Hodges - Towards a Philosophy of Labor

7/29/2019 Hodges - Towards a Philosophy of Labor

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hodges-towards-a-philosophy-of-labor 1/15

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.

Towards a Philosophy of LaborAuthor(s): Donald Clark HodgesReviewed work(s):Source: American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 21, No. 4 (Oct., 1962), pp. 359-372Published by: American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3484518 .

Accessed: 20/11/2012 10:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and

extend access to American Journal of Economics and Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.202 on Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:00:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ajesi

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3484518?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/3484518?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ajesi



Towardsa Philosophyof Labor

By DONALDCLARKHODGES

IIN THEPLACIDTWILIGHTf the groves of academe, a philosophy of labor

is likelyto appearas a gross travestyupon the worksof traditionalphilos-

ophers and as an excursion into areas that are unworthy of profound

philosophical meditation. Philosophical analysis of the current belief

in the dignityof labor-a fundamentalarticleof faith in our secularre-

ligions of progressand our so-called Age of the Common Man-would

appearin this light to involve a descentinto Plato's mythicaland not-so-

mythical Cave,not for the

purposeof

bringingwisdom to bear

uponsocial relations,but in order to seek wisdom where it cannot be found.

Philosophiesof labor help to formulate,clarify and refine the meaningof labor to man in his capacityas laborer,so that their area of human

concernis limited, like that of scientific theories of the labor movement,to the world of labor in the narrowsense.1 Nonetheless, even thoughthe conceptof labor s hardlyadequateas a startingpointof a philosophicalsystem,those intellectualsystemsthat have neglectedto develop a philos-ophy of labor-and this includes most of traditionalphilosophy-haveobviously failed in their task of creatinga full philosophicalexpressionof human life.

Basic to any philosophy of labor is a distinction between labor andsuch related activities as work and play. In ordinaryusage, labor is a

particularkind of work, so that there are other forms of work besideslabor. Generally speaking, work is concentratedand deliberateeffort,whether for the sake of livelihood or some less urgent goal. Thus onecan work at acquiringknowledge, at masteringa particular port, and at

the art of love-making,as well as at the business of mere survival. Incontrast,play is activity for the specific purpose of amusement,refresh-

ment, relaxationor diversion. Sportsand games are, for the most part,designed for the sake of play, but may be pursuedwith such seriousnessand intensitythat they also acquirethe characterof work. Indeed, it is

possible for a given activity to partakeof both work and play, as inintellectual games requiringthought and concentration,whose aim is amartialvictoryover some friendly opponent. Such games are not neces-

1 See the essay by Mark Perlman,"LaborMovement Theories: Past, Present, and Fu-ture," in the symposium n honor of Selig Perlman,Industrialand LaborRelationsReview(April, 1960). Unlike scientific theories of the labor movement, philosophiesof laborare interested less in the external effects of trade unionism upon the community than inits moralimplicationsand the clusterof valuesin fact representedby it. See, for example,C. Delisle Burns,The Philosophy of Labor (London: George Allen & Unwin, 192S), andFrank Tannenbaum,A Philosophyof Labor (New York: Knopf, 1952).








360 The American Journal of Economics and Sociology

sarily relaxing nor even amusing, and pursued to excess they become

even boring. By comparison,play is necessarilydiverting, although it is

also possibleto find refreshment n some kinds of work. In currentusagework and play are not antithetical, ince concentrated nd purposiveeffortfor the sake of entertainmentrequiresa combinationof both.

The predispositionof philosophersto think in terms of logically ex-

clusive categories has led to a somewhat different conception of work

and play. Thus work has been definedas activityperformednot for the

pleasure of acting, but for the sake of a result beyond the action, such

that we would be unwilling to act unlesswe expectedthe resultto follow.2

In contrast,play has been conceived as activity exercisedpurely for itsown sake with no ulterior purpose.3 So interpreted,artists, scientists,

philosophersand others like them, who are absolutelydevoted to their

professions,are players instead of workers,and such phrasesas the "joyof work" and "joy throughwork"are only rhetoricalexpressions. Com-

mon usage has settled upon a different use of these terms, accordingto

which work can be intrinsicallyenjoyableand play can find its amusement

not only in the activityitself but also in the honor and self-esteemconse-

quent upon victoryover an

adversary.To some extent all work is dis-

agreeable,since disciplinerequiresthe suppressionof spontaneityagainstwhich our instincts rebel. Yet even manual work may be intrinsically

rewarding, especially the activity of mastering rebellious matter and

shaping it accordingto our will.

