Essay Options for Deep Work:
Choose One
Option #1
In a 1,000-word essay, defend, refute, or complicate Cal Newport's argument that Deep Work is an invaluable asset to your personal and professional life while Shallow Work and the mindless Internet habits that accompany it is a liability that results in mediocrity and nihilistic despair.
Option #2
In a 1,000-word essay, write a persuasive essay to someone you know who is shackled to mindless social media habits that they must replace their Internet addiction by radically transforming their brain hard-wiring, which could only be accomplished through the habits of Deep Work.
For both options, you must have 3 sources. You can use the book, and 2 sources from Cal Newport's Study Hack website.
Study Questions
One. What is the Principle of Least Resistance?
Too many corporate environments scatter-brain their employees by making them do a lot of shallow work. Why? Because of the Principle of Least Resistance:
Without clear feedback on how shallow work affects the bottom line, companies surrender to a shallow work environment, not because it’s most effective, but because it’s the easiest of all available options.
Additionally, getting a quick response creates the illusion of productivity. “Constant connectivity” creates the illusion of professionalism and efficiency. “Constant connectivity” is an example of an Easy Stupid Thing.
Another Easy Stupid Thing is forwarding emails. It’s super easy to forward an email to everyone in your office, but then you make them sweat and labor over your half-baked thought for hours while you did nothing. These half-baked forwarded emails ruin productivity, but they are easy to do.
As a corollary, we can postulate that on a personal level we do the same thing with social media, allowing the smartphone to be the slow-opium drip machine hooked up to our brain: We don’t question the damage this does to our personal and professional life. We simply “fall” into it because it’s easy, peer pressure dictates a certain conformity, and social media brands itself effectively as a way of being hip, now, sexy, and successful when in fact it’s a complete lie.
Another seduction of shallow work is that we think we’re productive when we’re busy, but we’re not. We can be “human routers” of busy work, but not producing high-quality deep work.
Newport warns us to not let busyness be a proxy for deep work.
Another seduction of busyness that can drain our capacity to deep work and suck us into shallow work is the grand lure of “having an internet presence” on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc.
While such a presence may be important for a lot of people, too many people find these social media presences a “time suck” that takes away from deep work.
Fear of Being Invisible and Irrelevant in the Technopoly
We get sucked into the shallow work of having a social media presence (and constantly responding to comments and messages) because in the technopoly, the blind worship of technology for its own sake, we fear that not having an internet presence will render us invisible and irrelevant.
Two. What profound purpose is Cal Newport trying to achieve in his book?
Newport is trying to show us that a life hooked to social media, internet, and the technopoly is one of fragmentation, scatter-brained disorientation, soulless mediocrity, depression, shallow work and emptiness.
In contrast, a life of deep work in the service of becoming a master craftsman results in personal distinction that is valued by others, performance of high-quality work that cannot be easily replicated by others, deep satisfaction, and deep meaning in both one’s personal and professional life.
It’s like the difference between heaven and hell.
Focus, Not Desirable Circumstances, Lead to Happiness
Referring to the wisdom he finds in Winifred Gallagher’s book Rapt, Newport makes the point that a life of focus, not desirable circumstances, lead to happiness.
Focus helps unify our thoughts and makes us feel whole, complete, and happy.
The opposite is also true then: Attention-fragmentation makes us feel scattered, incomplete, empty and depressed. This emptiness and depression can afflict us even in the most desirable circumstances imaginable.
He quotes Gallagher:
“Who you are, what you think, feel, and do, what you love—is the sum of what you focus on.”
If you love “sharing” on social media photos of your fish tacos from Rubio’s or your bread sticks from Olive Garden and in general your “happy” life with your friends at restaurants, then that’s you who are. But remember that your focus is shallow; therefore, you’re not experiencing meaning and happiness.
If you focus on honing your craft at the piano, or singing, dancing, acting, math, or architecture, to give a few examples, your mastering your craft and your focus and you will be happier than if you’re constantly “sharing” and doing shallow work.
