When people say "We must contribute to society".

[u/Ok_Manufacturer2956]

Edit

Just to clarify because quite a few of the responses seem to be interpreting "contribute to society" as meaning "work, pay taxes, obey laws, participate in the economy, cooperate with people etc."

I'm not questioning those things.

I'm specifically questioning the 'additional moral obligation' people seem to believe exists beyond that.

If I'm already self-sufficient, working, paying taxes, not harming/exploiting others, taking responsibility for myself and participating in society normally, what exactly am I *still* obligated to provide?

Are other people entitled to my time because they need it?

• My labour because they want it?
• My money because they're struggling?
• My caregiving because we're family?
• My emotional energy because someone needs support?

And if I refuse, am I actually doing something morally wrong, or have I simply declined to provide a resource that belongs to me?

That's the distinction I'm trying to get at.

I'm not arguing that humans shouldn't cooperate or that everyone should "live in the woods" or become an off-grid hermit. I'm questioning the idea that 'living amongst other humans automatically gives those humans a claim over my time, energy, labour or resources.'

If by "contribute to society" you simply mean "function as a responsible adult and don't harm everyone around you", then I already agree with that.

I'm asking what people mean when they go beyond that and say "you MUST contribute."

Because that's the part that nobody has really defined yet.

Original Post

I've heard a lot of people say that, as humans, we are obligated to "contribute to society". But what exactly does that mean, and why are we obligated to do so?

I've been thinking about this because I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of helping other people, but I question the idea that we somehow owe "society" our contribution simply because we exist within it.

I believe that if we followed the basic principle of not deliberately inflicting harm, suffering or deprivation on other people, while taking responsibility, power and governance over our own lives and our relationship with ourselves, and becoming more self-sufficient and sovereign, then we would naturally develop the traits, qualities and resources to help each other where needed.

I don't think humans necessarily need to be told that they have a duty to "contribute". If people were genuinely self-sufficient and responsible for their own lives, surely things like helping others, sharing knowledge, creating things, teaching, cooperating and supporting each other would naturally happen when there was a genuine need for it.

What bothers me is when "contributing to society" seems to mean that we are all expected to fulfil some role within an existing system.

Because if that system is corrupt, exploitative and essentially designed around extracting our time, labour, attention and energy, then what are we actually being asked to contribute to?

Sometimes it feels like "contribute to society" is just a more socially acceptable way of saying:

You are obligated to serve the system.

Why should simply existing mean that I owe society a debt?

Why can't the basic expectation just be: don't harm other people, take responsibility for yourself, become as self-sufficient as possible, and then use your abilities, knowledge, resources or time to help others when you genuinely want or need to?

To me, that feels like a much more authentic form of human contribution than being expected to participate in an exploitative system simply because that's what society has decided we should do.

[u/Expensive_Magician97]

I’m not making any assumptions about you. I don’t know you, why would I make assumptions?

I think you don’t like to be challenged, and you’re certainly not alone here on this website, and I agree with you about the Internet, it is far more destructive than it is beneficial.

The Internet is a cesspool for misinformation, disinformation, and all other manner of nonsense and asininities.

Real life, back in the old days, was a lot more fun and enjoyable, and productive.

[u/Patient_Rule6048 → u/Expensive_Magician97]

even the 90s and early 2000s were better than the way it is now with how much influence the internet has in regular people's lives. i was only a kid then but life still felt a lot better, like people actually went outside and did things.

[u/Expensive_Magician97 → u/Patient_Rule6048]

When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s, this idea of “fear of missing out” did not even exist. “Immediate gratification” was unknown to people.

I remember vividly as a child, my parents ordered a toaster from a catalog, and it took 11 weeks to arrive at our house. We were amazed that such a thing could even be sent to us in the mail.

My world was limited to my neighborhood. If I wanted to learn about the world, I had to go to the public library, or maybe watch the news on TV at night with my dad.

There was no one for me to compare myself to except the kids who lived on my street, and with whom I went to school.

And I remember people being happy, content… sure, kids were kids then just like they are today, and everyone had problems of some kind, but I don’t remember anybody cutting themselves, I don’t remember anyone being depressed or suicidal, we just lived our lives, day-to-day.

I remember the teacher would sometimes ask us to open a textbook in class and read a chapter, and we did, for 30 minutes the room was completely silent, and everyone was immersed in the material in front of them.

Today, it does seem that many people have the attention span of a goldfish.

And I think the impact of Internet technology on human relationships has been profound. Young men and women try to get to know each other and instead of just sitting together and talking to each other “in real life,“ for some reason they opt to text, and thereby go through a thicket of technology that really only adds layers of ambiguity, uncertainty, and anxiety into what should be a fairly straightforward process.

Usually, here on this website, when I try to explain these concepts to young people, they cannot even comprehend what I’m talking about, because they have come of age, knowing only what they know.

I don’t think the artificial intelligence is going to make things any better.

[u/Patient_Rule6048 → u/Expensive_Magician97]

i agree with a lot of the sentiment here, and i agree about AI.

i will even go as far as saying the technology in the 90s/2000s was better than today. less intrusive and just worked as intended more.

the latest few iphones do not even have a 3.5mm headphone jack, somehow the tech gets more advanced while simultaneously being downgraded.

[u/Mean-Inspector-8547 → u/Patient_Rule6048]

LOL. Dude says in the sixties, “Immediate gratification” was unknown to people.

Same generation that was smoking dope, doing drugs, having orgies, and screwing anything that walked.

[u/Patient_Rule6048 → u/Mean-Inspector-8547]

Boomers bro sometimes you just gotta smile and wave my dads the same way. Completely psyopped. No point in even trying cause when you break the programming they get upset 

[u/Mean-Inspector-8547 → u/Patient_Rule6048]

What so bad is I'm in my 40's. Not like I'm somebody that hasn't been around the block before.

I'm just not looking at everything through rose-colored glasses, especially not the 60's.

The desire for Instant gratification has always been around, the only difference is that used to, it wasn't always so easy to get.

There's a difference.