A friend of mine and I have been having these very serious discussions regarding what people do. Not, like, as a career (although do we talk a lot about that). More like what you do, during the day. Like right now, I'm sitting on a couch, watching Family guy, sipping wine, and writing this post (yes, I probably published this Tuesday morning - rest assured that I didn't write it Tuesday morning).
My friend, as I understand it, is of the opinion that certain things are sort of a waste of her time. Television, for example.
I don't really understand how that whole attitude came about. I'm not calling her out, specifically. This is a widely held opinion and one that I frequently fall prey to. Reading is better than the radio, which is better than tv. Writing is better than reading. Meditating is, perhaps, better than writing. Working is better than meditating. Volunteering is better than working.
In some cases, this totally works. If you're supposed to be working and someone is paying you for the outcome, you maybe shouldn't be watching tv.
In other cases, though, I'm a little confused. Why, exactly, is reading better than watching tv? Really?
I was trying to relate this to sexual predilections the other night when talking to Crockett, and I wasn't quite successful in my comparison. I was trying to say that we (we being cool people) have reached the conclusion that whatever weird sex people like is fine, as long as they're doing it with other people who also like it and want to be there. The same cool people should be ok with whatever you do in your spare time, as long as you want to be doing it and aren't hurting yourself in any major way (skipping work repeatedly to watch tv probably counts as hurting yourself).
As I said, doesn't quite hold up.
Anyway, why is watching tv a worse way to spend your than reading? Or listening to the radio a worse way to spend your time than meditating? Where does that idea come from?