Deep Work Equals Happiness
Citing the psychological studies of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi on happiness, Newport quotes the researcher:
“The best moments usually occur when a person’s body or mind is stretched to its limits in a voluntary effort to accomplish something difficult and worthwhile.”
The above quote is an excellent reiteration of what it means to do deep work, and it leads to happiness no less.
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi concludes that life is easier when we’re focused on deep work than when we’re lollygagging through free time. Deep work causes intense happiness called “flow.”
Piddling away several minutes or hours in a waiting room or on an airplane or in a classroom is a form of misery, yet we’ve been manipulated into believing by the social media industry that we’re having “fun.”
When we’re plugged into the slow-drip opium drug of our smartphone, we’re in hell, but we’re in denial of this fact.
Philosophical Argument for Deep Work
For centuries, educated humans knew there were two kinds of time: sacred and profane time and the two time zones should never mix.
A caveman telling a fable about the meaning of life to other cavemen around the campfire would be in sacred time.
A man and a woman contemplating the idea of spending the rest of their life with each other are in sacred time.
The story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is a story about sacred time.
The story of Adam and Even being expelled from Paradise is a story about leaving sacred time and entering profane time.
Listening to music at a concert is entering sacred time.
Watching a movie is entering sacred time.
Walking along the beach with your children and pointing at the waves is sacred time.
Sitting at the table with your family and discussing how your daughter spoke her first words is sacred time.
Getting a speeding ticket from a cop is profane time.
Playing a computer game is profane time.
Chatting on social media is profane time.
Doing deep work and improving your craft so that you can be a master of what you do is entering sacred time.
We Are Elevated as Human Beings When We Keep Sacred and Profane Time Separated
But in the technopoly, we’ve worshipped technology above all else and we’ve lost sight of the very notion of sacred time.
We live in profane time, shallow work, and rude interruptions of sacred events. People text inside churches and at funerals.
People take selfies at concerts.
Deep Work is a return to sacred time.
Shallow Work is to live in profane time and suffer the nihilism of a shallow, empty, meaningless existence.
Newport’s Conclusion
We don’t become happy because we find some amazing “rarified” job. We become happy because we establish a “rarified approach” to our work. We value the sacred time of deep work and find meaning from becoming master craftsmen.
We transform from Opium-Drip Smartphone Zombies to “Homo Sapiens Deepensis.”
Recognizing Logical Fallacies
Begging the Question
Begging the question assumes that a statement is self-evident when it actually requires proof.
Major Premise: Fulfilling all my major desires is the only way I can be happy.
Minor Premise: I can’t afford when of my greatest desires in life, a Lexus GS350.
Conclusion: Therefore, I can never be happy.
Circular Reasoning
Circular reasoning occurs when we support a statement by restating it in different terms.
Stealing is wrong because it is illegal.
Admitting women into the men’s club is wrong because it’s an invalid policy.
Your essay is woeful because of its egregious construction.
Your boyfriend is hideous because of his heinous characteristics.
I have to sell my car because I’m ready to sell it.
I can’t spend time with my kids because it’s too time consuming.
I need to spend more money on my presents than my family’s presents because I need bigger and better presents.
I’m a great father because I’m the best father my children have ever had.
Weak Analogy or Faulty Comparison
Analogies are never perfect but they can be powerful. The question is do they have a degree of validity to make them worth the effort.
A toxic relationship is like a cancer that gets worse and worse (fine).
Sugar is high-octane fuel to use before your workout (weak because there is nothing high-octane about a substance that causes you to crash and converts into fat and creates other problems)
Free education is a great flame and the masses are moths flying into the flames of destruction. (horribly false analogy)
Ad Hominem Fallacy (Personal Attack)
“Who are you to be a marriage counselor? You’ve been divorced six times?”
A lot of people give great advice and present sound arguments even if they don’t apply their principles to their lives, so we should focus on the argument, not personal attack.
“So you believe in universal health care, do you? I suppose you’re a communist and you hate America as well.”
Making someone you disagree with an American-hating communist is invalid and doesn’t address the actual argument.
“What do you mean you don’t believe in marriage? What are you, a crazed nihilist, an unrepentant anarchist, an immoral misanthrope, a craven miscreant?”