There is another equally philosophical conception that work is the

proper fulfillment of man's uniquely human capacitiesand that play is

essentially trivial, although a means of refreshment in preparationfor

further work.4 Thus work is conceived as an expenditureof energy by

which man conquersnatureand impresseshis own image upon it-a pre-

requisiteof rational activityand of human virtue. In contrast,play is

conceivedas spontaneousactivitycarriedon without impedimentspurelyfor the sake of pleasure and without hope of edification. Play cannot

satisfy the soul as fully as work, for it does not bring into action the

full potentialities of man, but only superficially engages his passions,commitments,knowledge,and intelligence. The trivialcharacter f play,its carefreespirit,maylead it to place its faith, as in gamesof chance,into

2 AdrianoTilgher, Work: What It Has Meant to Men Through the Ages, tr. from theItalian by Dorothy C. Fisher (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1930), pp. 191-2. In part,this thesis was also sharedby Gentile. For Tilgher's statement and criticism of Gentile'sviews, see pp. 165 ff.

3 Ibid., pp. 191-2.

4Ibid., pp. 194-9. This is Tilgher's own view.









the hands of a capricious ate. However, in this interpretation, ommon

usage is violated in favorof a philosophicalcredo. Work maybe pursued

for trivial ends, as in producingluxuries,and under such degradingcir-cumstances hat it stunts the growth of man's uniquelyhuman capacities.Under certain conditionsplay may be more fulfilling than work, so that

work becomesvalued as a means to play instead of conversely. Labor

itself is a species of work exercisedunder the pressureof survival and

chosen under duress. Although some modes of work, especially pro-fessional, are intrinsicallyrewardingand worthy of pursuit without re-

muneration,the need to survive compels most individuals to labor for

a living.

II

BEARING IN MIND the ordinaryuse of theseterms,is it correct o say, then,that laborhas dignity? It would seem that labor lacks intrinsicdignity,since it commonly mpliesdisagreeable fforts,whetherphysicalor mental;work that is hard,wearisomeor grievous;toil that is painful or fatiguing;or drudgerythat is dull, irksome and distasteful. Labor is degrading,since it is more suitableto animalsthan to men and interfereswith the

fulfillment of uniquely human potentialities.5 Since few persons wholabor for a livelihood would do so if they could do otherwise, laborers

cannot as such be regardedas free agents-at least, not in the sense in

which professionalworkersare free in finding fulfillment in their jobs.6Unlike liberalactivity,which is also work whether or not it servesa pre-eminentlyeconomicpurpose,labor is so intrinsically rksome that even a

high degree of competenceis insufficient o induce persons to undergoit without outside remuneration.7 The only kind of work that is in-

trinsicallyfulfilling or has intrinsic dignity is of a liberal nature, suchas the profession and practiceof the liberal arts. Although the term"liberal"signifies an activitythat is befittinga free man-in the ancientsense of someone who is neither serf nor slave-a liberal educationcon-tinues to elude the modernwage-earnerwho, being propertyless, s com-

pelled to labor for a living.8

5 Louis 0. Kelso and MortimerJ. Adler, The CapitalistManifesto (New York: Ran-dom House, 1958), pp. 21-3. See especially the sections entitled "Labor, Leisure andFreedom"and "The Form and Characterof Human Work."

6Ibid., pp. 14-6, 21-9.7Ibid., pp. 13-29. A fundamental differencebetween Kelso's,Adler's and my own

treatment of the relations between labor, liberal activity and play is my rejection andtheir acceptanceof the Aristotelianthesis that play is inferior in dignity to all kinds ofwork, including labor (ibid., pp. 17-20).

8 Ibid., pp. 14-6, 21-6.

361









There is a distinctionof importancebetweenmanualactivityand labor.

Although the illiberal characterof labor has sometimesbeen attributed

to the former, there is a free play of energy in working with the handsthatresults n a feeling of expansivenessand exaltation-a sense of vitalityor of the body being alive that cannot possibly be derived from readingand writing.9 Far from being purely brutish, manual activity requires

intelligence and deliberation,occasionallybringing into operation more

of the total man than so-called "intellectualwork."10 Many intellectual

occupationsare more mechanicalin their discipline than the work re-

quired of farmers and independent artisans. In part, the dignity of

manual work stems from the knowledge that it is socially necessarytohuman culture." From the simple observationthat all men must have

food, clothing and shelter before they can dedicate themselves to science,literatureand art, there is a sense of importance n providing for human

needs. Paintingand sculptingare manualemploymentsof intrinsicvalue

to the artist,so that it is not the manual character f work that is intrin-

sically menial, but the social relations of coercion that have succeeded

in transformingmanual workers nto wage-laborers nd beastsof burden.

To be sure,manualoccupations

are far lesscapable

than so-called intellec-

tual ones of fulfilling man's uniquely human potentialities;yet it is not

the manual or intellectual characterof employments that determines

which have dignity and which do not.

Labortends to be mechanicalin quality, requiring repetitive, routine

operationsthat call for little or no independent judgment or creative

intelligence from the laborer. It is the mechanical characterof labor,not its bodily exertion or manual activity, that makes it stultifying, mo-

notonousand dull. Prolongedor difficultrepetitionof the same physical

motions results in the lowest of all forms of labor-drudgery. Drudgelabor stunts intellectualand moral growth not only on the job, but also

off. Just as monotonyin one sphereof life leads to confusion, disorder

and distraction n another, so satisfactionin work conduces to the in-

telligentuse of leisure. Humandignityresidesprimarily n thoseactivities

that are characteristically r uniquely human, hence distinct from the

operations of machines modeled upon inanimate processes. Althoughlaboris degradingalso becauseof its urgency-the brute need to struggle

for subsistenceunder the pressureof biological necessity-the reductionof activity o a series of mechanicaloperations s generallymorefrustrating

9 Burns, op. cnt.,p. 3 5.10Ibid., p. 38.

Ibid., p. 36.









to the laborer han his compulsion o laborin orderto perpetuatehimself.

Indeed, the extent of human degradationexceeds that of other creatures,

since domesticatedanimalsare seldom reducedto the statusof machines,and even then the extent of their degradation s less than that of human

laborers,whose degree of frustrationis proportionalto their compara-

tively greaterpowersof fulfillment.

Historically, he indignityof labor is attributableess to man'sbondageto naturethanto man'sinhumanity o man. In the past,civilized societies

functionedas coercive and semi-coerciveStates that exempted from labor

a chosen few at the expenseof the massesof humanitycondemned o labor

on their behalf. Laborershave served as living tools for their mastersand employersnot only in the role of slaves and serfs, but also as wage-earners debarredfrom the land and, consequently,without independentmeans of sustenance. Unlike the publiclyor privatelyowned slave and

the serfs forciblytied to the manor,the free laborerwas able to hire him-

self out and to choose his own master. Yet the historicaldevelopmentof

the labor process only partly transformed he conditions of the laborer.As a result of hire, his capacity o labor and not only its fruits passedinto

another's ontrol;hence he continued o be alienated rom the fount as wellas the streamof the laborprocess.12 The more he put into his products,the less he had left for himself; the more energy expended in labor, the

poorerhe became as a person. Since laborwas not meant to be self-ful-

fillingbut to provideself-fulfillmentfor others,he was alienatedboth fromhis rationalnatureas a humanbeing and from all those who used him-the superiorbeings to whom his labor and producebelonged and forwhom his torment of labor was transformed nto their joy and delight.13The labor process destroyedthe spirit of the laborerand, by making a

mockeryof his aspirations,diminishedhis statureas a humanbeing. In-stead of loving and affirming he world, he learnedto resent natureand

society. In a word, he becamecynical,dissatisfiedwith life, as representedby the labor process, a strangerto the liberal activity that continuallyeluded him.14 So far-reachingwere the consequencesof the indignitiessufferedby the victims of the labor process that many lost respect forhuman dignity altogether, including their own capacityfor indignation.

12 Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts, tr. M. Milligan (Moscow:ForeignLanguagesPublishingHouse, n.d.), pp. 69-74.

13 Ibid., pp. 74-80.14On cynicism as a philosophyendemicto the laborprocess,seemy essays:"Philosoph-

ical Cynicism and Criminal Philosophy,"Archives of Criminal Psychodynamics (Spring,1959); "ReligiousCynicism," Encounter (Autumn, 1960); and "Cynicism in the LaborMovement,"Am. J.Econ. and Social., 21 (January, 1962).

363









III

To MANY, the first industrial revolution heralded the beginning of the

end for labor under this old dispensation. Yet it is only recently,withthe advent of atomic power and automation,that the promise of a new

order for labor has ceased to be a dream and acquiredthe semblance

of reality. Concurrently,here has been an increasing endencyin the di-

rection of the Welfare State, as societies have become more democratic

and more responsiveto the needs and claims of organized labor. For

the first time in history, labor governmentsemerged capableof passing

legislationfavorable o laboron a grandscale. Never beforehave laborers

enjoyed such a high standard of living with the prospectof regular in-creases, greater opportunitiesfor leisure, vacationswith pay, social se-

curityand a guaranteedannual wage. Prophetsof the new order have

proclaimed he end of economicsas the Dismal Science,alongwith poverty,

inequality and insecurity.15 To some observers, the only serious labor

problemof our times is the tendencyof powerful trade unions to demand

and obtain wage increasesin excess of labor productivity,therebycon-

tributingto inflation.16 On the one hand, countervailingpower has re-

sulted in thesharing

ofpower

between differentclasses, including

labor.

