Unstructured Leisure and Progress

One of the highly problematic aspects of contemporary
Western societies is the widespread aversion to individuals having “unstructured
time” – for which no conventions or prescribed routines dictate how it will be
spent. This is a mistaken distaste and, indeed, a dangerous one. Unstructured
time is not only the source of human progress; it is also essential for people
to develop their own individualities and flourish as unique human beings.
Consider,
for instance, a subsistence farmer: he must work all day just in order to eat;
he has virtually no leisure time. He must spend every waking minute toiling just
to survive. However, if he were to accumulate a surplus of food and other
necessities, he might be able to obtain some time in which he did not absolutely
have to do something in particular. Rather,
he would be free to direct his energies at his discretion. One possible use of
that new-found time might be to experiment with ways of improving his
condition: looking for new crops to plant, developing more productive tools, or
learning about other ways to make a living. If he is motivated to advance his
life, he will spend such unstructured time in a way that benefits him either
directly or indirectly. Indeed, it was these little periods of leisure that led
to humanity’s first stirrings of technological progress during the early
agricultural period. Unstructured time is time away from being constrained to function along known and
expected patterns – either by the
scarcities of nature or by the expectations of other men. It is, rather, a time
to explore, experiment, discover, and improve life in hitherto unanticipated
ways.
It
is especially important to recognize the indirect
benefits of unstructured time. The next leap forward in any field of human
endeavor is not necessarily obvious – even when it might seem obvious in
hindsight. Initially arriving at innovative ideas may be a roundabout and idiosyncratic
process, shaped by the interests, experiences, and imaginings of the
discoverer. There is no one-size-fits-all routine that can be internalized to
reliably bring about advances; rather, one needs the flexibility, time, and
space to truly delve into a particular area in which the advance is desired –
or even to discover the existence of such an area.
Nor
is it necessary that the use of unstructured time be efficient in the manner
that “regular work” is expected to be. Indeed, one would be hard-pressed to
even define efficiency in the context
of discovery and experimentation. There are certainly more and less effective
ways of accomplishing known tasks;
for instance, creating a vehicle on an assembly line is much more efficient
than creating it from the ground up through the work of a single skilled
mechanic. However, as future advances are by definition unknown until they
occur, neither can the “efficient” path toward them be predicted in advance. The
probability that an advance will be
made, however, can be improved if greater numbers of capable individuals have more
unstructured time during which they can conceive of possibilities as they see
fit. Many will pursue dead-end approaches or might not originate even
potentially feasible solutions. Many others will use their unstructured time
just to rest from their structured exertions. Some others might even use this
time in a dissipative or deleterious fashion. But some will succeed – and, without unstructured time, they could
not have done so. Their successes will have the potential to elevate everyone’s standards of living. These successes
– past, present, and future – alone suffice to justify unstructured leisure.
But
discretionary time has even more in its favor. It is vital in enabling
individuals to discover what it is that defines them as individuals. It would be a tragic world indeed in which people
only acted to implement others’ “blueprints” for how they should live, losing
their mental autonomy, creativity, and internal discipline in the process. From
their earliest years, most people in contemporary Western societies are placed
under stifling regimentation in preschools, “public” classrooms, teams, and
group projects. As often as possible, authority figures attempt to subject
children to contrived hierarchical structures from which a reprieve can
scarcely be found. This is not the
kind of voluntary cooperation and exchange in which free individuals
participate out of recognition of the possibilities for mutual gain.
While some manners of structured environments
are necessary, the almost universal attempts to direct children toward “organized
recreation” – apart from what is officially considered “work” – may be ultimately
responsible for many of today’s societal ills. These range from the mind-numbing
culture of teenage conformity to the sheepish attitude of most adults toward
political and economic issues. As children grow up in such highly regimented
environments, they increasingly fail to discover anything about them which is
not conditioned by their peers, their society, and the expectations of authority
figures – either formal political authorities or informal authorities of the
mass culture. Instead of finding themselves as individuals, they try
increasingly to lose themselves in the crowd. With this, tremendous creative
energy is also lost, along, perhaps, with the basic truth of individualism that
each person is responsible and accountable for his or her own choices and
actions.
The scarcities of nature impose upon us
external discipline and routines that are necessary, given the present state of
human knowledge and resources. However, we should not compound such impositions
with purely artificial restraints placed on individual exploration and
creativity by societal convention. Unstructured time is a wonderful gift made
possible by what abundance and technological sophistication we presently enjoy.
It is also an indispensable means toward elevating humankind from its still
semi-barbaric state toward a decent, free, rational, and ever-improving state
of affairs. Indeed, if there ever comes about a world where most people can
spend all of their time in an
unstructured fashion, this will be a sign that humankind has overcome its
greatest challenges.
G. Stolyarov II is an actuary, science fiction novelist, independent philosophical essayist, poet, amateur mathematician, composer, contributor to Enter Stage Right, Le Quebecois Libre, Rebirth of Reason, and the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Senior Writer for The Liberal Institute, former weekly columnist for GrasstopsUSA.com, and Editor-in-Chief of The Rational Argumentator, a magazine championing the principles of reason, rights, and progress. Mr. Stolyarov’s blog, The Progress of Liberty, offers a combination of commentary, multimedia presentations, educational materials, and suggestions for effective activism in favor of individual freedom. Mr. Stolyarov also publishes his articles on Helium.com and Associated Content to assist the spread of rational ideas. He holds the highest Clout Level (10) possible on Associated Content and is one of Associated Content's Page View Millionaires. Mr. Stolyarov has also written a science fiction novel, Eden against the Colossus, a non-fiction treatise, A Rational Cosmology, and a play, Implied Consent. You can watch his YouTube Videos. Mr. Stolyarov can be contacted at gennadystolyarovii@yahoo.com.
Click here to return to TRA's Issue CCXLVII Index.
Learn about Mr. Stolyarov's novel, Eden against the Colossus, here.Read Mr. Stolyarov's comprehensive treatise, A Rational Cosmology, explicating such terms as the universe, matter, space, time, sound, light, life, consciousness, and volition, here.
The
Rational Argumentator