Straw Man Fallacy
You twist and misconstrue your opponent’s argument to make it look weaker than it is when you refute it. Instead of attacking the real issue, you aim for a weaker issue based on your deliberate misinterpretation of your opponent’s argument.
“Those who are against universal health care are heartless. They obviously don’t care if innocent children die.”
Hasty Generalization (Jumping to a Conclusion)
“I’ve had three English instructors who are middle-aged bald men. Therefore, all English instructors are middle-aged bald men.”
“I’ve met three Americans with false British accents and they were all annoying. Therefore, all Americans, such as Madonna, who contrive British accents are annoying.” Perhaps some Americans do so ironically and as a result are more funny than annoying.
Either/Or Fallacy
There are only two choices to an issue is an over simplification and an either/or fallacy.
“Either you be my girlfriend or you don’t like real men.”
“Either you be my boyfriend or you’re not a real American.”
“Either you play football for me or you’re not a real man.”
“Either you’re for us or against us.” (The enemy of our enemy is our friend is every day foreign policy.)
“Either you agree with me about increasing the minimum wage, or you’re okay with letting children starve to death.”
“Either you get a 4.0 and get admitted into USC, or you’re only half a man.”
Equivocation
Equivocation occurs when you deliberately twist the meaning of something in order to justify your position.
“You told me the used car you just sold me was in ‘good working condition.’”
“I said ‘good,’ not perfect.”
The seller is equivocating.
“I told you to be in bed by ten.”
“I thought you meant be home by ten.”
“You told me you were going to pay me the money you owe me on Friday.”
“I didn’t know you meant the whole sum.”
“You told me you were going to take me out on my birthday.”
“Technically speaking, the picnic I made for us in the backyard was a form of ‘going out.’”
Red Herring Fallacy
This fallacy is to throw a distraction in your opponent’s face because you know a distraction may help you win the argument.
“Barack Obama wants us to support him but his father was a Muslim. How can we trust the President on the war against terrorism when he has terrorist ties?”
“You said you were going to pay me my thousand dollars today. Where is it?”
“Dear friend, I’ve been diagnosed with a very serious medical condition. Can we talk about our money issue some other time?”
Slippery Slope Fallacy
We go down a rabbit hole of exaggerated consequences to make our point sound convincing.
“If we allow gay marriage, we’ll have to allow people to marry gorillas.”
“If we allow gay marriage, my marriage to my wife will be disrespected and dishonored.”
Appeal to Authority
Using a celebrity to promote an energy drink doesn’t make this drink effective in increasing performance.
Listening to an actor play a doctor on TV doesn’t make the pharmaceutical he’s promoting safe or effective.
Tradition Fallacy
“We’ve never allowed women into our country club. Why should we start now?”
“Women have always served men. That’s the way it’s been and that’s the way it always should be.”
Misuse of Statistics
Using stats to show causality when it’s a condition of correlation or omitting other facts.
“Ninety-nine percent of people who take this remedy see their cold go away in ten days.” (Colds go away on their own).
“Violent crime from home intruders goes down twenty percent in home equipped with guns.” (more people in those homes die of accidental shootings or suicides)
Post Hoc, Confusing Causality with Correlation
Taking cold medicine makes your cold go away. Really?
The rooster crows and makes the sun go up. Really?
You drink on a Thursday night and on Friday morning you get an A on your calculus exam. Really?
You stop drinking milk and you feel stronger. Really? (or is it placebo effect?)
Non Sequitur (It Does Not Follow)
The conclusion in an argument is not relevant to the premises.
Megan drives a BMW, so she must be rich.
McMahon understands the difference between a phrase and a dependent clause; therefore, he must be a genius.
Whenever I eat chocolate cake, I feel good. Therefore, chocolate cake must be good for me.
Bandwagon Fallacy
Because everyone believes something, it must be right.
“You can steal a little at work. Everyone else does.”
“In Paris, ninety-nine percent of all husbands have a secret mistress. Therefore adultery is not immoral.”
Comments