On the otherhand,problemsof laborlegislationhave becomeeclipsedby

problems of international relations, whose solutions lie beyond the

Welfare State.l7 In this light, a majorproblemof a contemporary hilos-

ophy of labor is to appraisethese recent developmentsin their bearing

upon the dignity of labor and to reassess the conventionalwisdom con-

cerningthe laborprocess.A consensus about the long-run effects of automationupon the con-

ditions of labor, with and without governmentinterferencein business,is comparativelyslight. Automation tends to render obsolete physical

drudgery,at least under conditions of mass productionwhere it increas-

ingly substitutes nervous for physical fatigue. It also tends to reduce

the relative and, possibly, the absolutenumberof productivelaborers-

the blue-collarcontingentof the laboring class. Whether or not it will

eventuallymeanthe continuousoperationof automatedofficesandfactories

over 24 hours of a seven-dayweek, it will rendersuperfluousarge num-

bers of clericaland industriallaborers,even with shorterhours of work.

s5John K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1958), pp.27 f., 77-138.

16 Jules Abels, The WelfareState (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce,1951), pp. 34,

58, 77 f.17Gunnar Myrdal, Beyond the Welfare State (New Haven: Yale University Press,

1960), pp. 45 f., 62 f., 67 f., 141-76.









Piece ratesand hourlyrateswill tend to becomeobsoleteas the individual

laborerceasesto exercisecontrolover a given outputand his value comes

to be measured n terms of teamwork. Since there is abundantevidenceto show that real wages vary directlywith the value of per-capitacapitalentrustedto individuallaborers,as well as with their rateof productivity,there will be a tendencyfor laborersworkingunderautomation o improvetheir standardof living.18 As the value of the machineryhandledby each

laborerincreases,there will also be a tendencyto improvework morale,which should mean not only higher pay but also increasedsecurityand

improvedconditionsof work. Althoughautomation ends to isolatelabor-

ers by eliminating opportunitiesfor direct communication,it increasesthe psychologicalbonds between labor and managementas a resultof the

smaller number of laborersand increased teamwork with management

participation. Since all membersof a teammay be necessary o keep the

wheels of industryturning, there may have to be emergencycrews ever

ready to replace workerson sick leave, absenteeworkers,uncooperativeworkers, etc. Consequently,even though automationshould contribute

substantially o the numbersof unemployed, he extent of unemploymentshould

be offset somewhatby the requirements f increasingcooperationand the need for a reservecorps of laborers n each industry.Primafacie, the conditionsof laborunder automationwould seem to in-

dicatea turn for the better. Yet, despitesome agreementaboutparticulartendencies, there are differing interpretations f the social and politicaleffects of automationupon labor as a whole. From the standpoint of

labor, the most optimisticview-I shall call it the futurist thesis-positsa radicalbreak with past tendencies, n effecta qualitativetransformationof labor and a

leap

into the future. Itsstrongestsupporters

are drawnfrom the ranksof Marxiansocialists,"new deal" technocrats,and not afew conservatives earful of a forthcoming"revolt of the masses." Futur-ists argue that the tendencyof automation s to upgradethe bulk of thelabor force, thereby annulling the age-old divorce between manual andintellectual labor.19 Its ultimate tendencyis to replace all routine and

18Yale Brozen, "Automation'sImpact on Capital and Labor Markets," Automationand Society, ed. by Howard B. Jacobsonand JosephS. Roucek (New York: PhilosophicalLibrary, 1959), p. 291.

19

GeorgeB. Baldwin and

GeorgeP.

Shultz,"Automation: A New

Dimension to OldProblems,"Proceedingsof the Seventh Annual Meeting (Detroit: Industrial RelationsRe-searchAssociation, 1954), pp. 121-2; CharlesR. Walker,Toward the Automatic Factory(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957), pp. 195-8; John Diebold, Automation: ItsImpact on Businessand Labor (Washington,D. C.: National PlanningAssociation, 1959),pp. 35 f.; SamuelLilley, Automation and Social Progress (New York: International Pub-

lishers, 1957), pp. 90-6, 104 f.

