Francisco Contreras – Unabashedly Skeptical

"The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks." –Christopher Hitchens

Work to Live or Live to Work?

“ Work is what people have to do in order to be able to buy Iphones and party”

This sentence was uttered by one of my middle-school students during a class discussion about what work means to them. Regrettably, she was not an outlier in uttering this opinion, but a representative of the class consensus; and as far as I can tell, society’s consensus also. For quite some time it has been generally accepted that one’s “job”  is merely the obligatory, often grueling task that one has to do in order to fund leisure. Do you want to have nice things? Well suck it up and work. Do you want to travel and go to shows and concerts? Well suck it up and work.  Indeed , the so-called Monday-Friday workweek is often seen as an oppressive barrier from you and your “real life”. “TGIF”, am I right? This is our modern philosophy of work, and it is prevalent anywhere we look. To take one example, high-school students today are told to choose  college majors solely based on the amount of expected income the majors might provide in the future. These students are no longer told to consider qualitative values of choosing a profession, whether the job will allow them to express themselves, whether it would help society, etc. Is this conception of work one that we should have as a society? What have been the consequences of excluding work from our personal identity? How has this happened and how ought we to change it?

workweek

Small Is Beautiful by E. F. Schumacher is considered to be a modern classic on alternative economics. It is a wonderfully enlightening book that critiques our underlying economic  assumptions and encourages a new perspective  on how we can move towards a sustainable economic future. This collection of essays was written in 1973,  but its ideas remain as relevant today as on its day of publication. Among the most interesting of the essays is one entitled Buddhist Economics, where he argues that the current philosophy of work  in much of today’s society is dissatisfying, confusing, and ultimately unsustainable.   

2015-01-09-consumerismSchumacher explains that due to the adoption of Keynesian Economics and capitalist economic structures, our conception of work, which had been previously informed mostly by religious traditions, took a turn for the materialistic with the dawn of the Industrial Revolutions in the early 1800s. Modern economic theory reduces work to an activity to acquire monetary wealth, a mere economic utility.  The reasoning behind this new philosophy of work was that it was the only way to meet the industrial employment demands of the new economy. If people continued to view work as part of their personal and social identity and not as merely a way to to make money, then they probably wouldn’t have accepted the impersonal, grueling jobs of the industrial era.

“For at least another hundred years we must pretend to ourselves and to everyone that fair is foul and foul is fair; for foul is useful and fair is not. Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods for a little longer still. For only they can lead us out of the tunnel of economic necessity into daylight. “  

— John Maynard Keynes

From this philosophy stems the desire to avoid work at at all costs, which Schumacher argues has estranged us from finding a fulfillment and purpose in life.  He instead encourages us to adopt what he calls a Buddhist Perspective of Human Labor. Which consists of three parts.

1: Work To Develop One’s Faculties

Our work should allow for the full expression of our creative and intellectual capacities. It should not be an obligation, but an exercise of our mental dexterity.

2: Work To Overcome Ego-Centeredness

Schumacher states that according to Buddhist tradition, work is the main way in which we can go outside ourselves and collaborate with others. 

3.Work for Necessary Sustenance  

The last point of this perspective deals directly with material necessity. Unlike our modern perspective, working for material gains should be only a component of why we work, not our sole aim.   


 

Personally a lot of these ideas seem interestingly reminiscent of Henry David Thoreau, which makes sense considering he took a lot of inspiration from Eastern Philosophy.  One could argue that the main message in all of his work is his fierce opposition to the mindless consumerism and materialism of his day. Though fiercely eloquent, Thoreau’s thought always featured the tricky juxtaposition of idealism and practicality, and I think that’s the main challenge we too must wrestle with if we are to continue to re-think our philosophy of work. However, it is clear to me that we must give it a shot.

“… to make a living not merely holiest and honorable, but altogether inviting and glorious; for if getting a living is not so, then living is not”

 –Live Without Principle, Henry David Thoreau

 

Advertisements

5 responses to “Work to Live or Live to Work?

  1. suburbanlife February 14, 2016 at 12:11 am

    As a human being and educator, the only method you might be able to harness to your efforts to educate the young is by example your own and others’. However the culture within which you operate will throw up constant road-blocks. Insidious messages are broadcast, everywhere, and with varying degrees of subtlety. Examination of context of messaging would be a big part of any educational curriculum – and is not! Most unfortunate, this. G

    Like

  2. chakshuRA February 15, 2016 at 6:25 am

    Let me again add some ancient Indian wisdom to the discussion. Work is treated as worship and the ancient sages believed that enlightenment / liberation can be attained by work also.

    This excerpt is from the book Bhagavad Gita. This book is a manual for leading a good life. Obviously the language is cryptic and has to be understood in the right context. Here is what the book says about work (Karma).

    “Thy right is to work only, but never to its fruits; let not the fruit-of-action be thy motive, nor let thy attachment be to inaction. ”

    Broadly there are four precepts –
    1) Work is seen as a Right and not a Duty. Something you exercise for yourself I.e. Right… and not doing it for others I.e. duty.
    2) You cannot control or claim your right on the outcome of the work I.e. fruit. Input / efforts and output / outcome are not predictable and in many cases randomized by nature.
    3) Your motive for the work should be work itself and not the fruit of action. It’s the process you should enjoy and not the result.
    4) inaction or inertia for work is discouraged. This is a kind of a forcing function to motivate people to work and closes the loop back to #1 above.

    In short all it says is work for the joy of work itself and let not the fruit of action be they motive.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Luis Francisco Contreras February 20, 2016 at 11:32 pm

      I just finished reading Karma Yoga and I sure wish I would have written this post after I had read that. Thank you so much for bringing Swami Vivekananda’s work to my attention, the book has touched me deeply. I’ve already begun looking for his other books; I want to read everything he has ever written. There some authors that immediately touch your life the moment you lay your eyes on their words, and Swami Vivekananda is one of them.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: