Work

[MURAI]

Also, I imagine even if you work in a field you like you're not exactly going to like it. Being forced to work like a machine to do work and sell it like a product. Little mind tricks people play on others just to get ahead. Even if one does something worthwhile it won't always get credited at the time but I guess that's life.

A writer I like described highly systemized societies to be like the military. We are designed to have to work in our post for our survival and keep the system going at the same time.

 

[speed]

Also, I imagine even if you work in a field you like you're not exactly going to like it. Being forced to work like a machine to do work and sell it like a product. Little mind tricks people play on others just to get ahead. Even if one does something worthwhile it won't always get credited at the time but I guess that's life.

A writer I like described highly systemized societies to be like the military. We are designed to have to work in our post for our survival and keep the system going at the same time.

Who is this writer?

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

I disagree. I think many feel their jobs to be unfulfilling and pointless but they're just doing it out of necessity or just being passive all together.

i think this describes just about every single min-wage worker a guy comming home to girlfreind bitching about how crappy his job is and then says "i'm gonna quit this job just as soon as i can get something that pays better"

 

[MURAI]

Who is this writer?

Shiba Ryotarou

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

Shiba Ryotarou

how do i aquire the things this guy has written???

 

[VikingSF]

Work, is a most interesting conundrum. On one hand, in the United States, work or occupation is considered to give and be the meaning of ones life; one spends one's whole life, from education to countless years, sacrificing at the altar of work. Yet, at the same time, if one looks or reads of those great thinkers, scientists, artists, writers, and so on, one discovers that it was the very fact such persons were free of the duties of an occupation, that they began creating. This idea is most prevalent in our Universities; especially the scientific departments. Many profs, are freed up from teaching duties to focus on more important research.

Thus, I propose the hypothesis that work in the form of some money earning occupation, far from being a benefit, is actually quite the hindrance for human development. While we spend our years wasting away in some office or store, or other profession, we could be "working" on something more personally fulfilling, and something of great importance for all humanity.

Karl Marx, despite his cockamamied political ideology, was on to something when he wrote about work. In the Grundrisse he envisioned a time, in the not-to-distant future, when all persons would be required to work no more than four hours a day, or even less. The rest of the time would be spent on their own "development" if you will. This was a time, when there was not enough relevant or essential positions available due to efficiency and mechanization. Have we hit this stage or era (without thinking of some historical theory)? Are the millions of positions in this country really necessary anymore? No one produces anything anymore; there are less than 3 million farmers as well. Besides teachers, police and fireman, power plant operators, inspectors and the like, how many positions are even necessary? Do we really need these millions of sales and marketing, and business analysts, etc, etc, positions? And what about in the future, as technology expands even further, and more and more jobs are shipped overseas due to efficiency and cost? Will the idea of work be different; if so, what changes would be best?

The main thing you're overlooking here is the purpose of work. The purpose in the modern world is to earn money so that one can eat regularly, have a decent place to live, support a family, own nice things, if desired, and have the money for leisure time that makes your life more pleasant and enjoyable. This is not much different from the purpose of work in pre-technological eras. At it's most basic form, a human would work to hunt or gather food, to build or find shelter, and to defend territory and life, by strength and by alliance with other humans. You can see all the other iterations between hunter-gather and modern worker played out through history in various models.

The only way to avoid providing for oneself through work is to depend on others to provide for you. People have devised a myriad of ways to do just that over the course of human history. Most people with any self-respect don't like others to provide for them without doing something in return that is of value to the provider. And most people with any self-respect don't like providing for someone who is ungrateful and doesn't do anything in return. That's one reason why welfare states and socialism will always spiral into corruption and unhappiness.

That's reality.

 

[speed]

The main thing you're overlooking here is the purpose of work. The purpose in the modern world is to earn money so that one can eat regularly, have a decent place to live, support a family, own nice things, if desired, and have the money for leisure time that makes your life more pleasant and enjoyable. This is not much different from the purpose of work in pre-technological eras. At it's most basic form, a human would work to hunt or gather food, to build or find shelter, and to defend territory and life, by strength and by alliance with other humans. You can see all the other iterations between hunter-gather and modern worker played out through history in various models.

The only way to avoid providing for oneself through work is to depend on others to provide for you. People have devised a myriad of ways to do just that over the course of human history. Most people with any self-respect don't like others to provide for them without doing something in return that is of value to the provider. And most people with any self-respect don't like providing for someone who is ungrateful and doesn't do anything in return. That's one reason why welfare states and socialism will always spiral into corruption and unhappiness.

