/lit/ - Literature

>clearly has facial hair

>>18699370
>>18699371

>>18683534

BEARD FAGS ABSOLUTELY BTFO

>>16934032
Materialists BTFO

>>16061479

>why is "work" a void in terms of a daily routine
Think about it, OP. Being employed means you are an acting representative for someone else's business. In other words, it's not your own affair that you're carrying out--you are paid a wage in exchange for giving yourself over to someone else's direction for a period of time, helping them to carry out their affair with clients/customers/owners/etc. When you're "at work" you're on someone else's time, rather than your own. Thus, for you, it is not included in the list of activities included in your daily routine. This does not mean that work performed under employment cannot be personally stimulating (or degrading) in any number of ways--it remains true however that it is still someone else's business, and technically speaking you are voluntarily acting on behalf of someone else, so long as you are at your job. When you walk up to any cashier, you are interacting with that person as though they were the owner, the actual initiator of the business which is occurring between you and them. The actual person who is acting cashier is necessarily interchangeable.

If you would have ever worked a job this would all be plain to you. It doesn't matter how enthusiastic you are about your work--so long as you are merely employed you are only ever representing someone else, not yourself. That is the reality of daily life for most people. For however many hours of the day their time is not their own, and their activities are not their own.

Are they /lit/? Are they obscene? Is obscenity /lit/? What is more grotesque, the mouth or the beard? Do you think Schopenhauer felt the same way about pubes? These questions and more answered ITT.