Re:On Digital Minimalism
by imgabe on Sunday December 18, 2016 @09:31AM
(#13205894)
The problem I had with /r/minimalism is that it's more focused on the aesthetic movement rather than the lifestyle movement. A 4,000sf house with sparse furniture and clean straight lines is minimalist in an aesthetic sense, but not really in the sense of owning only exactly what you need to do what you want and no more. The two meanings of minimalism seem to create a lot confusion and conflict about whether a given thing is "minimalist".
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:On Digital Minimalism
by huhtenberg on Sunday December 18, 2016 @12:07PM
(#13206518)
> not really in the sense of owning only exactly what you need to do what you want and no more
It's one and the same really. Once you have a bit more money the pragmatic live-in-a-shoebox minimalism tends to transform into the "aesthetic" variety - you still own a bare minimum that makes you happy, but you can now afford a better quality of the same. Be it a larger place or a more expensive pair of jeans.
Re:On Digital Minimalism
by icebraining on Sunday December 18, 2016 @06:50PM
(#13208450)
But a larger place is by definition not the bare minimum - you have more square footage than you need.
Re:On Digital Minimalism
by huhtenberg on Monday December 19, 2016 @04:04AM
(#13210342)
For bare minimum you can sleep on a park bench :)
"Need" is subjective and the rest follows from there.