Is Labor Necessary for Life?

By: Alexandria Addesso

Ah work. It is usually a word that brings about dread for many employed people. Long caffeinated hours that can, usually, be quite strenuous and taxing on the body and mind. Even workers that are very passionate about their careers can get exhausted and fed up by them. But what if we lived in a workless society? Would things be better, or worst for the individual’s health and psyche? Is work only necessary for financial stability and to accomplish the necessities for life or is there something more?

Philosopher Aristotle described “the complete happiness of man”, as being “self-sufficiency, leisureliness and unworriedness”. But after discussing this he added that man was too lowly for such accomplishments and that they were only suitable for the gods. Conversely, in the first chapter of Genesis in the Bible God is seen as doing three things; creating, working, and resting. If man is to be like Him, he must do the same. But philosophical and religious notions aside, can man lead a meaningful life without labor?



A 2013 Gallup poll found that 68 percent of people would keep working after winning the lottery. Obviously this majority of people polled would not be working simply to pay the bills, so why else would anyone work? Another Gallup poll from the same year found that three out of four employed people surveyed said they planned to keep working part-time after retirement.
When wages and labor is separated, work can become more meaningful. Wage-labor can be viewed as a form of enslavement and forceful. But when labor is separated from wages what an individual accomplishes by the sweat of their brow or creative abilities, can bring about a more in-depth sense of self-worth and accomplishment. Rather than pursuing meaningless work to earn a check, a person can labor to better themselves, others, the greater society and the planet.



The late French social activist Peter Maurin co-founded the Catholic Worker Movement in part to reject and go against wage labor. Although he believed in labor as a beneficial and necessary part of each person’s life, he also believed that labor should only be pursued for four hours a day, followed by four hours of discussion. The following is an excerpt from one of Maurin’s Easy Essays on labor guides:

“But the worker would not be exploited at the point of production
if the worker did not sell his labor to the exploiter of his labor.
When the worker sells his labor to a capitalist or accumulator of labor
he allows the capitalist or accumulator of labor to accumulate his labor.
And when the capitalist or accumulator of the worker’s labor has
accumulated so much of the worker’s labor that he no longer finds it
profitab1e to buy the worker’s labor then the worker can no longer sell
his labor to the capitalist or accumulator of labor.
And when the worker can no longer sell his labor to the capitalist or
accumulator of labor he can no longer buy the products of his labor.
And that is what the worker gets for selling his labor to the capitalist or
accumu1ator of labor.
He just gets left and he gets what is coming to him. Labor is not a
commodity to be bought and sold–. Labor is a means of self-expression,
the worker’s gift to the common good.”

YOUR INPUT IS MUCH APPRECIATED! LEAVE YOUR COMMENT BELOW.

With Robots: Is a life without work one, we’d want to live?

Being gainfully employed is about more than money. We need to consider what will give our lives purpose and connections in the age of auto information.

When Aristotle described “the complete happiness of man”, he thought it would include, among other things, “self-sufficiency, leisureliness and unweariedness”. Unfortunately the philosopher concluded that “such a life would be too high for man” – it was suitable only for the gods. All the same, he encouraged humanity to keep striving to get as close to “complete happiness” as possible.

I reckon he’d be proud of where we’ve got. Today, the fourth industrial revolution– which ranges from artificial intelligence to genetic engineering and automation – promises almost total freedom from weariness and uninterrupted leisure time as demands of work are taken away from us by better, cheaper and more efficient artificial technology.

The robots are coming and apparently they’re here to work.
But will all the free time we’re being promised actually make our lives any better? Is a life without work one we’d actually want to live?

I’ve often debated the merits of continuing to work after winning the lotto with friends and family – I maintain that I wouldn’t but I always find myself in the minority. Apparently this isn’t unique to my social circle – a 2013 Gallup poll found 68% of people would keep working after winning lotto. I’m assuming they’re not thinking they’ll still need the money, so what is it about the daily grind that’s more appealing than putting your feet up on a beach?



People view a robot during the Taiwan Automation Intelligence and Robot Show in Taipei, Taiwan, in August.

The obvious answer is that we don’t only work for income we do it because it adds meaning to our lives and gives a sense of purpose. Even though I insist I wouldn’t work if I struck it rich, what I mean is that I’d choose the type of work I would do and how often I’d do it. For instance, I would still write and give talks on subjects I’m passionate about.

It’s not necessarily because “if you do what you love, you’ll never work a day in your life”. Writing, preparing talks and doing research are all work but it’s work I think is worth doing and the financial wealth would mean I could balance it with everything else I value in life. To put it simply, I’d do it because it would bring me closer to Aristotle’s “complete happiness”.

There’s new research to back up this popular mode of thinking. The economist Paul Dolan’s recent book Happiness by Design shows the happiest people are those who experience feelings of both purpose and pleasure over time. All the work and no play might make Jack a dull boy but all play and no work, isn’t going to make him happy either.

Of course not all work is going to provide us with a profound sense of purpose. Some of it is both pointless and unpleasant – a total happiness suck. Someone in a role they hate, working for a company whose values don’t match their own or not earning enough money to live off isn’t going to be nourished by their work. Assuming their financial needs could be met, they’d seem to be much better off quitting and leaving the work to a robot.



Here’s where the challenges for automation start to arise. It’s easy to say there are certain individuals who would be happier if they left their jobs to a robot but automation isn’t going to replace individual roles – it’s going to replace entire industries. Experts say 47% of jobs in America are likely to be robots and other automated processes and researchers reckon the situation is likely to be similar in Australia.

There are almost undoubtedly people who find purpose or pleasure in the work they do and will not be happier having their jobs replaced. But automation looks likely to capture the satisfied and dissatisfied alike across a range of industries – cabbies, surgeons, accountants, artists, – the list goes on.

YOUR INPUT IS MUCH APPRECIATED! LEAVE YOUR COMMENT BELOW.