<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Productivity: What Do We Really Want?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thatistoothin.com/2008/11/26/productivity-what-do-we-really-want/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thatistoothin.com/2008/11/26/productivity-what-do-we-really-want/</link>
	<description>Problems Worth Thinking</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Nov 2010 00:45:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: vp</title>
		<link>http://thatistoothin.com/2008/11/26/productivity-what-do-we-really-want/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>vp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:19:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thatistoothin.com/?p=60#comment-8</guid>
		<description>Exactly.

General methods working for everyone are mere illusions.
Same applies to sports - when people think repeating champion techniques will make them champions.

Seems, only very personal, very private, as you say, methods have a chance to work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly.</p>
<p>General methods working for everyone are mere illusions.<br />
Same applies to sports &#8211; when people think repeating champion techniques will make them champions.</p>
<p>Seems, only very personal, very private, as you say, methods have a chance to work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: S.L.</title>
		<link>http://thatistoothin.com/2008/11/26/productivity-what-do-we-really-want/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>S.L.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:42:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thatistoothin.com/?p=60#comment-7</guid>
		<description>Good post, i should say!
The theme can be refered as eternal, but sometimes it grows up to be correlating with happyness. It is really serious.
Well, i rememeber one perfect book about happyness. It claimed that happyness consists of several levels, the best one can be achived only by creativity.
So, what is productivity? I think we should consider this within some context, because if we think about productivity as something abstract, we&#039;ll fall into a trap. Let me show this.
Happyness is something private, something that closely depends on the man. There is no happyness for all. Happyness is always a happyness of John or Mary. So, it is strongly useless to think about happyness for all, there is no such object in human nature.
So as productivity. I think it is private too.
To measure the productivity we should have a man, a field, a start point, a time interval, a result, results of other people in the same field, a happyness, a judge.
It is hard, isn&#039;t it? And what is an objective of such measurement? It is completely useless for others.
Each man has his own way of living, own way of happyness, own way of productivity. 
He or she is building themselves being under influence of someone example, but making their own solutions every second (or millisecond).
So, what is at the end?
Prodictivity of man is a myth! (There can be a productivity of plant or bakery or something else). There is only happyness. And creativity. As the way to happyness. Spend your time learning how to be a creative. And do a perfect work for the world. No, for the Universe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good post, i should say!<br />
The theme can be refered as eternal, but sometimes it grows up to be correlating with happyness. It is really serious.<br />
Well, i rememeber one perfect book about happyness. It claimed that happyness consists of several levels, the best one can be achived only by creativity.<br />
So, what is productivity? I think we should consider this within some context, because if we think about productivity as something abstract, we&#8217;ll fall into a trap. Let me show this.<br />
Happyness is something private, something that closely depends on the man. There is no happyness for all. Happyness is always a happyness of John or Mary. So, it is strongly useless to think about happyness for all, there is no such object in human nature.<br />
So as productivity. I think it is private too.<br />
To measure the productivity we should have a man, a field, a start point, a time interval, a result, results of other people in the same field, a happyness, a judge.<br />
It is hard, isn&#8217;t it? And what is an objective of such measurement? It is completely useless for others.<br />
Each man has his own way of living, own way of happyness, own way of productivity.<br />
He or she is building themselves being under influence of someone example, but making their own solutions every second (or millisecond).<br />
So, what is at the end?<br />
Prodictivity of man is a myth! (There can be a productivity of plant or bakery or something else). There is only happyness. And creativity. As the way to happyness. Spend your time learning how to be a creative. And do a perfect work for the world. No, for the Universe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