365









repetitive operations by machinery,to replace unskilled jobs by those

that requireconstructivethoughtas well as manualdexterity,by inspection

and maintenancestaffs, etc.20 Although the dominanttendencyof mass-

production industries for the past century has been the steady replace-ment of skilled workersby unskilled and semi-skilled-before 1750 most

workers were skilled in variousdegrees-automation representsa return

to the former state, albeit on a higher level.21 One resultof this general

upgrading is to increase the standardof living and conditions of work

for most laborers. The promiseof automation,writes one of its leading

prophets, is "the shorterwork week, higher wages, and better working

conditions."22 Since the upgradingof the labor force implies the in-creasingexpensivenessor cost of producingspecial skills, there will also

be a tendencyto pay laborershigher wages in proportionto their greatervalue to society. In the end, the result should be an increasingshare

of labor in distribution,which futurists believe has been the general

tendencyover the past quarter entury.23Somewhatless optimisticis the modernistview, a current of thought

skepticalof the power of moderntechnologyto alter radicallythe condi-

tions of labor-although modernists affirm that the lot of most laborersshould steadilybut slowly improvewith increasingproductivity. Amongits chief supportersare liberalprotagonistsof the Welfare State,includingnon-Marxian and evolutionarysocialists. Modernistsargue that current

concepts of "upgrading"in job evaluation are highly ambiguous and

that a detailed breakdownof jobs in automated ndustriesindicates that

there has been little over-all change in the job mix.24 A considerable

amount of evidencehas been marshaledshowing a constancy n the ratio

of skilled to unskilledlaborwithin automated

plants.

Instead of increas-

ing the demand for more complexskills, automation eads to an increase

in the numberand varietyof skills requiredby individualworkers,skills

demandinga minimum of training,so that the over-all result is not an

upgrading of the labor force. There is reason to believe that full-scale

automation,as distinctfrom partialautomation,actuallymeans that skill,

20Walker, loc. cit.; Lilley, loc. cit.

21Lilley, op. cit., p. 105.22 Diebold, op. cit., p. 34.23

JosephA.

Schumpeter,Capitalism,Socialism,and

Democracy,3rd ed.

(NewYork:

Harper & Brothers, 1950), pp. 381-4; Dudley Seers,The Levellingof Incomessince 1938

(Oxford: BasilBlackwell, 1951), p. 55; Galbraith,op. cit., pp. 85 f.24JamesR. Bright, Automationand Management (Boston:HarvardUniversity, 1958),

pp. 176 f., 205 f.; Jiri Nehnevajsaand Albert Frances,"Automationand Social Stratifica-

tion," Automationand Society, op. cit., pp. 401 f.








Towards Philosophyf Labor

effortandresponsibilityequirementsecrease.25Yet evidencendicatesthatthecorrespondingewards ave ended o increase.26Although uto-

matedrolesare less demanding,heyenjoyhigherprestigepartlybecauseworker urnover onstitutes muchgraverproblem han it does undermechanized onditions.27Generally peaking,the Welfare State hascontributedo raising aborstandards, lthoughmost modernists greethatit has not appreciablyltered he statusof laborrelative o that ofothernon-laboringlasses. Thus there s a noteworthyendencyor therelativehares f capital nd laborn thegrossnationalproducto remainconstant.28Althoughmodernistspredict hat labor's hareshouldevent-

ually increase t the expenseof capital, hey do not sharethe futuristexpectationhatunskilledaborwillbeeventuallybolished nder henew

dispensation.A decidedlyomber hesis s representedy the traditionalistiew that

automationends to accentuatepast tendenciesnsteadof counteractingthem. This view, that the futureis continuouswith the past insteadof anevolutionaryynthesisf old andnewor a radical reakwithtradi-

tion, findssupportamongsociological essimistsor whomtotalitarian

and bureaucraticendenciesrepresenthe wave of the future-a motleygroupincludingibertarians,s well as somepoliticalconservativesnddisillusioneddealists. Traditionalistsrgue hatthetendency f automa-tionto upgradeobs s limited o a smallminority f skilledworkers,ndthat ts dominantendencys to downgradehe laboring lass.29Insteadof raising he levelof mostlaborers o the statusof skilledmaintenance

workers,nspectors,ndtechnicians,utomationendsto widenthe gapbetween killedmanualworkers ndengineers,ndbetweenunskilled ndskilled manual aborers.30One effectof

computers,or

example,s

toliberate ngineersromthe role of livecalculators,o transformhem ntoresearchworkers nddesigners,hereby aising heirintellectualevel of

performance.In contrast,he bulk of the laborforce becomessuper-25Nehnevajsaand Frances, oc. cit.26Ibid., p. 405; Bright, op. cit., pp. 204-9.27 Nehnevajsaand Frances,op. cit., pp. 405-6.28Colin Clark, National Income and Outlay (London: Macmillan, 1937), p. 94;

