Talk:Productivism

Untitled
Changed the format. Arguments for/Criticism against to balance POV. Still can't stand on its own two feet. Skol 11:16, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Productivism is the (purported) ideology that measurable economic productivity and growth is the purpose of human organization and perhaps the purpose of life itself. It is a corollary to the related ideas of consumerism - which critics say promotes waste - and scientism - acceptance of certain measures or models of reality that are divorced from human experience, as being more 'real' than the experience itself.

I can't understand what this has to do with strong or weak scientism as I've seen them defined. I'm going to put it like this:


 * Productivism is the (purported) ideology that measurable economic productivity and growth is the purpose of human organization and perhaps the purpose of life itself. It is a corollary to the related ideas of consumerism - which critics say promotes waste and an acceptance of certain measures or models of reality that are divorced from human experience, as being more 'real' than the experience itself.

Maprovonsha172 15:36, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

This article has some pretty hardcore POV issues. Clearly the term and concept are used and worth talking about, but the idea that the "criticism" of an ideology that may or may not actually be an ideology balances the article is silly. I'd suggest a complete rewrite, but frankly I don't think the notion is credible enough to be willing to do the research do it. At very least, I think it would make more sense to reorganize the article along these lines: instead of a biased intro which suggests there is such a thing as "productivism" which is bad, and then gives some arguments for it, and then criticizes it again; the intro should talk about the history of the term, which is basically only coming from critics of the ideas associated with the term, and then a balance "Criticism" section could be added asking whether or not there is even such a thing as "productivism", something clearly in dispute. --Jammoe (talk) 07:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion debate
This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Doc ask? 00:39, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The very first sentence (definition of productivism) is directly off the 'reference.com' website. That ok? See link

Productivism --Cuzza fin (talk) 13:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)Doc ask? 00:39, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that this clause could use some re-arranging: "While critics of productivism and its political/economic variants, notably capitalism and socialism, challenge the notions of conventional political economy..." It does not make it clear that capitalism and socialism are being mentioned as political/economic variants of productivism. On the contrary, it sounds a bit like capitalism and socialism are being mentioned as critics of productivism. Does anyone else agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ltgoff (talk • contribs) 21:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Other Motivations for Productivism
I may edit this article later, but I'd add that criticism of productivism as such is not only grounded in ecology, but also the loss in human autonomy (from constantly working to produce and consume more), and non-monetary forms of social organization and exchange. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PalimpsestCleaner (talk • contribs) 14:19, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

This article is doing more bad than good
I think this article as it is more confusing than informative, and you end up actually knowing less about its topic after reading it.

First of all, it defines Productivism in a mather of fact way, like a word in a dictionary, it doesn't mention its origins, roots, predecessor and creators. It gives the impression its a general, vague and basic belief ; too prevalent and ubiquitous to human culture that you cant pinpoint its origin, like the concept of optimism. As a matter of fact, the first definition tied to an actual person appears on the "Criticism of productivism " section.

"While critics of productivism and its political-economic variants, notably capitalism and socialism, challenge the notions of conventional political economy and argue for an economic policy more compatible with humanity, these views are often dismissed as utopian by economists and political scientists,"

Are capitalism & socialism critics of productivism or variants of it ? It doesnt make sense either way for me.

Finally, what is this article even? It opens up saying that "Productivism or growthism is the belief " ,but by the looks of its categories its a economic theory. But i came to it from a link from constructivism, which implies that it is a art movement / theory ("he INKhUK debates of 1920–22 had culminated in the theory of Productivism propounded by Osip Brik and other"). But at the same time there's this Productivism (art) page. Was it just a mix up? what are the relations between these?

Im obviously a layman, so i cant just fix this article up, but i felt it was important to state how confused i was by this article as someone trying to learn from it. Nilanz (talk) 18:30, 19 July 2023 (UTC)