We live in an age of work for work’s sake, of production, acquisition, and consumption, of income and expenses, GDP and unemployment percentages. Production, acquisition, and consumption have come to be the definitive organizing principles of our lives, conceived–or rather, lived out–as ends in themselves.1 This provides modern man with what the Greek’s called telos–an end or purpose–and thus structures our lives in a specific way. The tasks of income, wealth, and its management become our primary concerns, and within this Economic sphere, efficiency likewise becomes an end in itself. This situation is unprecedented in history.2
Our life is structured by work and its accompanying scaffolding. Whether we are an employee, self-employed, or own a business, our daily routine is likely structured by activities associated with continuing our income. This involves a wide range of things. We rise at a specific time,3 and–among other things–get dressed. We wear clothes specific to what we do; a uniform, a suit. We must leave for work at a specific time, to be “on time”. We must get there somehow, likely by driving a car. Cars must be fueled and maintained–regular maintenance, tire-rotations, insurance, and so on. There may be other expenses associated with work, such as shoes or ties, tools, or other things which we must provide. Working hours are monitored, time-clocks are “punched”, “paid time off” or “vacation time” is requested. The workday is itself structured in a specific way, a routine of tasks punctuated perhaps by breaks or meals, phone calls, transactions, et al., before the day wraps up–also at a specific time4–and we return home. The daily cycle is repeated; days, weeks, months, years. Life itself becomes structured by work and divided into stages, education, employment, retirement. This picture is only a partial one, but it should provide a touchstone for the predicament of the contemporary worker,5 and helps explain what I have called the “ethic of success or wealth”, what Josef Pieper has called the “workaday world” or the world of “total work”.
It was not always the case that human life was structured in the way described above. Before capitalism got off the ground it had to overcome certain obstacles, one of which has been called economic traditionalism.6 Economic traditionalism is the idea that views work as “a necessary evil and only one arena of life, no more important than the arenas of leisure, family, and friends. ‘Traditional needs’ are implied: when fulfilled, then work ceases.”7 If anything, from this perspective work was seen as less important than leisure, family, and friends–in the sense that when one’s needs are met, work ceases to have a point, and therefore stops. In other words, if you are able to support yourself doing a certain amount of work, that is the amount of work you will do. If you devise a way to do the same amount of work (or make the same amount of money, say) in less time, you will work less. This may not sound like anything odd, but we must remember that work was viewed very differently in the pre-modern West, especially medieval Europe, where the world of production and consumption was much simpler in comparison to our own. The general pace of medieval society was leisurely, for instance, and was “dominated by agrarian rhythms, free of haste, careless of exactitude, unconcerned by productivity”.8 Work–on this view–is part of the structure of life, and not the whole of it.9 If you didn’t have to work, you didn’t.
From the perspective of economic traditionalism, the “ethic of success or wealth” or what Max Weber calls “the spirit of capitalism”, appears entirely irrational. If we are forced to work to earn our livelihood, then work is man’s response to an external pressure–that of survival. To work as an end in itself under an internal compulsion10–surpassing the needs of oneself and one’s family, i.e., capital accumulation–makes little sense. Of course, there are exceptions to this. In medieval Europe and antiquity there are examples of people motivated by acquisition and the pursuit of wealth as an end in itself. But this “spirit” did not develop on a widespread scale until the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.11
What is interesting is that the standard of living enjoyed in the contemporary West requires that work dominate our lives, at least if we are to have reasonable access to that standard of living. This is unprecedented. In the pre-modern world, the amount of work required in order to survive was far less than it is today.12 Today, we need more because the world we have built requires that we need more.13 We no longer need to simply feed and shelter ourselves. Today we need electricity, gas, houses, furnaces, air conditioners, cars, TVs, dishwashers, clothes, shoes, cell phones, computers, apps, software, shampoo, deodorant, health insurance, glasses, microwaves, washing machines, and on and on.14 Of course, there are those that argue that these technological developments have greatly improved our lives. This is clearly true in some ways; in others, less so.
The alternative picture is that antiquity and the Middle Ages were characterized by widespread poverty, superstition, disease, and general misery. And that it was only with the dawn of modernity and the advent of capitalism that man began to raise himself to the greatness we now enjoy.15 Regardless, our views of work and the role it plays in our lives has indeed changed. Whether this is a good thing or not is a separate question, and one which cannot be attempted until the mosaic of our investigation is more clear.
Notes:
1. In other words, production, acquisition, and consumption have come to be sought in the form of non-instrumental goods, despite the fact that, as such, each is instrumental. For a well thought contemporary introduction to the cycles and aspects of work, production, acquisition, and consumption, see Juliet B. Schor, The Overworked American, and The Overspent American.
2. This likely began with the rise of industrialization. The peak of working hours was likely seen in the 19th century, and though working time has decreased since then, when we compare current rates to those of the medieval epoch, we find that time spent working was not only less, but qualitatively different. See Jacques LeGoff, Time, Work and Culture in the Middle Ages. Today, it isn’t just that we work a certain average number of hours every day or year, it is that work structures our lives in the form of a telos.
3. If we are reasonably responsible, this involves going to bed “on time” as well.
4. It is worth noting that many people “bring work home” with them, but the factor of time is always present. It is difficult for us to imagine the structure of the day without reference to time, or more specifically, to the clock. This has been brilliantly discussed by Raymond Tallis. See Raymond Tallis, Of Time and Lamentation.
5. By “worker” I do not mean merely “working men and women”, such as blue-collar workers, but anyone who works in order to secure an income. This would include most business owners.
6. This is discussed by Max Weber in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
7. Quoted from the Glossary to Stephen Kalberg’s translation of Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism with Other Writings on the Rise of the West. This may not sound like a novel idea. Indeed, this attitude or viewpoint can be found among many working people today. The difference between work in the medieval epoch and today, however, is that today–at least in the West–much more is demanded of us in terms of what is needed to survive (or, if not survive, live at what we would call the average “standard of living”).
8. See Jacques LeGoff, Time, Work and Culture in the Middle Ages.
9. Many people today will argue that work does not dominate their life, that it is only a “part” and not the “whole” of it. Almost no one would say that they live to work, that work expresses their highest value. But what I am concerned with here is the question of what is structuring the day-to-day life of working individuals. People may say their highest values are “faith, family, and friends,” or some approximation thereof, but it remains the case that their day-to-day life is structured by the demands of securing an income.
10. I am indebted to Erich Fromm for the phrase “internal compulsion”. See Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom.
11. In this essay I will not deal with the so-called “spirit of capitalism” as understood by Max Weber directly, but will rather concern myself with its effects.
12. This, I think, is mainly due to the fact that the world was simpler, and the “spirit of capitalism,” which ultimately produced modern capitalism, did not yet exist. See Juliet B. Schor, The Overworked American; See Jacques LeGoff, Time, Work and Culture in the Middle Ages.
13. This seems to be bound up with the permeation of money in our society, as well as changes in the domestic househould which occurred as a result of industrialization.
14. This can perhaps be explained by what Paul Zane Pilzer refers to as “The Fourth Law of Economic Alchemy”, originally put forth in his book, Unlimited Wealth. The law states, “Technology determines the nature of demand.” In other words, “Imagine a need, and then create it.” See, Paul Zane Pilzer, Unlimited Wealth, and The Next Millionaires.
15. For a systematic and articulate defense of this view, see Andrew Bernstein, The Capitalist Manifesto.