Douglas Jay, The Socialist Case (London: Faber and Faber, 1937), pp. 31-3, 44; JoanRobinson, An Essayon MarxianEconomics (London: Macmillan, 1949), pp. 80-1; John

Strachey,ContemporaryCapitalism(New York: RandomHouse, 1956), pp. 155-80.29 Norbert Wiener, Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal andthe Machine (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1948), pp. 37-8; FrederickPollock, Auto-mation: A Study of Its Economicand SocialConsequences, r. W. P. Hendersonand W. H.Chaloner (New York: FrederickA. Praeger, 1957), pp. 88 f.

30 Pollock, op. cit., pp. 82 f., 90 f., 210 f.

367









numerary n so-called productiveemployments,and valueless except for

its personal services.31 A new servant class is likely to emerge, in lieu

of mass unemployment,bread and circuses-so argues Michael Youngin his combined sociological analysis and phantasy, The Rise of the

Meritocracy1870-2033, based in part upon Norbert Wiener's gloomyforecastsof the social effects of cybernetics.32Wiener had argued that

any labor that acceptsthe conditionsof competitionwith "slave labor"-

automated machineryis the contemporaryequivalent of slave labor-

accepts he conditionsof "slavelabor,"and is essentially"slavelabor,"and

that one effectof automations to devalueall categoriesof labordisplaced

by machinery, ncludingmental labor in its simplerand more routinede-cisions.33 In the Age of Automation the only occupationsremaining

open to the vast massof the laborforceare those in which automationmaybe expectedto make the least progress,viz., the field of professionaland

personal services.34 The danger in all this is that the average human

being of mediocrecapacitiesand attainments, ncluding the majorityof

laborerswith inferior intellectualendowments,will have nothing to sell

but their capacity o relieveothers of time-consumingmenial tasks outside

the home and in it.35

This argumentprovides supportfor the traditionalistview that auto-

mationsignifies for the majorityof laborersa decreasingrelativeshare in

distribution.36 Walter Reutherand JamesCarey,both leading officials n

the industrialwing of the AmericanFederationof Labor-Congress f In-

dustrialOrganizations,underlinethe tendencyfor increasedproductivityto benefitprimarily he owners and managers.37 There is also some evi

dence that the alleged constancy n the relative sharesof capitaland labor

duringthe last quartercenturywasonly apparentand basedon a confusion

of wages and salaries.38 The categoryof expenseaccountsalone conceals

31 Ibid., pp. 88 f.32Michael Young, The Rise of the Meritocracy 1870-2033 (London: Thames and

Hudson, 1958), pp. 93-9.33Wiener, loc. cit.34Pollock, op. cit., p. 90.35Young, op. cit., p. 97.36Pollock, op. cit., pp. 90-2.37The Challenge of Automation: Papers Delivered at the National Conference on

Automation (Washington,D. C.: Public AffairsPress, 1955), pp. 48, 66.38Strachey, op. cit., pp. 160-2; BarbaraWooton, The Social Foundationsof Wage

Policy (London: GeorgeAllen & Unwin, 1955), pp. 28 f.; Joseph Gillman, The FallingRate of Profit (London: Dennis Dobson, 1957), pp. 87-90. Although Gillman notes a

constancy in the rate of "net surplusvalue" after 1919, on the basis of which he supportsJoan Robinson'sthesis of constant relative shares in distribution,by implication the rateof "gross surplus value" has increased,thereby resulting in a diminishing share of the

gross national product for "productivelaborers"and also those "unproductiveworkers,"who labor in the strict senseand earn wagesinstead of salaries.








