Do we pick our own hobbies?

[dstebbins]

I've actually noticed a strange correlation between our traits and our hobbies. Most people tend to develop hobbies based around their strengths. It's almost as if evolution has equipped us with an in-born desire to engage in activities that play to our strengths.

 

For example, I am very intelligent. I didn't work hard to get this intelligence, either. When I was a kid, I could sleep in math class, and still pass the class. In fact, the teacher allowed me to sleep in class BECAUSE I was still passing.

 

That's not effort, right there. I was born with my math skills. I can't beat around the bush, here. As inspiring as it may be for a story, to say that I passed math class because I knew shortcuts in the mathematical process, the fact of the matter is ... I just happen to have a brain that makes me good at math.

 

My hobbies compliment this. I enjoy science documentaries. I enjoy video games that make me think\, like strategy, puzzle, and RPG games, rather than the brainless shoot-em-ups like Call of Duty.

 

Similarly, in the movie "The Incredibles," Dash is upset because he can't try out for the school's track and field team. However, the reason he wants to be on track and field, in the first place, is because the super speed that he was born with, out of sheer luck, made him good at it.

 

I've even seen this pattern amongst people who aren't yet aware of their unique skills, which is what makes me think it's an evolutionary trait. For example, Dean Karnazes has a series of unique body traits that make him the perfect. Muscles that are impervious to exercise damage ... extra blood in his veins ... and a variety of other things.

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_19661_6-real-people-with-mind-blowing-mutant-superpowers.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=new+article&wa_ibsrc=fanpage

 

Gee ... it sure is a good thing he just happened to pick a favorite hobby that exposed those body traits of his!

 

Except ... I don't think that's coincidence. Did he pick his own favorite hobby? Or did his body sub-consciously nudge him him in that direction, giving him the desire for that hobby that his body sub-consciously knew it was built for?

 

Now, you might think that makes total sense, and in a way, it does. But it has some horrifying implications about our self-awareness, free will, and independent thought. Indeed, this thread probably deserves to be just as much on the Philosophy board as it does the biology board.

 

Our hobbies make up about 80% of who we are. When describing our personalities to potential friends or potential love interests, our hobbies are the most important thing we discuss. Mutual hobbies are the most important thing we look to when deciding compatibility (either as friends or as love interests).

 

But if our hobbies - or, rather, our desire to pursue a certain course of conduct, thus leading to hobbies - are actually assigned to us, based on what our bodies know we're good at, then our hobbies lose their subjectivity. We become mere androids. The conduct that we THINK we are engaging in of our own "choice" is, in fact, not our choice at all. Rather, just as our desire for sex is an evolutionary trait installed into us in order to keep the species going, our desire for our hobbies is programmed into us, at birth, based on what our skills and bodily traits just happen to be.

 

Sure, we can consciously reject our desires for our hobbies, just as we can consciously supress our desire for sex, so you could make the argument for free will that way. The question is ... who in their right mind would, of their own conscious choice, go out and do so something for fun ... that they don't think is fun!

[Delta1212]

You try things out until you find something you're good at. People enjoy doing things they're good at. You hear about the ones that are especially good at whatever they do. You don't hear about the ones that never tried the things they would have been really good at.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Delta1212

[swansont]

I understand your framing of the question, but even within an area of innate skills there are a number of potential hobbies (you mentioned sports: not all tall people like basketball. Some like volleyball, others hate sports altogether). And you don't always pick a hobby you are inherently good at from the outset. So I think you are wrong about this.

[Phi for All]

Our hobbies make up about 80% of who we are.

 

You have a LOT of assertions like this, using them as the basic premise for your idea. You need to back these up with some evidence. This just sounds like you made it up. How are you quantifying that?

[fiveworlds]

Most people tend to develop hobbies based around their strengths.

 

Not true they develop hobbies around what they can afford to do. I would love to fly planes and I have a private airfield near my home but it is too expensive for me to do so.

[Klaynos]

Not true they develop hobbies around what they can afford to do. I would love to fly planes and I have a private airfield near my home but it is too expensive for me to do so.

Sorry a little off topic.

 

Try and find a local gliding club. My experience is that they're very friendly and it's normally the cheapest way to fly.

[fiveworlds]

Try and find a local gliding club. My experience is that they're very friendly and it's normally the cheapest way to fly.

 

They have one at the private airfield but if I wanted a private pilots license it can still be quite expensive. I am a member of a yacht club though

[Phi for All]

They have one at the private airfield but if I wanted a private pilots license it can still be quite expensive. I am a member of a yacht club though

 

Are the licenses to fly a yacht cheaper?

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry the OP got a negative rep point. I don't like to see that. I'm not a "There are no stupid questions" kind of guy, but I think people shouldn't get dinged for their initial attempt to start a conversation. But this:

 

When describing our personalities to potential friends or potential love interests, our hobbies are the most important thing we discuss. Mutual hobbies are the most important thing we look to when deciding compatibility (either as friends or as love interests).

