Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

ucl.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#71

Post by beepbooptheory »

jokoon wrote: post #5

I was again, arguing about work on reddit. Someone said that even animals "work" to survive. I found that the comparison was not really good. Food and shelter are abundant. Technology improved the human condition, but it made humans be much much less social, which is the main cause of inequalities. The individual car/kitchen/living room/bathroom generate exclusion. I'm an introvert, I want to have my safe space, but…

Not sure if you care to hear this or not, but this almost a perfect way to articulate the humanism that is the starting point for Marx's analysis of history. But he was actually just following the way Aristotle thought about it!

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#72

Post by yboris »

Related: 80,000 Hours - an organization promoting finding work / career that has a large positive impact on the world.

Named after the rough amount of hours that a typical person will work over the course of their lives. Given that we'll spend this many hours on something, why not make it towards the goal of making the world a better place?

https://80000hours.org/

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#73

Post by mlatu »

SuoDuanDao wrote: post #67
mlatu wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what they want you to believe, but your hat needs to be at least THIS big in order to not just evaporate when it lands in the ring. Good luck playing against the house. I'd much rather demolish this casino and put up a soupkitchen instead. I'd rather have everyone fed, clothed, housed and medically taken care of than having a low chance of "winning". What do you win anyways? Can you hug your profits? Can they…

I believe you want to demolish the casino. I don't believe you want to build a soup kitchen. I don't even believe you volunteer at a soup kitchen now, because I've met people who volunteer at soup kitchens and you sound nothing like them. As to what I'd do if I 'won', it's funny you ask since I spent this morning thinking about just that. For one, I think that a lot of contaminated land, including spent mining sites,…

I said: I want to see the (capitalist) world burn.

Well, why would you misquote me?

I wonder. You make me sound like some madman indeed. Personally, I would even consider a UBI to be "setting the world ablaze", but probably the only way forwards.

No, I do not volunteer in a soup kitchen, do you? Of course you do. Do you want to read how I don't have the time to volunteer? Of course not.

Does it matter that you are concretizing an abstraction to make me look like a lazy loudmouthed fool? Of course not.

As to that Syrian experiment, pardon my mistrust, but is it safe enough that you would send your own daughter there?

If I would be a gambler, I would bet that experiment whiped off the earth in 5 - 10 years if they haven't disbanded by then already due to ???

Nah, I have dug myself in here pretty solidly, even if I wanted to: I couldn't just up and leave on a whim. Besides, your plea for me to consider going off into the desert reads like that meme with that dude stating "how curious, yet you participate in a society" to some peasant complaining about the state of the world.

Instead of going someplace that could be droned to peace for being a threat to even mildly authoritarean regimes, or, just as likely, where I could be stoned to death for just existing (am trans and gay): I'll rather wait for the nuclear holocaust to bring anarchy to my doorstep, kthxbye

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#74

Post by SuoDuanDao »

samhw wrote: post #69
SuoDuanDao wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe you want to demolish the casino. I don't believe you want to build a soup kitchen. I don't even believe you volunteer at a soup kitchen now, because I've met people who volunteer at soup kitchens and you sound nothing like them. As to what I'd do if I 'won', it's funny you ask since I spent this morning thinking about just that. For one, I think that a lot of contaminated land, including spent mining sites,…

Thank you for this, I appreciated reading it. It's depressing to see how many people's vision of the world is fundamentally negative and opposed to letting human beings live freely and flourish according to their own hopes and dreams. That being said, I think the problem is that the pro-freedom side hasn't put forth a sufficiently convincing argument. Ridiculous Elon Musk fanboys should not be the representatives for…

Why thank you! I am testing out pro-freedom arguments when the opportunity arises, "This is my vision, who are you to say I have no right to pursue it?" does seem to be working somewhat. Asking for alternatives similarly, though I think I'll need to pick up a copy of 'doughnut economics' to get the most out of the ensuing conversations.

But taking a wider view, comparing our current situation to any time except Postwar America seems like it should be argument enough. I think the issue is that freedom means freedom to make bad choices if it means anything, and we're currently in a situation of having to deal with the consequences of some bad choices. How that resolves I can't begin to guess.

Edit: It occurred to me, maybe acknowledging that freedom allowed bad choices to be made and that we need to deal with the consequences of those choices would be another way to approach the same argument.

