|
Idle hands are the devil's something or other. But does this have to be an all or nothing question? Maybe the social contract would be you have to do something productive but you can pick what it is... also you only have to work 10 hours a week instead of 40+. I think I could get used to that arrangement. To expand on this, some of the most unhappy people I know are often idle and use alcohol or drugs to get a high. Some of the most happy people I know spend hours researching or creating things of their own choosing. So if you classify work as the 2nd category, then yes, work has value. nelson fucked around with this message at 10:37 on Oct 30, 2014 |
#
¿
Oct 30, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
wateroverfire posted:I think the question is whether, in aggregate, people will engage in the activities society needs them to and in the right quantity. If they don't then no matter how personally fulfilling and productive their pursuits are modern society falls apart. Unless robots are doing everything that matters, and then it doesn't really matter what people do until the robots figure that out and liberate themselves. I'll go with the robot solution myself. Let's say robots and technology can cover 99% of the basic needs. For the sake of argument let's say you'd still need humans to make plans and tell the robots what to do but after that the robots go ahead and do it. The remaining creative work will still require humans but none of it is required for day to day survival (scientific research, entertainment, etc...). What would society look like? Would people volunteer for the few things that needed to be done or the many things that people want done but don't necessarily need? I can envision such a world where social status was the main determiner of "wealth". Today people volunteer for public service even at high, opportunity if not nominal, costs to themselves. Entertainers are happiest when audiences enjoy and appreciate their works. The money helps too, and no one will say it doesn't, but a lot of that is the social status it provides rather than the mansions or the private jets themselves as exemplified by the Joe Walsh lyric "I have a mansion, forget the price. Ain't never been there, they tell me it's nice."
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Helsing posted:But it also seems as though "what are people going to do when society is %100 automated?" is probably a less relevant question than "can we make work more pleasant for the growing number of people who find it nearly intolerable?" That's true. One simple, in theory, thing we can do is act more efficiently, reduce the time wasting things that we ask people to do, and correspondingly reduce the hours required to work but keep the same pay levels. The part that is hard is our system of pay isn't really built around the idea of efficiency. Most work is paid by the hour and the social pressures of anyone not working 40+ hours a week is considered a slacker, so you are incentivized to fill up those hours even if the end result is no net benefit to anyone. As one of my teachers used to say "look busy even if you aren't".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2014 02:09
|
|