 

These are assumptions being asserted as fact. IMO, I think what a person does for a living is often the most important thing discussed. But I'm basing this on anecdotal evidence and personal observation, so there's no way I'm asserting this to be a fact. I just observe it more often among the people I know.

[fiveworlds]

Are the licenses to fly a yacht cheaper?

 

Because the family owns yachts yeah. It doesn't fly though be fun if it did.

[Phi for All]

But if our hobbies - or, rather, our desire to pursue a certain course of conduct, thus leading to hobbies - are actually assigned to us, based on what our bodies know we're good at, then our hobbies lose their subjectivity. We become mere androids.

 

I don't follow this part. Nothing changed, except we went from thinking we picked our own hobby to having it picked for us by our body's capabilities. I don't see where we became androids.

 

Because the family owns yachts yeah. It doesn't fly though be fun if it did.

 

As Klaynos mentioned, gliders don't require the same kind of license, and are cheaper to learn how to fly. Perhaps the local club you mentioned has a certified Flight Instructor for gliders that would like to barter some time on a yacht....

[kisai]

Ehh... There do indeed exist people who seem to be optimized for their job/hobby/sport/vocation/et cetera, but there's plenty more people who indulge in a field who are average or even bad at it. For instance, there are plenty of rotten painters, singers, and dancers, but you never really see these people because their work isn't put on display. There are plenty of people who, through the Dunning-Kruger effect consistently overrate their own skill. There are also people who believe that because they are okay or successful in one field, this intelligence spills over into another field which they know nothing about.

 

It seems ideal to be at the top of the vocation that you choose, but unless you win the genetic/environment lottery, it probably won't happen.

Edited May 15, 2015 by kisai

[CharonY]

 

Are the licenses to fly a yacht cheaper?

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry the OP got a negative rep point. I don't like to see that. I'm not a "There are no stupid questions" kind of guy, but I think people shouldn't get dinged for their initial attempt to start a conversation. But this:

 

 

These are assumptions being asserted as fact. IMO, I think what a person does for a living is often the most important thing discussed. But I'm basing this on anecdotal evidence and personal observation, so there's no way I'm asserting this to be a fact. I just observe it more often among the people I know.

 

My guess is that OP is still rather young and thus hobbies make up a bulk of their time. I would agree that for most people work tends to be front and center. Hobbies tend to be something introduced if you think you have a common ground. The opposite is true if the meeting is specifically centered around a hobby, of course. But then people would assume common interests and soon it will drift towards" so what are you doing for a living?".

 

Also there are plenty of people who are (initially) not very good or interested in a given hobby but may have joined in, say, because of their SO or friends. But eventually they may enjoying it and getting pretty good or even better than their partners...

 

An anecdotal example would be the number of academics I know whose abilities are clearly in the intellectual area, yet they massively enjoy getting humiliated playing sports. If they were inclined only to do what they are good at their hobbies would be far more sedentary, I guess.

 

Considering that there is little biology to back up the assertions in OP I am moving this to the Lounge for the time being.

Edited May 15, 2015 by CharonY

[sunshaker]

 

My guess is that OP is still rather young and thus hobbies make up a bulk of their time. I would agree that for most people work tends to be front and center. Hobbies tend to be something introduced if you think you have a common ground. The opposite is true if the meeting is specifically centered around a hobby, of course. But then people would assume common interests and soon it will drift towards" so what are you doing for a living?".

 

Also there are plenty of people who are (initially) not very good or interested in a given hobby but may have joined in, say, because of their SO or friends. But eventually they may enjoying it and getting pretty good or even better than their partners...

 

Considering that there is little biology to back up the assertions in OP I am moving this to the Lounge for the time being.

Work is something "we have to do", hobbies are something "we want to do", some times when we are lucky when they both are one and the same.

 

I agree partly with the OP, Perhaps it is in our dna or perhaps the trillions of bacteria within us that guides us, some bacteria within us thrive on adrenaline which pushes us to extreme sports etc, i Expect different hobbies will cause different chemical reactions within us that suit different bacteria.

 

I recently watched about a man lost at sea for weeks in a dingy, At first he caught fish and eat the meat, but after a while he said "instinct" took over and he craved the fish eyes and the organs, these gave him what his body needed and craved which kept him alive.

 

Sometimes we do not know what we need or want or what we are good at, But there is something special inside each of us waiting to be found.

Some people find their calling to work/hobbies early in life and are content, while others are always looking for those missing pieces.

 

We all have hobbies we may have found through friends that we may "enjoy", but you will know when you find your own "hobby" it can be life changing and define who you are.

[swansont]

Something that has been (largely) ignored is that our traits, our likes & dislikes, are not entirely genetic.