back
3 comments
I do think we have bad attitudes toward work and that many jobs just make people sick and produce nothing of value. As the article says, in Aristotle's view that saps society of valuable civic energy. But I don't think he was championing laziness. People I know who "gave up work" went back to some voluntary or lower-paid socially useful activity, because we are naturally generous, industrious and "restless creatures" (De Tocqueville). It wasn't until they were free of a so-called "boss", grubby office politics and unnecessary anxiety that they were able to truly give anything.

The problem lies in our present society's values coming from a twisted Protestant ethic of martyrdom, and celebration of exploitation. There are unwritten rules that it's not 'real' work unless you're utterly miserable doing it. It descends into a competition to be the most virtuously over-worked wretch. That's just a psychological disease.

So when I meet people who are always "terribly, terribly busy" I wonder what is going on for them. Really? Or is "work" actually defence mechanism from engaging in *living", that messy, awkward, complicated but exhilarating activity? Many work-places provide a rationale and framework for avoidance.

"Aristotle" spares 31 characters and adds clarity and specificity to the title.

Alternatively, Quartz's original seems to have been "Work is only seen as virtuous today thanks to the pervasiveness of Judeo-Christian thinking".

Ok, we've Aristotled it. Thanks!