3 ms·

It's more than a social fact. It's a consequence of living in a physical reality with physical wants and needs that require action to be satisfied. The best we

It's more than a social fact. It's a consequence of living in a physical reality with physical wants and needs that require action to be satisfied. The best we can do is move the work around, and have someone else do it. (We can harness physical forces to take care of most of the work in the force-times-distance sense, but we're still a long way from moving the rest.) And the ultimate problem with moving it around so that we don't have to do any of it will be that it is likely to result in some outside entity having outsized power over our lives.

Barrin92 5y ago
OP talks about 'work' in a particular way, as does the author of the piece. What we need is food, shelter and so on. 'Work' as in conflict with 'life' (i.e the work-life balance) is a social construct. It didn't always use to be that way, and it doesn't have to. That we have physical needs is a fact. That we have alienated work from life, or family, or expressing ourselves is not. That work created an absentee father is not in the laws of physics, obviously, but that it's hard to perceive it as anything else is what OP pointed out, and that's something worth paying attention to. The idea that you have to 'move work around' (kind of sounds like moving garbage around) wouldn't make sense to a person who is able to express themselves in their work. Ask a craftsman for example, an artist, or someone on a family farm. The fact that people are detached from their work, that they're objects of their work, that their work dehumanizes them in extreme cases, that is a result of a particular mode of production we are living under. Someone for whom their work is an extension of their life, who are not detached from the products of their work, and for whom work strengthens their social relations, there is no work-life balance, because there is no work-life conflict.
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  > The idea that you have to 'move work around' (kind of sounds like moving garbage around) wouldn't make sense to a person who is able to express themselves in their work. Ask a craftsman for example, an artist, or someone on a family farm. When I go over to the printmaking studio, I recognize that in principle someone else might be able to grind the limestone slabs I intend to use for printing, maintain the printing press, clean up the ink, or perform any number of tasks incidental to the expressive portion. I am just as sure that anyone on a family farm knows they can, in principle, get someone else in the family to do work, and that hired hands exist, and can take care of many tasks or unpleasant chores. They may prefer to do the work themselves, so that they get better results, or have more control or feel useful, or because they have a duty to contribute productively. In every job that must be done, there is an element of fun. It is essentially never entirely fun.
- sdwr 5y ago
  Beautifully put!
- nradov 5y ago
  Yes go ahead and ask someone on a family farm. Most of them see it as a way to get some food and money, not a way to express themselves. Some of them love it, others hate it but don't have a practical way to get out.
avgcorrection 5y ago
But now the goalpost has been moved. The OP claimed that it is a psychological need.
kelseyfrog 5y ago
"We need work" and "we things to get done" are different things in my mind. I agree just like anyone that we need certain things to get done to survive. "We need work" is a curious little phrase though. It's setup in the same way as "we need food", or "we need safety and security", or "we need to feel loved." The framing is that of a basic human need and it's my impression that's how many people see it. It's interesting that the language follows suit in a Metaphors We Live By[1]-type of way. 1. https://www.biblio.com/9780226468013 https://www.biblio.com/9780226468013

Barrin92 5y ago

OP talks about 'work' in a particular way, as does the author of the piece. What we need is food, shelter and so on. 'Work' as in conflict with 'life' (i.e the work-life balance) is a social construct. It didn't always use to be that way, and it doesn't have to. That we have physical needs is a fact. That we have alienated work from life, or family, or expressing ourselves is not. That work created an absentee father is not in the laws of physics, obviously, but that it's hard to perceive it as anything else is what OP pointed out, and that's something worth paying attention to. The idea that you have to 'move work around' (kind of sounds like moving garbage around) wouldn't make sense to a person who is able to express themselves in their work. Ask a craftsman for example, an artist, or someone on a family farm. The fact that people are detached from their work, that they're objects of their work, that their work dehumanizes them in extreme cases, that is a result of a particular mode of production we are living under. Someone for whom their work is an extension of their life, who are not detached from the products of their work, and for whom work strengthens their social relations, there is no work-life balance, because there is no work-life conflict.

fennecfoxen 5y ago
> The idea that you have to 'move work around' (kind of sounds like moving garbage around) wouldn't make sense to a person who is able to express themselves in their work. Ask a craftsman for example, an artist, or someone on a family farm. When I go over to the printmaking studio, I recognize that in principle someone else might be able to grind the limestone slabs I intend to use for printing, maintain the printing press, clean up the ink, or perform any number of tasks incidental to the expressive portion. I am just as sure that anyone on a family farm knows they can, in principle, get someone else in the family to do work, and that hired hands exist, and can take care of many tasks or unpleasant chores. They may prefer to do the work themselves, so that they get better results, or have more control or feel useful, or because they have a duty to contribute productively. In every job that must be done, there is an element of fun. It is essentially never entirely fun.
sdwr 5y ago
Beautifully put!
nradov 5y ago
Yes go ahead and ask someone on a family farm. Most of them see it as a way to get some food and money, not a way to express themselves. Some of them love it, others hate it but don't have a practical way to get out.

avgcorrection 5y ago

But now the goalpost has been moved. The OP claimed that it is a psychological need.

kelseyfrog 5y ago

"We need work" and "we things to get done" are different things in my mind. I agree just like anyone that we need certain things to get done to survive. "We need work" is a curious little phrase though. It's setup in the same way as "we need food", or "we need safety and security", or "we need to feel loved." The framing is that of a basic human need and it's my impression that's how many people see it. It's interesting that the language follows suit in a Metaphors We Live By[1]-type of way. 1. https://www.biblio.com/9780226468013 https://www.biblio.com/9780226468013