No, I don’t think so. You can be physically present somewhere while your attention is in whatever is going on in your head. Though I grant you that in that case you’re not doing either very well.
“Seat time” is literally what you are giving them in that situation. You can say that it’s not “time” but I can say that it is because there is nuance and we are doing many things at same time. Being present physically, mentally, paying attention to your surroundings, putting in effort, etc, can in many ways be counted separately. Who’s to say if your way of accounting for time is the “correct” one or whether somebody else’s is?
Eh, I see what you mean but I think in this culture and point in time, it’s useful for human well-being to see them as separate things. Like I said, conflating them is a sleight of hand. Because the reality is that you can book 1h for a meeting and then be totally mentally absent from it. People think that you’re committed in the meeting, you’re giving it your time as can be measured. You are not actually giving your time to the meeting but due to being physically present, you’re also not using your time (and attention) freely on what you really want to. So you’re doing a sleight of hand possibly on yourself and people observing you in the meeting.
The sleight of hand is being committed by you and your work-culture problem
Tbh this sounds like a kinda personal issue you have with work and working too much or having a shitty job or something and it’s somehow morphing into a linguistic dispute instead when it shouldn’t be
noretus@crazypeople.online 1 day ago
No, I don’t think so. You can be physically present somewhere while your attention is in whatever is going on in your head. Though I grant you that in that case you’re not doing either very well.
gustofwind@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Then you aren’t giving them your time
Get it?
dvoraqs@lemmy.world 1 day ago
“Seat time” is literally what you are giving them in that situation. You can say that it’s not “time” but I can say that it is because there is nuance and we are doing many things at same time. Being present physically, mentally, paying attention to your surroundings, putting in effort, etc, can in many ways be counted separately. Who’s to say if your way of accounting for time is the “correct” one or whether somebody else’s is?
gustofwind@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Sure but then you are the one specifically saying it’s “seat” time which is an overt signal it’s not “real” time
If you just said an unqualified time it’s rightfully assumed to be your legitimate attention
noretus@crazypeople.online 1 day ago
Eh, I see what you mean but I think in this culture and point in time, it’s useful for human well-being to see them as separate things. Like I said, conflating them is a sleight of hand. Because the reality is that you can book 1h for a meeting and then be totally mentally absent from it. People think that you’re committed in the meeting, you’re giving it your time as can be measured. You are not actually giving your time to the meeting but due to being physically present, you’re also not using your time (and attention) freely on what you really want to. So you’re doing a sleight of hand possibly on yourself and people observing you in the meeting.
gustofwind@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The sleight of hand is being committed by you and your work-culture problem
Tbh this sounds like a kinda personal issue you have with work and working too much or having a shitty job or something and it’s somehow morphing into a linguistic dispute instead when it shouldn’t be
moakley@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Then why are they still paying me for it?
gustofwind@lemmy.world 1 day ago
They don’t have the ai technology implanted into your brain yet to only clock moments actually spent working