I have a dilemma. What exactly is the working definition of passion? My thoughts are divided over two ideas: is passion something one finds immense pleasure to do, or it is something that gives great satisfaction. How one should make a choice in his life if pleasure and satisfaction does not get along?
There is a thin line that separates these two ideas and let me explain it through an example. Let us say X is a talented artist and a kind-hearted natural leader. X is passionate about painting and he makes good amount of money by selling his paintings. That also brings him fame and boosts his ego. On the other hand, his sympathetic heart argues that if he could become a social worker, he might be able to serve the humanity in a better way. Let us assume that he can’t choose both the paths simultaneously. In what direction he should go? What should he choose, pleasure or satisfaction?
I am just curious what does people mean in those talks when they say that one should follow his/her heart.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 26, 2010 at 4:35 am
wanderer
As for contributing toward the society, one could definitely say that social work is better than being a criminal. But, a scientist, artist, engineer, banker, dancer are all contributing to the society in their different ways.
I think if we did what we loved, and if it were not a destructive thing, then we’d be contributing to the society and also doing justice to our own interest. There, one can find meaning.
For me, passion lies at the intersection of interest and meaning!
February 26, 2010 at 8:03 pm
Ajay
Saurabh, I completely agree with whatever you said. As usual, your writing is bliss.
Actually, in the context of the comment, my question is about the situation where it is hard to find that ‘intersection’.
I might have failed to make it clear but the social work and painting are mere examples. In more general sense the question is: should X choose what he loves to do (pleasure); or he should choose what ‘he feels’ that he should do (satisfaction)?
Sorry if I am still unable to explain.
March 24, 2010 at 11:23 pm
Tom
Well, my (admittedly quick and possibly prejudiced) take is this – if the painter X really
feels for the social work , that feeling would come back and corrode any pleasure
which comes from painting. And if that is what is really happening then there is
a straightforward answer – “there is no pleasure without satisfaction”. But, whether
this scenario indeed plays out is a very personal question about the painter X.
Alternatively, if X cannot get the “fame and boost of ego” that he/she thirsts for
in social work then that would corrode any satisfaction which would come from
that kind of work. So ” there is no satisfaction without pleasure” either.
I should however admit that there are people for whom this dilemma is essentially
unresolvable which just reinforces the point that life is not something which
can be decided based on simple rules and commandments
like “Seek pleasure” or “Seek satisfaction”. Life is much more complicated
and the eventual decision might not be a decision of a lone individual
but it would be a decision of an individual in deep interaction with the
environment around and often it would be a decision which mostly arises
out of ignorance, prejudices, fallacious logic and quick emotions. That too
is natural, for that’s how humanity has decided on stuff for aeons and dilemmas
are themselves beautiful emotions which enrich life more than they erode….