We Shall Now Begin Ethics - Vol. 5 Ch. 22
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2018
- Messages
- 176
Group Leader
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2018
- Messages
- 1,283
@Celiohogane Next would be finding a way for robots to scrap and rebuild their own kind after wear and tear.
So the only time machines can truly be independent from humans is when they become a similar existence to humans.
So the only time machines can truly be independent from humans is when they become a similar existence to humans.
Supporter
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2018
- Messages
- 577
something to think about
Despite the message of the importance of 'labor' being explicitly mentioned in this chapter, the delivery was surprisingly weak.
It was subtly implied that because we can "get water through the turn of of a tap, get food from a convenience store, and machines taking care of cleaning and laundry". That we no longer fight to acquire our necessities, that we only struggle to acquire more luxuries. Well, we still need to produce those necessities in the first place. Even if we don't eat today, we still need to eat tomorrow if we want to continue living (yes we don't literally die by not eating for 2 days). Which means even if we don't work to produce our necessities today, we still need to produce our necessities tomorrow.
I will say that it is true that we produce enough food to feed the entire human population and that in general there are more empty buildings than homeless people and yet we still find people in poverty. This is because our necessities are bought and sold, under this logic, we need money in order to acquire our necessities, and for most people who don't have property other than their own manpower, they sell some of their time to work for others in exchange for money, and they can use that money to buy their necessities. In general, the motivation for people to work is not because they really want to or because society needs it (which it does as I hope I've shown above), but because they need the money to buy their necessities so they can continue being alive.
It's quite reductive to declare that modern people are free compared to the past. In the past, people produce their own food, and famine is actually caused by food shortages and crop failures, whereas today, famine is caused because people can't buy the already available food, and the producers would lose more money distributing the food for free than to just destroy them. Not to mention that the top 1% owns more wealth than the 99% of the human population.
The point on leisure is also oversimplistic when you consider that Amazon has been destroying non-defective luxuries that they can't sell or planned obsolescence (where products were intentionally made to have lesser lifespan so people need to buy more).
But who knows, maybe I'm just salty Takayanagi didn't quote Karl Marx on this:
"It is only possible to achieve real liberation in the real world and by employing real means, that slavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. ‘Liberation’ is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse.”
— Karl Marx, “The German Ideology”
"But the putting of labour-power into action – i.e., the work – is the active expression of the labourer's own life. And this life activity he sells to another person in order to secure the necessary means of life. His life-activity, therefore, is but a means of securing his own existence. He works that he may keep alive. He does not count the labour itself as a part of his life; it is rather a sacrifice of his life. It is a commodity that he has auctioned off to another. The product of his activity, therefore, is not the aim of his activity. What he produces for himself is not the silk that he weaves, not the gold that he draws up the mining shaft, not the palace that he builds. What he produces for himself is wages; and the silk, the gold, and the palace are resolved for him into a certain quantity of necessaries of life, perhaps into a cotton jacket, into copper coins, and into a basement dwelling. And the labourer who for 12 hours long, weaves, spins, bores, turns, builds, shovels, breaks stone, carries hods, and so on – is this 12 hours' weaving, spinning, boring, turning, building, shovelling, stone-breaking, regarded by him as a manifestation of life, as life? Quite the contrary. Life for him begins where this activity ceases, at the table, at the tavern, in bed. The 12 hours' work, on the other hand, has no meaning for him as weaving, spinning, boring, and so on, but only as earnings, which enable him to sit down at a table, to take his seat in the tavern, and to lie down in a bed. If the silk-worm's object in spinning were to prolong its existence as caterpillar, it would be a perfect example of a wage-worker."
- Karl Marx, "Wage Labour and Capital"
"In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly – only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
- Karl Marx, "Critique of the Gotha Programme”
It was subtly implied that because we can "get water through the turn of of a tap, get food from a convenience store, and machines taking care of cleaning and laundry". That we no longer fight to acquire our necessities, that we only struggle to acquire more luxuries. Well, we still need to produce those necessities in the first place. Even if we don't eat today, we still need to eat tomorrow if we want to continue living (yes we don't literally die by not eating for 2 days). Which means even if we don't work to produce our necessities today, we still need to produce our necessities tomorrow.
I will say that it is true that we produce enough food to feed the entire human population and that in general there are more empty buildings than homeless people and yet we still find people in poverty. This is because our necessities are bought and sold, under this logic, we need money in order to acquire our necessities, and for most people who don't have property other than their own manpower, they sell some of their time to work for others in exchange for money, and they can use that money to buy their necessities. In general, the motivation for people to work is not because they really want to or because society needs it (which it does as I hope I've shown above), but because they need the money to buy their necessities so they can continue being alive.
It's quite reductive to declare that modern people are free compared to the past. In the past, people produce their own food, and famine is actually caused by food shortages and crop failures, whereas today, famine is caused because people can't buy the already available food, and the producers would lose more money distributing the food for free than to just destroy them. Not to mention that the top 1% owns more wealth than the 99% of the human population.
The point on leisure is also oversimplistic when you consider that Amazon has been destroying non-defective luxuries that they can't sell or planned obsolescence (where products were intentionally made to have lesser lifespan so people need to buy more).
But who knows, maybe I'm just salty Takayanagi didn't quote Karl Marx on this:
"It is only possible to achieve real liberation in the real world and by employing real means, that slavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. ‘Liberation’ is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse.”
— Karl Marx, “The German Ideology”
"But the putting of labour-power into action – i.e., the work – is the active expression of the labourer's own life. And this life activity he sells to another person in order to secure the necessary means of life. His life-activity, therefore, is but a means of securing his own existence. He works that he may keep alive. He does not count the labour itself as a part of his life; it is rather a sacrifice of his life. It is a commodity that he has auctioned off to another. The product of his activity, therefore, is not the aim of his activity. What he produces for himself is not the silk that he weaves, not the gold that he draws up the mining shaft, not the palace that he builds. What he produces for himself is wages; and the silk, the gold, and the palace are resolved for him into a certain quantity of necessaries of life, perhaps into a cotton jacket, into copper coins, and into a basement dwelling. And the labourer who for 12 hours long, weaves, spins, bores, turns, builds, shovels, breaks stone, carries hods, and so on – is this 12 hours' weaving, spinning, boring, turning, building, shovelling, stone-breaking, regarded by him as a manifestation of life, as life? Quite the contrary. Life for him begins where this activity ceases, at the table, at the tavern, in bed. The 12 hours' work, on the other hand, has no meaning for him as weaving, spinning, boring, and so on, but only as earnings, which enable him to sit down at a table, to take his seat in the tavern, and to lie down in a bed. If the silk-worm's object in spinning were to prolong its existence as caterpillar, it would be a perfect example of a wage-worker."
- Karl Marx, "Wage Labour and Capital"
"In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly – only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
- Karl Marx, "Critique of the Gotha Programme”
Last edited:
I'm starting to think that ethics should be compulsory, but not for teens. Looks like something a 21yo could really get into it and give good use to that kind of teachings.
That is also E T H I C S
Looks like most people won't find the joy of labor, I think it's an important issue to address when discussing society.
This part got me emotional, no wonder it might have made you salty when it wasn't mentioned.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2023
- Messages
- 9,820
Plot twist. His wife AND teacher died. He never smiles.
Similar threads