Towardsa Philosophy of Labor

a multitudeof sins. Equalizationof incomesmayserve to camouflage he

increasinggapbetween wealth and

poverty,as the differences between

grades cease to be recognizedin terms of personal income and become

acknowledged n the form of expense accountsjustifiedby the costs of

efficiency.39Moreover,even though the absolutegap between wealth and

poverty may conceivablydiminish with a strengtheningof the Welfare

State,the shareof labor shouldgraduallydiminish as a result of a relative,if not an absolute reductionin size of the labor force. One may rea-

sonably anticipatea decline in the power and influence of the labor

movement,as automation endersincreasingly uperfluousargenumbersof

productivelaborers.40 There is also reason to believe that the growing

powerof scientistsandengineers,coupledwith the ignoranceandweakness

of increasingnumbersof unskilled and semi-skilledworkers,may lead to

the eclipse of liberal and democraticby authoritarian orms of govern-ment.41

IV

Is THERE any dear-cut evidence, then, that recent tendencies warrant

the modernsecular aith in the dignityof labor? Consideringmost of the

relevantfacts, the varioustendenciesandcountertendencies,t is extremelydifficult o concurwith the optimismof the futurists and theirunqualifiedfaith in science and technology. There is much more evidence for the

modernistview, although it, too, constitutesan "exceptionalist"hesis in

relationto the past-the thesis of an evolutionary ransformationof the

laborprocess nto somethingdifferentin kind, at least for the majorityof

laborers. Traditionalistsalso believe in a gradual improvementin the

conditionsof labor,in the form of betterworkingconditionsand a higher

standardof living, but not to the point of positing either a revolutionaryor evolutionaryovercomingof the indignities of the labor process. In

affirminga basic continuityof tradition, their position is assuredlythe

safest, mostmoderateand, to all appearances,most readilydefensible one.

The burdenof "proof" rests upon the shouldersof modernistsand fu-

turists, who, owing to their radicalviews, have less evidence than hopefor somethingnew underthe sun.

Evidencefor the traditionalistview lies not only in the intrinsic char-

acterof labor, as distinctfrom work, but also in thelong-run

tendencies

that have hitherto characterizedcivilized societies. Since the dawn of

39Young, op. cit., pp. 126-7.

40Pollock, op. cit., p. 91; Young, op. cit., pp. 11 f.41Pollock, op. cit., p. 92; Young, op. cit., pp. 107 f.

369









civilization the increasing productivityof labor has enabled increasingnumbersto becomeindustriallyexempt and to enlargetheir share in dis-

tributionrelative to the class of laborers.As a result,the so-callednatural

wages of labor have gravitatedtowardsa minimum of subsistencedeter-

mined by the physiological minimumfor survivaland reproduction, he

economicminimumrequiredfor efficiency,and the sociologicalminimum

of decency. Although the economicand sociologicalminima have steadilyincreasedwith changes in the mode of productionand the consequentsocial life of mankind, they have not increased at the same rate as the

higher standardsenjoyed by other non-laboringclasses. This has meant

that the number of privileged individualsfreed from Adam's curse hasgrown proportionatelyarger, and the numberof laborersproportionatelysmaller. Inasmuch as labor's share in distributionrepresents an ever

dwindlingproportionof the gross productof society,the dignityof labor

has diminishedin this respect. To some extent, the naturalindignity of

laborhas been compensatedby changesin the social amenities,while the

modern liberal and democraticideology has also helped to mollify the

laborer's subjective sense of social inferiority.42 Thus even unskilled

laborersarecurrently

addressedas "mister"andeuphemistically

denoted

"gentlemen"-the first, a variation on "master,"and the second, a term

for nobility. Nonetheless, beneaththe veneer of modern etiquette and

civilitylies the harshrealityof the division of modernsocietyinto workers

who are really masters,and into laborers who are anythingbut lords of

theirown destiny.

Although in several respectsthere have been appreciablegains in the

dignityof labor,these have been counterbalancedo some extent by other

factors. As technology has advanced, the contributionof labor to the

wealthof societyhas playeda steadilydiminishingrole.43 With the pro-

gressive increase in the skills and intelligence embodied in technology,labor has becomeprogressivelyreduced to an appendageof the machine,whose real mastersare the scientists and engineerswho alone understand

its full complexities. Possessing fewer skills relative to the machinerythatit tends,laborhascomparativelyessvaluethanthe latter. Automation

42 It is interesting to comparethe differentevaluationsplaced upon labor and liberal

activity by Aristotle and Adam Smith. Thus Aristotle stressed the degradationof labor

by calling it "servile,"whereasSmith dignifiedlabor as "productive";Aristotle dignifiedliberal activity with the name of "leisure," whereas Smith referred to it, somewhat

derogatorily, as "idle" and "unproductive." See Aristotle's Politics, tr. H. Rackham

(London: W. Heinemann, 1932), III. ii. 8-9, iii. 2-3; VIII. ii. 4-6, iii. 1-2; and Adam

Smith, An Inquiryinto the Nature and Causesof the Wealthof Nations, ed. J. E. Thorold

Rogers,2 vols. (Oxford, 1869), Vol. I, Bk. II, chap. III, pp. 332-53.43 Kelsoand Adler, op. cit., pp. 36-41.








