Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35

Thread: You ARE what you DO

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aontas Sóvéideach na hÉireann
    Posts
    13,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default You ARE what you DO

    Kant's famous advice to the world on how best to live was to always treat human beings, including yourself, as an end and never a means to an end. That means never to exploit other people as a way to get money or fame or whatever, and, indeed, never to exploit yourself either. Of course, Jesus had also said: treat others as you would have others treat you. (Which is fine as long as your not a Sado-Masochist.)

    Hegel and Marx pointed out that the human individual is what he or she does. The person\subject is not inside the human being, ready made and always the same no matter what that human being does. No, the person is always in the process of being created - by his or her actions. By their labour (and labour simply means any human activity, including thinking.)

    So, is it not true that if you sell your labour as a means to an end (to get wages), that you are selling yourself, and treating yourself as a means to an end? After all, you spend most of your waking day getting ready to go to work, going to work, working, coming home from work, and then being too exhausted to do anything else after work.

    If work is to be regarded as a means to an end, i.e. wages, then the people who do that work are also a means to an end.

    And this holds for all types of human labour\activity. If we are not in the process of self actualisation in our everyday lives, then we are becoming alienated from ourselves, and becoming a pawn in someone else's game.

    And that is the simple reason why capitalism must fail as people become more and more self aware, and demand that they be treated as an end in themselves and that they treat themselves as an end in themselves - not a means to the capitalists enrichment and their own daily survival.

    Communism is the word for that form of society in which human beings treat themselves and others, in the words of Kant, as ends in themselves, and not means to an end.

    And what is that end that the person must be? What is it to treat yourself as an end and not a means to an end? Hegel points out that:

    "Mind is only what it does, and its act is to make itself the object of its own consciousness."

    This sounds complicated but really it not. In the old days a carpenter made a table. He put his heart and soul into that work, like an artist, and he made a table that was an expression of himself. When he looked at that table he could see before him a physical manifestation of his own mind. As Hegel put it; the table had become, for that moment, the mind of the carpenter physically before him as he consciously regarded and appreciated it.

    How different for the tens of millions who slave away for wages, making things that could never be regarded as an expression of themselves. What about the poor worker who makes police batons, decides to go on strike, and then has his head split by one of the very police batons he himself made. Thats what you call the alienation of labour.

    Unfortunately, in the USSR and other states who aspired to Communism, the worker was very often also alienated from his labour. His labour was not an expression of himself, but, as in the capitalist system, was turned against him. The Workers State became the end to which the worker was a means to. Clearly this was not what Marx had in mind.

    What todays Communists must do is create work practices and methods of production that put the productive forces in the hands and the minds of the workers themselves - so that our work becomes the physical manifestation of ourselves, and so that we work to see ourselves in our work. That is the great challenge which Capitalism must always shrink away in guilt from, and which Communism must happily make reality.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member Dreaded_Estate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,695
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    How are you going to put the work practices and means of production in the hands of workers and make every job interesting Cael?

    Some jobs simply aren't interesting and never will be!

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aontas Sóvéideach na hÉireann
    Posts
    13,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreaded_Estate View Post
    How are you going to put the work practices and means of production in the hands of workers and make every job interesting Cael?

    Some jobs simply aren't interesting and never will be!
    A lot of boring jobs can now be done by machine, and the rest of them could be done on some kind of rota basis. A lot of the most soul destroying jobs like stock brokers, insurance sales and estate agents would be gone anyway.

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member jcdf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,772
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    There is also the philosophy 'You DO what you ARE'

    In my mind they are a very simplistic ways of defining people and therefore have no real merit.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    Kant's famous advice to the world on how best to live was to always treat human beings, including yourself, as an end and never a means to an end. That means never to exploit other people as a way to get money or fame or whatever, and, indeed, never to exploit yourself either. Of course, Jesus had also said: treat others as you would have others treat you. (Which is fine as long as your not a Sado-Masochist.)
    The problem with this philosophy is that people including ones self are not permanent. We are all temporal, and in the eyes of some, making something that is impermanent an end in it's self is an exercise in futility. Exploiting is not always about money or fame, the 'end' it can in fact be anything real or imaginary in anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    Hegel and Marx pointed out that the human individual is what he or she does. The person\subject is not inside the human being, ready made and always the same no matter what that human being does. No, the person is always in the process of being created - by his or her actions. By their labour (and labour simply means any human activity, including thinking.)
    From a third person perspective I suppose that is true. Actions does not equate labour. Labour must be defined within a very specific measurable matrix. Actions can be anything that changes the arrangement of reality however subtly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    So, is it not true that if you sell your labour as a means to an end (to get wages), that you are selling yourself, and treating yourself as a means to an end? After all, you spend most of your waking day getting ready to go to work, going to work, working, coming home from work, and then being too exhausted to do anything else after work.

