The philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca, born in Cordoba (Spain), once said: \u201cNatural necessity has its own limits, while artificial necessities and those derived from mere pleasure know no bounds\u201d. Considering that he lived in the first century after Christ, it is disturbing to realize how relevant his words are today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is the conclusion reached by Professor Andr\u00e9a Lu\u00edsa Bucchile Faggion, from the Department of Philosophy at UEL. In addition to being a researcher in the Philosophy of Law, during her teaching career and in the development of the Research Methodology course, she identified certain challenges faced by undergraduate and graduate students, such as a lack of focus, discipline, and organization, which made it more challenging to carry out research, a final paper, or an article.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Professor Faggion attributes these problems to deeper, more systematic causes rooted in the contemporary social structure itself. These issues are not limited to the academic sphere but extend to work and social life in general. \u201cIt\u2019s a problem of our time. Work has no end, no defined hours or location. You can and are expected to work anytime, anywhere\u201d, she explains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
She explains that, in the past, work used to follow a natural rhythm, with time set aside for everything. In most cases, work activities ended at the close of the day. However, inventions such as the electric light bulb, for example, made night shifts possible in factories, shops, and schools \u2013 creating more opportunities to produce, produce, and produce. The problem, she points out, is that resources are limited, both in terms of nature and human capacity, and thus cannot keep up with so much demand. Furthermore, everything perpetuates a model of subordinate relations and overload.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In short, working hard has become a lifestyle. Worse still, this lifestyle has influenced other aspects of social life. As a result, people work to the point of exhaustion, hold multiple jobs, and juggle work, studies, and parenting \u2013 all to maintain a certain status, defined by that often-quoted phrase of unknown origin: \u201cStatus is buying things you don\u2019t need with money you don\u2019t have to impress people you don\u2019t like, pretending to be a person you\u2019re not\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this regard, social media is the realm of appearance. \u201cPeople feel obliged to react to everything they see, afraid of no longer being noticed, liked, or commented on. The curious thing is that a person may have hundreds of \u2018friends\u2019, but the vast majority of them wouldn\u2019t even notice if they stop posting.\u201d, comments Professor Faggion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For the professor, social media is a \u201ccasino technology\u201d \u2013 a place with no clocks and no walls, designed to make people lose track of time and stay there indefinitely.
In a reality like this, how can you set priorities? \u201cIf you have more than three priorities, you have none,\u201d the professor asserts. To her, some plan or goal will always be set aside for another: career, travel, new car, family, home ownership, marriage\u2026 It\u2019s impossible to \u201cprioritize\u201d everything, and trying to do so will only lead to exhaustion and possibly illness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The same idea applies to the work routine: no one truly accomplishes multiple tasks \u201cat the same time\u201d, says Andr\u00e9a. At most, they do it alternately, focusing on one and then the other \u2013 which is also not ideal, even though it may be praised: \u201cWow, so-and-so does three things at the same time\u201d. Not at all. Nor should anyone do it. However, we do feel this pressure to be better at everything, says the professor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Likewise, students, workers, and others are increasingly unable to pay attention to their interlocutors. \u201cPeople don\u2019t listen. They just wait for their turn to speak\u201d. Not long ago, the director of the Central Bank, Roberto Campos Neto, compared President Lula, who is more attentive, to his predecessor: \u201cBolsonaro would get distracted in three minutes\u201d, he told the press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In her opinion, the outcome of work should have value without the cost being exhaustion. According to the professor, bureaucracy is one of the major obstacles, considered broadly: beyond reports and long, frequent meetings, as well as working groups and committees, which are exhausting and often counterproductive. \u201cThese are hours and hours in which the employee could be working on what really matters but is instead taken away to carry out bureaucratic activities,\u201d she ponders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Professor Faggion. points out that managers (bosses, etc.) contribute to this scenario by adopting a productivist ideal. This means they adhere to a doctrine that views the quantitative increase in production as the primary objective of the evolution of social, political, and economic structures. The cartoon on this page illustrates a story that circulates in university corridors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Academic productivism has been the subject of study and criticism since the 1990s. While some view it positively, others call it a \u201cnecessary evil\u201d, as it at least ensures that researchers maintain a steady pace of production \u2013 which, of course, does not guarantee the quality of the work produced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One of the solutions for this problem, according to Professor Andr\u00e9a Faggion, is to say \u201cno\u201d, even to important things. \u201cIt\u2019s sad, it\u2019s difficult, but you have to say \u2018no\u2019 sometimes\u201d, she asserts. Only then, with organization and planning, is it possible to produce quality work. After all, she argues, planning is more exciting than execution. Or, to borrow a saying, \u201cAnticipation sometimes exceeds realization\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Another approach, much bolder (some might say radical), is to reduce screen time. Professor Faggion shares that she no longer has a profile on any social media platform and feels happier this way: \u201cIt improved my quality of life\u201d, she summarizes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to her, social networks provoke a sense of comparison among people (success, travel, etc.), which diminishes the joy of those who lack such experiences. She suggests, \u201cTake a month-long break from social media. Many people won\u2019t even notice your absence\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is because, she says, those relationships aren\u2019t authentic. \u201cSocial networks take your focus away. It\u2019s an addiction \u2013 an addiction to dopamine, a craving for new things and likes \u2013 that robs you of your ability to focus and concentrate. The cell phone is worse than the refrigerator,\u201d she concludes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Professor Faggion puts these ideas into practice with her students, especially her advisees. \u201cThere\u2019s no demanding work all the time, but there is a schedule and a good conversation at the start of the study\u201d, she explains. For the professor, unforeseen events don\u2019t really exist \u2013 everyone knows that some problem will arise, they just don\u2019t know what or when, and that\u2019s part of the research process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In addition to planning, she emphasizes the need not to let tasks pile up or postpone them until the last minute. After all, there can always be that inevitable conflict between what\u2019s most important and what\u2019s most urgent. For her, a good research project is not the product of genius but of methodical work. So far, she\u2019s satisfied with the quality of the Master\u2019s and Doctoral theses she supervises. Good research, according to her, is not a \u201cpatchwork quilt\u201d of references, or a summary of various authors, but involves classifying, grouping, creating a taxonomy, and being able to present knowledge in one\u2019s own words.<\/p>\n\n\n\n