That's reality.

Well I agree with your thesis here; however, you have unwittingly proven my thesis. As you state, one works essentially to eat and to live a somewhat comfortable life. My contention is that for those with some ability, this work for a comfortable sustenance position, detracts from higher human development. And thus, my point was, if persons of some ability were given more time (less hours, more vacation, leave etc) as most jobs are essentially pointless, then perhaps we may have a far better, more meaningful society.

However, I acknowledge for American society at least, such a decrease or vacuum of work, would be a disaster, as most in our society can't stand to spend one minute of their lives contemplating their existence.

 

[MURAI]

how do i aquire the things this guy has written???

Learn Japanese first Mr. Hello Kitty.

And North American society isn't about culture or depth anymore. Everything is just "entertainment".

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

Learn Japanese first Mr. Hello Kitty.

since i love sailor moon so much, how did you know that i have to read the english sub-titles when i listen to the Japenese sound?
also
is there really a huge problem when Japanese text is translated to english as all the Japanese speaking people claim?

 

[MasterOLightning]

I think a major problem is the increasing need for credentials and higher education in order to succeed in the workplace. I go to a top 10 university, and everyone here is worried about finding a good job, and realistically so. It used to be that going to a prestigious school was the golden key to having a successful career where one would have non-menial work. College attendance keeps going up, which increases the value of going to a top-tier school. This forces high schoolers to work even harder to imagine they have a chance at being rich someday. This competitiveness is ingrained relatively early on, and continues on through college (if you haven't burned out from HS) and then grad school, and then work.

Lots of workers who don't need to work so many hours do, and they better their financial standing in this way. People would only cut their hours if guaranteed the same pay. The employer could always find someone willing to work those extra hours. America is just ridiculously competitive, and as more and more have access to higher education, there aren't necessary jobs for all these people.

 

[judas69]

And don't forget the experience; the other side of the coin.

 

[byrne]

This thread fell through the generalisation tree and hit every branch on the way down.

While we spend our years wasting away in some office or store, or other profession, we could be "working" on something more personally fulfilling, and something of great importance for all humanity.

Define "fulfilling". Mastering a profession, as unncessary as it may seem to you, may suit someone else down the ground. "Wasting their lives away in an office", can be fulfilling in many different ways. Boundaries of success are limited only by personal goals. If someone is truly unhappy about what they do, and do nothing to remedy the situation, I doubt they would do any better in your suggested world of "self-fulfillment".
Your assumption seems to be that everyones dream in life is to be creative in some race-enhancing way and that is clearly flawed.

Sure, most people probably aren't as happy as they possibly could be doing what they are doing - but it is simple analysis of risk vs. reward and marginal utility. If, to achieve their ultimate goals, they have to risk (X), but marginal utility (net of risk) is not worth it, they do not go about this "other path of fulfillment".

You could argue that the "level of risk" is inherently unknown and on an individual case, yes it is, but for people to not be choosing this riskier path, there has to be a pre-conception of the value, based on history - which I'm sure you would find, suggests the risk is not worth taking, on average.

The problem is that 90% of people are sheep-like, and are afraid to put their lives, their world under that microscope and learn about things and grow .. they would much rather sit themselves down and chat uselessly on some metal message board

What does "learn about things and grow" mean? This is such a cliche thought process, again of what people find "fulfilling".

And those professors you mentioned that are teaching less for research, many of them are researching something in the field of medicine which prolongs life.

What about all the people who research technological advances, the growth/development of certain species, history and so forth. Do they not count?

americans live to work, that is a fact. thats one of the reasons i cant stand this country anymore. go to anywhere in europe (france has a 35 hr work week and they see more production value than california) and you can see the emphasis is on enjoying life.

Ever worked in Europe? From London to Hamburg, Zurich to Paris, Stockholm to Rome, people work hard. Just the same as they do in America. In Aus we have a 37.5hr week. Not much different to France apparently. This means next to nothing, all it does is determine the standard pay ours of full time employees. I can't remember the last time I worked an actual "37.5hr week" despite the fact that they are my standard working hours. It is the same for most people. And I think you mean "people work to live".

I agree largely with what Viking said and have also had similar lines of thought to MasterOLightning. That is, the unnecessary layering of education and self-improvement. The higher we make the "standard bar" the harder it will be to differntiate oneself. Plus, as MOL eluded to (I think), a lot of what needs to be learnt, comes from practical experience.

