over and over to produce it. Why?
Because if the way is more fun over and over to produce than the people producing it can handle, then sooner or later people can’t produce that way at best, or hurt themselves over and over and end up being less productive over time.
And if the way if less fun over and over to produce than the people producing it want, then sooner or later people want to do something else, and end up being less productive over time.
Depends on whether the grocery store managers understand this as a problem, meaning having a clerk bored to oblivion, or tired at work. Why?
Because customers don’t just by with their minds they buy according to what makes sense to them, and if the environment around them feels uncomfortable, they don’t feel that comfortable.
Solving such a problem in a grocery store that isn’t going too well, is an even bigger problem compared to a large company with cash flow, but…
…it is funny how there are large companies that don’t bother that much with this problem, as when there is cash flow in large companies, there is also a tendency to sweep problems under the carpet…and then…
…we have to spend more time and effort to have fun.
Daily there is a story that plays in the store, you think about that story, what you really have to do within that story, what you have to not do within that story, and after you are done and are able to summarize that, do you really have to think anything further? Why?
Because then you can discuss with the employees to see if that story makes sense to them, but…
…you have to allow this to happen the other way around have the employees come up with a story that makes sense to them, and you then have to make sense of it business wise.
If the above sounds vague as a reply, it is because you have to think specifically for each company and store, but if you really want me to say something more, there is a dialogue that has to play between employees and employers than goes both ways, both parts trying to find something to do commonly. If that is violated and each part has magical words it uses to justify their reasoning (“efficiency”, cost-effectiveness", over bullshit company words that we spend endless time and effort talking about in companies…), then…
…we spend time and effort discussing the magical words, and don’t make that much sense in reality, it seems to me.
I am trying to start a global revolution so that all humans understand what money does, which is already crazy enough to say for anyone, but the problem that I really have is that I have to do this in reality using through internet, and this is what I have for you below. facebook.com/AlexandrosTsolis/
I guess what you’re saying is that in order to reallocate resources such as to put them to their best use, the process by which people do it must be fun–otherwise, they just wouldn’t do it.
Ok, that’s kind of an odd example, but I’ll go with it. If breathing is your example of what it is to have fun, then “fun” means something like enjoyment or pleasure. And of course, we all want to experience enjoyment and pleasure over and over.
It sounds to me like your describing something like religion or someone living in denial about crucial facts pertaining to reality. In the case of religion, one does have to put a lot of mental energy into keeping up the illusion that their religious convictions are reality. This is because they have to exert a significant amount of effort into reconciling all the descrepancies that are bound to surface between what their religion predicts and what reality presents us with. If reality presents us with something that thwarts a religious person’s expectations, he would have to jump through a few hoops to rationalize those things away in favor of preserving what his religion dictates. It takes a lot more mental effort to come up with an elaborate account that restores “sense” (as you’re calling it) to a descrepancy that, left to its own devices, makes no sense given a person’s religious convictions. Someone who is dedicated to accepting reality no matter what it presents to the person, by contrast, simply has to believe what he is presented with, which takes very little mental effort, and only on occasion has to reconcile what he is presented with with a pre-existing but erroneous understanding. And given that he is accepting reality as such, he knows there is bound to be a correct understanding which can’t be that far off–so the effort required there is still minimal.
But if a person is unfortunately dedicated to the fun he thinks he can have if his religion were true (ex. maybe he thinks he can get whatever he wants simply by praying to God to give it to him), he will have to keep up the complicated and elaborate explanations for why his religion is true and the things reality is presenting to him are, if not false, then not to be interpreted at face value. And then if he succeeds in this effort, he still doesn’t necessarily get to experience his fun (God isn’t going to give him whatever he wants no matter how hard he prays).
With the exception of fun being added to the mix, I’m not sure I see the difference. It sounds to me like you’re saying the most efficient (or cost-effective) way to do something makes the most sense (given that it’s fun, of course).
Right, so that it must be fun is an important variable you are adding to the equation.
Like a religion. The religion of money that I’m familiar with is that money is the ultimate trading tool. If you have it, you can trade it for pretty much anything. People crave money over any other tool, any other commodity, because of how much power it gives one. A man possessing money can do anything with that money–trade it for something desirable, pay people to do his bidding, fund institutions to solve world plaguing problems and make revolutionary breakthroughs–it can even buy happiness if you know how to use it properly. But this is my understanding of how money works–what money is–do you say this is a story I’m making up? What do you say money is?
Ok, so there’s an optimal level of fun we should be having to work at our most efficient. I could agree with that. Too much fun leads to addiction which can distract from the productivity it is our goal to achieve. Not enough leads to insufficient motivation to be productive (obviously).
Well, I’m just trying to understand if my grocery store example is a good example of what you’re talking about. I’m wondering if you’re noting a descrepancy. Would you say descrepancies like this are possible? That the most cost-effective/efficient way to run a business is not always the most optimally fun way to run that business (at least, fun for the workers, the grocery store clerk)?
What if the customers didn’t care whether the clerk was bored to tears or not? What if the grocery store owners were happy with their customer base and the revenue it was producing?
Well, indeed there are plenty of businesses that your description applies to–businesses in which upper management tells themselves stories such as “my workers are happy, they’re jobs are enjoyable and meaningful, they have fun when they come to work”–you know, whatever lets them sleep at night. But the reality is that the workers are miserable–bored, unhappy, stressed, afraid to screw up, whatever–and this misery is eventually going to lead them to look for work elsewhere (not have fun together). So I agree that it behooves the owners not to just tell themselves stories but go down to the ground floor and see whether their workers are having fun or not.
I’m not convinced that “efficiency” and “cost-effective” are bullshit magic words. They’re just concepts. They’re useful for denoting real world phenomena. There is such a thing as efficiency. There is such a thing as cost-effectiveness. Now, whether efficiency and cost-effectiveness ought to be a business’s top priority is another matter–and maybe it shouldn’t be–so if you’re saying the use of these concepts as excuses to continue running a business in an inhumaine or unethical manner–inhumaine/unethical to the workers–is bullshit, magical thinking, then you have a point. But I’m not arguing that businesses have such an excuse–I’m still at the stage of trying to understand your point, so I bring up these concepts–efficiency and cost-effectiveness–to introduce ideas to you to see what you say about them. This helps me to understand.
Well, naturally you’d have to do this in reality. You ain’t starting no revolution in a fantasy.
I skipped over a few of your points. I’ll address them here.
It’s a bit of trial and error, experimenting and seeing the results. Most of the time, what we imagine to be fun turns out to actually be fun, but you’re right that sometimes this is not so. Sometimes we imagine that doing something would be fun only to find out it’s not so fun at all. And so we have to rethink our expectations.
So would this be like the example I gave where a person thinks it would be fun to keep praying to God to give him whatever he wants, but in reality this doesn’t actually happen, so it turns out not to be fun?
And would my example of the person who sticks with his religious convictions despite reality presenting him with contrary facts be a good example of this? Or do you mean the time and effort comes in the form of going through several rounds of trial and error, of experimenting and falsifying hypotheses, until one gets it right?