There was a question that some counselors would ask while you were in school that would help you decide what you wanted to do with the rest of your life. This question is more memorably remembered from the movie "Office Space." The question is quite simple: What would you do if you had $1,000,000?
I had a thought strike me at the same time as a fecal reminder of relief. I needed to know if the two were related and yielded to one of the thoughts, only to pick up the other directly after. I know what I want to do with the rest of my life; but the question sparked an odd assortment of concerns, which are listed below.
First, I find it interesting that the notion of having $1,000,000 sends someone without that sum of money into a mode of fantasy in which they see themselves with that amount. I am concerned that most people would take this fantasy into account too seriously and feel a great absence for the desire of work. This concerns me for the sake of the question. What good does it do to imbed the possibility of that sum into the mind when all it accomplishes is conjuring the idea that no more work is required -- or at least not the kind of work one would be pursuing at the time? It would seem that the initial response to the question asked is to become lazy, or non-responsive to taking the steps necessary to making the fantasy true.
Second, I do believe the question doesn't do any good for the discovery of true desire, since the question's sole condition in which it is proposed is the fictional idea that you have $1,000,000. The question only induces a sense of how the end may be, not necessarily how it will be. The most troubling concern I have with this is the complete lack of attention to the parts untouched with the question and the answer. The question makes no reference to how the $1,000,000 is or was acquired, and no emphasis is placed on the pathway set out to acquire it. In short, the question demands only results, no work. I would think that a counselor, or someone of credential opportunity to the shaping of naive minds, would see the blatant disregard to the most important part of the end -- the means by which the end was created.
Third, and last, the question can be a paradoxical answer of an unfulfilling end. Suppose the profession or hobby I chose from having $1,000,000 is to be a wood craftsman. I learn to do excellent work, but get paid very little. From what I have been able to discover, great craftsmen make about $20,000 each year, and that is still being quite generous. If an expert craftsmen were to get paid under the table on every job, and never spend any of it, after taxes for being alive, it would take about 56 years to acquire the initial $1,000,000 that would justify the want of the profession in the first place. This demonstrates the great lack of reponsibility the question portrays to the person answering. It sets up the person to pick a potentially unrewarding job. Some might argue that it wouldn't be unrewarding since they are doing what they want, and happy with their income; but that would completely dilute the means through which the inital discovery of the profession. The question itself puts a great deal of stress on having financial stability. That is what the question is all about. Instead of the above, it would be more beneficial to read: "After you become financially stable, what would you like to do?" By hinting towards the notion of having money in the first place, I would find no greater opponent to contrast said notion to than that of the means being presented by the person answering. Essentially, if I choose to be a wood carver, and make $20,000 each year, I would not be doing well in relation to the question, since it would take me 56 years in order to be able to answer it with more than a blind guess.
I conclude that for the initial question to be valid, it must be pushed as a motivation to get a high-paying job that would make the reality of the fantasy more available to the person answering the question when they are answering it. How does a young man of 18 know that he'll want to be able to truly answer the question when he's 74 about what he wants to do for the remainder of his life? In direct correlation to that thought process, the young man would have to make ten times that of a wood carver to be able to enjoy the fruits of a wood carver after the fact that he has acquired $1,000,000.
To correct this, I believe the question should be changed to: "After you have become financially stable, and have the time and resources to be frivolous, what would most entertain you?" Followed directly by the question: "What are you going to do to get to that point?" Without putting emphasis on the road to the end, the traveler will fall every step of the way. There is no honor or joy in an unlearned journey, even when the end is acquired. The end isn't the reward to be sought; rather, the journey.