    If work is to be regarded as a means to an end, i.e. wages, then the people who do that work are also a means to an end.
    That depends on whether you consider the work an ending in it's self. I suspect most people do not. Remember people do not have to work in our modern society.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    And this holds for all types of human labour\activity. If we are not in the process of self actualisation in our everyday lives, then we are becoming alienated from ourselves, and becoming a pawn in someone else's game.

    And that is the simple reason why capitalism must fail as people become more and more self aware, and demand that they be treated as an end in themselves and that they treat themselves as an end in themselves - not a means to the capitalists enrichment and their own daily survival.
    Here is the thing about self-actualisation, a person has to it them self, no one else can do it for them. It also requires sacrifices to attain a more self-aware state, though these are not always necessarily monetary. Becoming alienated from ourselves does not always necessarily result in us becoming a pawn in someone else's game. A self-actualised person is just as likely if not more so of turned into a tool.

    You second point has more merit. When capitalism fails it will be because of people becoming more and more dispossessed and alienated from the world at large.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    Communism is the word for that form of society in which human beings treat themselves and others, in the words of Kant, as ends in themselves, and not means to an end.

    And what is that end that the person must be? What is it to treat yourself as an end and not a means to an end? Hegel points out that:

    "Mind is only what it does, and its act is to make itself the object of its own consciousness."
    Perhaps, or one of a number of religions do as well. I do not agree with Hegel.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    This sounds complicated but really it not. In the old days a carpenter made a table. He put his heart and soul into that work, like an artist, and he made a table that was an expression of himself. When he looked at that table he could see before him a physical manifestation of his own mind. As Hegel put it; the table had become, for that moment, the mind of the carpenter physically before him as he consciously regarded and appreciated it.

    How different for the tens of millions who slave away for wages, making things that could never be regarded as an expression of themselves. What about the poor worker who makes police batons, decides to go on strike, and then has his head split by one of the very police batons he himself made. Thats what you call the alienation of labour.
    Many people still behave as your carpenter today Cael. The man having his head split open by one of his own batons is what I would call fubar.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    Unfortunately, in the USSR and other states who aspired to Communism, the worker was very often also alienated from his labour. His labour was not an expression of himself, but, as in the capitalist system, was turned against him. The Workers State became the end to which the worker was a means to. Clearly this was not what Marx had in mind.

    What todays Communists must do is create work practices and methods of production that put the productive forces in the hands and the minds of the workers themselves - so that our work becomes the physical manifestation of ourselves, and so that we work to see ourselves in our work. That is the great challenge which Capitalism must always shrink away in guilt from, and which Communism must happily make reality.
    People do not require an ideological or supernatural force like communism to find greater meaning in or project our psyche into our actions.
    Many people are required to produce the things that we want and need today. Capitalism facilitates, the efficient production of these goods. Communism does not!
    Economic Left/Right: -0.50
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member Eurocitizen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Naughty Land
    Posts
    808
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cael View Post
    A lot of boring jobs can now be done by machine, and the rest of them could be done on some kind of rota basis. A lot of the most soul destroying jobs like stock brokers, insurance sales and estate agents would be gone anyway.
    Gael there is truth in what you say but will machines not take jobs from the working class ?

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,285
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    What's happening, Cael ? Two good OPs in a row !!

    I would add to what is said is that man is social, and that to see the thing in terms of the individual only, as Hegel did, is misleading.

    The first and foremost change for workers (and that includes the working "middle class") is when they as a class own the means of production - factories, mines, land etc. and get the benefits of their work, instead of handing profits over to be used against them.

    Having won control, very many things then can be done about the actual experience of working - shorter working days and weeks, instead of boom and slump through overproduction, would be a start.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9,410
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    If I was rich, I'd hire people to do all the stuff I hate - shopping for groceries, cleaning, listening to the girlfriend talking about her job etc. What's wrong with that?

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9,410
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eurocitizan View Post
    Gael there is truth in what you say but will machines not take jobs from the working class ?
    Models will be replace by Mannequins

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    41
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toughbutfair View Post
    Models will be replace by Mannequins

    When people are attempting to partake in lively discourse, why do you persist in posting rubbish ? Cop on, or I will have you reported as a troll

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Member jcdf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,772
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Models are Mannequins aren't they?
    Economic Left/Right: -0.50
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.77

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •