Taylor does a great job of discussing sloth, but ultimately her use of Oblomov as an example fails. While the typical example of excess of vice should ultimately be completely undone by that excess of vice, Oblomov seems quite content. His contentedness does show how a true vice must be fully integrated into the personality of an individual, but, ultimately, a true vice should destroy the life of an example of said individual, rather than simply changing it.
Were Oblomov truly an exemplar of that vice, he would be wholly discontent with his life. Rather, he seems to have adopted a new life that he actually enjoys. Taylor, a philosopher, does not state exactly what would make Oblomov’s life worth living, but, if Oblomov’s life were truly not worthwhile, then his life would be devoid of happiness, and this clearly is not the case. In fact, were Oblomov not filled with sloth, he could easily find himself in a hostile world and in a worse state his current one, and he could even end up doing harm to others. Perhaps, as one of Taylor’s quotations laid out at the beginning of the chapter, sloth is the least harmful of the vices. More likely, though, Taylor does not fully flesh out her vision of a life worth living, or if she does so she creates a vision in disagreement with my own.
Taylor says that many things enjoyable but unproductive are unmemorable, seeming to imply that enjoyable things are fleeting and unimportant. Yet, some of my own greatest memories are of unproductive but enjoyable moments, and in the end productivity seems pointless without enjoyment. While Taylor makes many good points, I’m not sure I totally agree with her vision of a worthwhile life.
No comments:
Post a Comment