Being used a source of labor is a harm for the individual

schopenhauer1

De facto, if we are not in a Robinson Crusoe economy, we must rely on the economic system of a particular society (usually the one we are born into). It is practically a truism that an economy needs individuals to perform tasks of labor to make the goods and services to supply demand.

I have two simple ethical propositions that I derive from this fact:

1) By being born into a society that requires one's labor, one is de facto, being used by that society.

2) Doing any work that one would not ultimately do from original preferences (meaning, before buying into slogans, having to buy into some sort of Stoic ideology, lowered expectations, changed expectations, etc.) is a harm to an individual.

Of course my conclusion from this is that having new people is always a harm to that individual due to the de facto need for his/her labor.

tim wood

Life is harmful to every individual: it kills him, or her, me and you. We're creatures of nature.To live requires things. We barter our selves for those things, that we might live and enjoy, if we can, what we can of life. That's the contract, And you're bound by it will-you or nil-you. I suspect that the problem here is really that some people are better at getting the things than others. Maybe too much better.

schopenhauer1

Life is harmful to every individual: it kills him, or her, me and you. — tim wood

Correct

We're creatures of nature.To live requires things. — tim wood

Correct

We barter our selves for those things, that we might live and enjoy, if we can, what we can of life. That's the contract, And you're bound by it will-you or nil-you. — tim wood

Well, this is to deny that I mentioned that DE FACTO we must rely on the economic system, or to arbitrarily repeat the point?

I suspect that the problem here is really that some people are better at getting the things than others. Maybe too much better. — tim wood

This would be beside the point. Capacity in the system doesn't matter. 1) Individuals are being used (even if de facto, they have to use the system..I didn't deny the symbiosis), 2) Doing any work that one would not do from original preferences is still a harm to the individual.

Andrew4Handel

I think work is problematic for many reasons.

The reason you have to work is not through choice (even if that work is just cleaning your teeth or walking around).
You did not sign a contract to agree to embark on life and the effort involved.

The next big problem is the inequality and exploitation of others created by the division of labor. By being alive and being a consumer you rely on a complex system of exploitation with winners and losers and unsatisfactory jobs.

And finally you are forced into the company of other people and as we all know, hell is other people.

Terrapin Station

2) Doing any work that one would not ultimately do from original preferences (meaning, before buying into slogans, having to buy into some sort of Stoic ideology, lowered expectations, changed expectations, etc.) is a harm to an individual. — schopenhauer1

Could you explain how you're figuring that it's a harm?

schopenhauer1

Actually @Andrew4Handel had some good explanations but the one's I listed were:

1) By being born into a society that requires one's labor, one is de facto, being used by that society.

2) Doing any work that one would not ultimately do from original preferences (meaning, before buying into slogans, having to buy into some sort of Stoic ideology, lowered expectations, changed expectations, etc.) is a harm to an individual. — schopenhauer1

Being used as a source of labor by society and if it is work an individual would not do from original preferences, it is not following individual's ideal preference. I see lowered preference satisfaction for how one lives much of the day is a problem.

Being used a source of labor is a harm for the individual

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions