|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jens 'n' Frens
Idle thoughts of a relatively libertarian Republican in Cambridge, MA, and whomever he invites. Mostly political.
"A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures."
-- Daniel Webster
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, November 19, 2002 :::
Sometime in the not too distant past I read (in the Landes book to which I've refered previously) the assertion that, from around Martin Luther to the age of revolution, the Catholic church opposed gambling because one might lose, while the Protestants opposed gambling because one might win. This latter would mitigate the need for work and dull the character. While my inner economist objects to the notion that increased productivity would be a bad thing, it seems plausible to me that work builds character, but this leaves me with the question, What is work? Is that anything that I don't enjoy for itself, but only for longer-term rewards? Where does this leave the advice to "Do what you love, and find someone who will pay you to do it?" (Certainly part of the answer to that is that the people who apply it as an absolute tend to find themselves disappointed. At least some small detail of what it is you like to do will typically have to be negotiable in order for someone to be willing to pay you to do it.) I think a pro-work viewpoint is a common thread among the blue-collar, anti-trade, Reagan Democrats who lament the export of manufacturing jobs, largely because they don't view white-collar work as real work, and while I sympathize with the view to which I'm imputing this lamentation, I think there's a disconnect between the premise and the conclusion; at the same time it doesn't make sense to me that an activity can be character building just because it creates wealth (even in contrast to gambling, which at best redistributes it).
::: posted by dWj at 3:29 PM
|
|
|
|
