Why Is Work Different From Labor  Book Review

PAGES
2
WORDS
728
Cite

¶ … Human Condition What Caught My Attention

Hannah Arendt is a German philosopher who has refused to call herself a philosopher, but her work has been praised as being influential and brilliant (though controversial) in its originality and in its bold departure from what other philosophers have written about the human condition. What I found most compelling, and even appalling, is the way in which Arendt differentiates between "labor" and "work"; those are words that are most often used interchangeably but for Arendt, they are worlds apart in their true meaning.

Work vs. Labor -- a rather radical position by Arendt

In The Human Condition Arendt describes work and labor as two vitally different things. The laborer of today is similar to the slaves of ancient Greece, she explains. In fact those individuals whose whole lives totally revolve around labor (perhaps an example would be the farm laborers who toil in fields all day) brings them closest to the animal world of any other humans. In other words, to be trapped in a life of labor is to be almost animal (barely human). Basically she is saying, to be a laborer is merely surviving, not really living per se.

This didn't shock...

...

Perhaps many laborers also have hope for a better life, so they aren't animals; they are humans, people, with thoughts and voices.
Arendt suggests that part of the reason laborers are close to becoming animals is that their labor produces "necessities" for the rest of society. This would fit well when turning one's attention to the farm laborers; because what they produce (food) is an absolute necessity for the rest of society. Hence, her assertion that today's laborers are similar to the slaves of the Hellenic society. In fact Arendt (p. 83) writes that ancient peoples justified having slaves "…because of the slavish nature of all occupations that served the needs for the maintenance of life." And so the institution of slavery was defended because "…to labor meant to be enslaved by necessity… [and] since men were dominated by the necessities of life, they could win their freedom only through the domination of those whom they subjected to…

Sources Used in Documents:

Works Cited

Arendt, H. (2013). The Human Condition: Second Edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

National Geographic. (2010). Deforestation and Desertification / Forest Holocaust. Retrieved April 10, 2015, from http://www.nationalgeographic.com.


Cite this Document:

"Why Is Work Different From Labor " (2015, April 10) Retrieved April 20, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/why-is-work-different-from-labor-2150611

"Why Is Work Different From Labor " 10 April 2015. Web.20 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/why-is-work-different-from-labor-2150611>

"Why Is Work Different From Labor ", 10 April 2015, Accessed.20 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/why-is-work-different-from-labor-2150611

Related Documents

However, as has been stated, teams are not put together solely on the basis of interpersonal compatibility but for the optimal configuration of skill sets. It happens that individuals do not get along; a manager can help alleviate tensions with good communications skills. In the case of self-managed teams, however, the role of peacemaker or taskmaster is much less clearly defined. Individuals may or may not take it upon

Labor Unions These are organizations with membership drawn from the labor force of a particular economy and charged with the responsibility of representing the interests of its members in labor management issues within the work environment. Labor unions can also be specific thereby representing workers employed in various in specific trades and occupations such as communications workers for instance journalists, health care professionals including nurses and doctors, stage and theatrical employees

Labor Unions in America: A response to Hard Work by Rick Fantasia and Kim Voss. According to the authors, why have labor unions struggled in the U.S. How does their explanation resonate with major contemporary perspectives in the field of social movements? What do the authors have to say in regard to the possibilities and limits of labor union revitalization in the U.S. How does their view resonate with the major

From this perspective, right-to-work laws are passed in states in which public opinion is anti- union and the labor movement is politically ineffective; in such states, employees are less attracted to unions, and it is this public opinion climate, rather than the legislation itself, that harms union growth (Abraham & Voost 2000). The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation; Bureau of National Affairs (2002), reports that New Jersey does

Labor and Union Studies in Washington and Oregon States The United States labor movement has its roots in the complex trappings of the industrial revolution. Laborers were just starting to come to the United States from foreign countries because they had learned that there were many jobs available for even the most unskilled worker. People were also moving from rural areas in America to the cities in an attempt ti have

It would be difficult as a women to try and understand exactly what these women had to live through (in the name of commerce and production), but Morgan is sensitive while making her points, which has to be admired. Of particular interest in this book is the whole talk of "creolization" -- a term not often heard. Essentially, Morgan discusses creolization and how this event is directly associated with reproduction.