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#75

Post by jackothy »

joshgrib wrote: post #43
neilwilson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Food and shelter are abundant." Only because somebody made them by working Monday to Friday. That somebody could make less by working Monday to Tuesday. Food and shelter would be less abundant and the person currently working a full week to produce the surplus would instead have the rest of the week to themselves. The productivity, and the free time, would accrue to those expending the effort of production - as mora…

I think you're sneaking in some assumptions here that people just develop these skills within themselves and have the same opportunity to do so as anyone else. If you start the clock with them already having those skills and other people not then it makes sense, but they ultimately owe all of that back to the society that gave them those skills. However you end up is a combination of genes and environment - neither o…

Even though the world is deterministic it is beneficial (or even necessary) to treat people as though they are responsible for their own actions, both in good and bad. We send people to prison even if the chance of further crime is ~0. We get mad at people when they act like assholes. We don't just blame it on "society".

It's all about incentives. If people think they might get punished for a certain thing, they tend not to do it. If people think they might get rewarded for a certain thing, they tend to do it.

If we want to be the kind of society that creates people with useful skills, we have to incentivize people to attain those skills. Think of this as us controlling the environment that shapes people a certain way.

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#76

Post by nradov »

joshgrib wrote: post #46
burntoutfire wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Work already is not mandatory. Anyone is free to figure out other ways to get food and shelter.

I think this is overlooking the main argument - having someone waste time by getting their own food/shelter isn't really any better than having them waste time doing a job to get money for food/shelter. We would likely be better off not wasting people's time and just giving them food/shelter so they are free to figure out how to best use that time

No thanks. I am unwilling to provide free food and shelter to random people who are capable of working but choose not to. Their survival is not my concern.

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#77

Post by giantg2 »

mlatu wrote: post #70
giantg2 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we understand that life is full of struggle and death, yet we have children. "Distancing ourselfs from eachother by using money to measure the value of every interaction... " That's a choice. One can always volunteer. It seems human nature will always find some way to measure value transfer, or at least determine if someone is worthy of the "free" service. I think we see this in libertarian communities - most peo…

> But we understand that life is full of struggle and death, yet we have children. yeah, because life is also full of beauty. As to that choice: Sure, you just don't see many banks in volunteering in letting go of a debtor ;) If I had the time, I would.

And it was the debtor's choice to get involved in those transactions. Many businesses, including banks, make charitable donations.

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#78

Post by analognoise »

neilwilson wrote: post #8
jokoon wrote: post #5

I was again, arguing about work on reddit. Someone said that even animals "work" to survive. I found that the comparison was not really good. Food and shelter are abundant. Technology improved the human condition, but it made humans be much much less social, which is the main cause of inequalities. The individual car/kitchen/living room/bathroom generate exclusion. I'm an introvert, I want to have my safe space, but…

"Food and shelter are abundant." Only because somebody made them by working Monday to Friday. That somebody could make less by working Monday to Tuesday. Food and shelter would be less abundant and the person currently working a full week to produce the surplus would instead have the rest of the week to themselves. The productivity, and the free time, would accrue to those expending the effort of production - as mora…

"The productivity, and the free time, would accrue to those expending the effort of production - as morally it should."

This argument is not only not what happens in practice, it is a bold assertion for morality. What we actually have is that a class of people have infinite free time because people believe this lie - the "Job creator class" myth. The same job creators that need to be bailed out (with our money) every time the economy sneezes.

There's nothing morally correct or right about working under the assumption of homelessness or starvation - it's a threat that doesn't need to exist, to "produce" more. More of what? We already throw out tons and tons of food to keep prices at certain places for the sake of farmers and "the economy". The whole thing is artifice upon artifice - thousands of empty vacation homes, workers living with multiple people.

What is the point of all this production if the gains don't ever actually reach the people doing the work?

Re: The Philosophy of Work [pdf]

#80

Post by ryan93 »

mlatu wrote: post #57
Infernal wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd rather have everyone fed, clothed, housed and medically taken care of than having a low chance of "winning" Where do you believe the food, clothing, housing, and medical care/technology will come from in this hypothetical?

Where do you believe the food, clothing, housing, and medical care/technology is coming from in the current world? Same people, except in my hypothetical the workforce would be a tad bigger: Bezos, Musk and Gates, like the Kennedies, Rothschilds and Murdochs would (like everyone else on the planet) put in their own ~4 hours of daily work (4 out of 7 days should be plenty) towards feeding/clothing/housing/caring-for t…

If you want everyone to give up wealth you will have to do it at gun point.
Post reply on HN