Anyway, I've written this in bits and pieces - due to other chattings and internet doings .... I hope it makes sense.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

I think a major problem is the increasing need for credentials and higher education in order to succeed in the workplace. I go to a top 10 university, and everyone here is worried about finding a good job, and realistically so. It used to be that going to a prestigious school was the golden key to having a successful career where one would have non-menial work. College attendance keeps going up, which increases the value of going to a top-tier school. This forces high schoolers to work even harder to imagine they have a chance at being rich someday. This competitiveness is ingrained relatively early on, and continues on through college (if you haven't burned out from HS) and then grad school, and then work.

Lots of workers who don't need to work so many hours do, and they better their financial standing in this way. People would only cut their hours if guaranteed the same pay. The employer could always find someone willing to work those extra hours. America is just ridiculously competitive, and as more and more have access to higher education, there aren't necessary jobs for all these people.

americans are competitive to the extent of detriment

 

[judas69]

I agree largely with what Viking said and have also had similar lines of thought to MasterOLightning. That is, the unnecessary layering of education and self-improvement. The higher we make the "standard bar" the harder it will be to differntiate oneself. Plus, as MOL eluded to (I think), a lot of what needs to be learnt, comes from practical experience.

If you haven't figured it out yet, our world is growing in complexity (not the other way around) ..and ones level of education and experience is rightfully used in determining ones degree of usefulness in a given context.

The layering of education you talk about is the weeding out process separating the men from the boys. As I see it, if they want to cut back on the number of years, they should counter this and make the processes 10x more difficult ..as I have seen many useless people walk out with degrees that only really discredit the University and the educational process to begin with, making the requirement for further education more necessary in the longterm.

Remember, no one is forcing you to become a man, as you could still survive and become self-actualized by flipping burgers at Denny's.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

Remember, no one is forcing you to become a man, as you could still survive and become self-actualized by flipping burgers at Denny's.

this^^^ should have been in the first post

 

[Cynical]

Most people won't create great art whether they work or not; it's not a judgement against them, it's just that they've got different abilities and a different purpose (or, in many cases they're completely worthless, but for the sake of this post, lets ignore those folks). It makes sense for society to give the ones of these who are able work that helps society, both for their own sake and the sake of society as a whole. For those who are naturally artists, authors, musicians, etc., it makes sense for them to spend their time painting, writing, composing, etc., rather than working in an office, and to be "comissioned" for their art by the rest of society (think religious works of art during the medieval period).

 

[speed]

Most people won't create great art whether they work or not; it's not a judgement against them, it's just that they've got different abilities and a different purpose (or, in many cases they're completely worthless, but for the sake of this post, lets ignore those folks). It makes sense for society to give the ones of these who are able work that helps society, both for their own sake and the sake of society as a whole. For those who are naturally artists, authors, musicians, etc., it makes sense for them to spend their time painting, writing, composing, etc., rather than working in an office, and to be "comissioned" for their art by the rest of society (think religious works of art during the medieval period).

I totally agree. This is I suppose the best way to do it, and I think it should be extended to scientists as well--( although it sort of is in a way through government grants for Research Professors). I know in Ireland, if one is a writer, they do not have to pay taxes.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

I know in Ireland, if one is a writer, they do not have to pay taxes.

what?!?!? in USA the only jobs that don't have to pay taxes are the jobs where your paychecks come out of tax money

 

[Norsemaiden]

What about if someone lives their entire life on benefits and says that is because a) they don't want to work if immigrants are going to get to be on a life of benefits with their tax money b) because they don't agree with the way taxes are used in many other unethical ways
c)working for a boss is demeaning d)they think everyone else who hates the system should stop working - general strike - and then the system will collapse e)the whole feeling of being a work-cow f)they get lots of time for hobbies g)most jobs are unethical in some way
Do we all condemn the scrounger? I don't know.

 

[speed]

What about if someone lives their entire life on benefits and says that is because a) they don't want to work if immigrants are going to get to be on a life of benefits with their tax money b) because they don't agree with the way taxes are used in many other unethical ways
c)working for a boss is demeaning d)they think everyone else who hates the system should stop working - general strike - and then the system will collapse e)the whole feeling of being a work-cow f)they get lots of time for hobbies g)most jobs are unethical in some way
Do we all condemn the scrounger? I don't know.

I am sure Cynical is implying that said government would extend benefits to those artists and writers etc., that have produced something of note and of some cultural significance. This idea of patronage has been around for thousands of years. Its just we Americans are hostile to creativity and art unless it's profit producing.