Towardsa Philosophy of Labor

increases he demand or technicaland engineeringskills, but the tasksper-formed by them are liberal rather than mechanical,despite the fact that

they are used in producingmeans of subsistence.44 Far from adding tothe dignity of labor, the increasedleisure made possible by automation

decreases he demandfor skilled labor, while increasingthe demand for

workers n the field of educationand culture. Unlike manualskills,which

cannotimprove n qualitybeyonda certainpoint, thereis no ceiling to the

developmentand increasingcomplexityof intellectualtalents. Since in-

tellectual skills become more highly valued in proportionto their com-

plexity and increasingcosts of education,the gap between all grades of

labor and intellectualskills tends to widen with improvement n the artsof civilization. The expenditureof energyin laboriousoccupationscon-

stantly diminishescomparedto the amount expended in liberal activity.In general, the dignity of laborvaries inverselynot only with the powerof technology,but alsowith the dignityof the professions.

The indignityof labor is associatedwith economicdependenceupon the

more or less arbitrarywill of a master. Despite the growth of trade

unions and legislation designed to protect the laborer against extreme

abusesbyemployers,

aborerscontinueto bedegraded

to a statuscompa-rable to that of childrenand adolescents. In contrast,the man of prop-

erty is his own masterand, to some extent, so is the collegian or profes-sional man, whose knowledge of a particular ield makes him eminentlysuited to commandthe laborof others. Having greatervalue to societythan the ordinarylaborer, the professional worker is less dispensable,hence more economicallysecure. By commandinga salary instead of a

wage, he is guaranteedemploymentover a longer time interval than the

manual aborer. Unlike the latter,he is not compelledby economic neces-

sity to take the first job that offers itself, but is able to hold out and tochoose one that is more congenialto his wishes. A professionalethic sets

limits to the arbitrarydemandsof employers,whereasthe laborer s avail-

able for almostanykind of work and readyto producealmostanythingto

securea living wage. Althoughhe is currently pareda realistic udgmentof his actual degradation, t is partly owing to ideologies of the labor

process indispensableto preserving his morale. Historically, there are

manyreasonsfor the tragicomic ncongruityof the laborer'sconvictionof

44All subsistencework is illiberal, according to Kelso and Adler, but not necessarilymechanical, viz., subsistence work that is creative in quality (ibid., pp. 37-8). I preferto identify liberal with creative activity, in accordancewith modern instead of classicalusage.

371









his own dignity, when his objectivefunction in societyis to ministeruni-

laterally o otherpeople'sneedsand desires.45

The foregoing discussionof the meaningand dignityof humanlabor is

only a sampleof the kinds of problemsposed by a philosophyof labor.

Recent work in this area considerssuch vital philosophicalquestions as:

What are the paradoxesor antinomiesof labor? Are these paradoxesa

necessarypartof the laborprocess? What is the role of labor in human

life? What are the stages in a philosophicalhistory of labor?46 Since

these are not questionsof concernto sociologists,economistsor other stu-

dents of the social sciences,it is the philosopher'stask to discuss them--

if theyareworthconsideringat all. Until recently,philosophersneglectedto considerquestionsof this kind, with the result that philosophy itself

came under attackfor failing to minister to the intellectualproblems,as

well as personalneeds of the overburdenedmajorityof the human race.

In reaction Marxismwent to the opposite extreme of making labor the

starting point and primary subject matter or center of philosophical

thought.4 There remains,then, the problemof developinga philosophyof labor that will confront man with a many-sided mage of the labor

process,but thatwill not reduce

philosophyprimarilyo an instrumentof

labor theory. To succeed in this task, one should avoid exaggeratedclaimson behalf of the value of labor-the subjectof the presentessay--and the no less immoderate laimsof philosophydissociated rom the vital

problemsof humansubsistence.

Universityof Missouri

45 Tilgher, op. cit., pp. 47 f., 72 f.46

Remy C. Kwant, Philosophy of Labor, Duquesne Studies: Philosophical Series No.10 (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University, 1960), pp. 3 ff., 25-6, 29 ff., 84-91. Sec myreview of this book in The Modern Schoolman, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 3, 1961. For the

fundamentalthemesof a theology of labor, which fulfills the parallel function of makingtheology relevant to the labor processand the labor movement, see my review of LucienDaloz' Le Travail selon Saint Jean Chrysostome (Paris: P. Lethielleux, 1959), in thesamevolume.

47 Ibid., pp. 59-60, 85-7.

Hodges - Towards a Philosophy of Labor

Documents