3 ms·
On the contrary, why should you enjoy your job just because some rich person “gives it to you” (more realistically, “foists it upon the public”)? Sounds like a
by sameoldtune 2y ago
On the contrary, why should you enjoy your job just because some rich person “gives it to you” (more realistically, “foists it upon the public”)? Sounds like a mental illness to only value yourself as the amount of economic impact you could achieve.
When I was younger I had a friend that quit a job because they made her wear a uniform and she thought the uniform was degrading and ugly. Is she not valuing herself more than her employer in that instance?
As someone who has done many types of menial labor, I understand we all need to work to make our society function. But there are kinds of work that are so lifeless or degrading they affect the mental health of the employee. Where that line is is different for each person, but to pretend it doesn’t exist is naive.
- sublinear 2y agoI was commenting on the idea of work being "meaningless". That's only partially subjective. The way I see it the meaning of work can be broken down into at least a few parts: the objective results, benefit to worker, benefit to employer, and benefit to society. The benefits are the subjective part that you and others are focusing on, but the objective results are what I'm commenting on. For work to be truly meaningless, the results would have to be obsoleted by technological or social progress such that there is no demand. An example is post-industrial handmade goods. Some people may call the effort to produce such goods "meaningless", yet the demand remains so it's anything but. This is how I am distinguishing work from mere cost, price, or whatever the employer or employee wants. Tons of stuff is necessary in this world that sucks to make, doesn't make any money, and that broader society reluctantly agrees is necessary.