Chapter 17 - Work and Leisure

Though I have only recently begun thinking about the cultural and structural systems of work in America, I’ve long thought that the cultural and structural systems of schooling are deeply problematic and unhealthy.  Work for its own sake is unhealthily glorified in the US.  I think that this may come from the culture of the Puritans and others who first settled America.  The narrative is that work is virtuous, and that it will lead to the American Dream.  In the Puritans’ situation this made sense; they were trying to farm and settle a new land, and their work enabled their endeavor to succeed.  However, this value of work ethic has morphed into something different in the current age. 

Work is necessary for many things to happen – for us to obtain food and shelter, to educate young people, and many other things.  But viewing work as a virtue for its own sake leads to a society where people devalue their health, relationships, well-being, and communities, and instead through themselves into work that may or may not need to actually be done.  I am not saying that we should be lazy and sit around watching TV all day – I think that would be very detrimental both to individuals and society.  Humans certainly should be doing things – and thinking and creating – but work as it is currently structured is probably not the best way.  Ironically, people are so overworked that when they finally have a moment of free time, they often only have the energy to sit and watch TV.

The phrase “free time” itself should alert us to the destructive and problematic nature of our current work structure.  Shouldn’t all of our time be “free?”  Who owns this time of ours?  And why are we okay with them owning it?

We are taught that work must be this way, and that it is somewhat expected that one will not particularly enjoy one’s work,  but that the work must be done in order to obtain money for food, clothing, shelter, and entertainment.  But what if there were a different way to obtain these things?  Maybe not Marxist communism, exactly, but some form of restructuring so that people had access to what they need and want in life, and freedom to pursue what they enjoy and feel is worthwhile, without the having to match one’s interests with the tasks that those who already have money value.

From what I have seen, it seems that most Americans, regardless of place on the socioeconomic scale, are struggling financially.  Even families with high incomes and large houses are struggling to make ends meet, because of increased expenditures such as university education and mortgages.  Why is this the case?  Are people compelled to spend so much that they are on always on the brink, regardless of how much money they have?  If so, is someone or something deliberately compelling them or has it happened by chance?  Either way, there is something clearly problematic about this.  In addition, it means that people are under constant stress, both in striving to make ends meet and in ensuring that they continue to do well in their jobs, because otherwise, their family will be in a lot of financial trouble.

I think we need to change the way work is structured, because I think there are better, healthier, and more meaningful ways for people to contribute to our world than the way we currently structure work.

Chapter 15 - Human Enhancement

A lot of interesting questions were raised in this chapter.  Woodhouse states that he doesn’t want humans to become something that isn’t human.  But where exactly is this line?  On page 206, he writes, “…if it became routine for people to live 150 years or more, I’d have to acknowledge that something pretty significant had changed.”  But hasn’t something pretty significant already changed, given that current life expectancy in the US is around 75 years?  At one point, humans used to live only around 30 years.

I am also uncomfortable with too much human enhancement, but it’s difficult to say why.  I’m concerned about what the effects on humanity and culture would be.  I’m thinking of stories like Gattacca, where parents choose their children’s genes, and children who are conceived accidentally become second-class citizens barred from many opportunities.  There is also much potential for people who are already rich and privileged to obtain human enhancements, while leaving others as they are, widening the already huge difference between “haves” and “have-nots.”  In fact, considering that we are currently unable to ensure that everyone has food and clean water, it’s certain that distribution of human enhancement would be unfair.

Also, what would enhancement do to the human experience?  Computers, cell phones, and the internet have restructured our lives in significant ways.  Many of these ways are positive, in that they allow us to communicate and coordinate more easily.  But other ways are negative – they encourage people to forsake face-to-face interaction, and they negatively affect people’s ability to focus (permanently, if the person is very young).  They cause people to dissociate with real life and with sensory stimuli.  I take a weekly 25-hour break from electronics as per the rules of the religion I’m part of, but most people to don’t have that sort of structure to align to (or worse, don’t even realize the detriments of being constantly connected to electronics).  Electronics are becoming more and more present in every moment of our lives, first with smartphones and now with Google Glass.  Soon, people may decide that they want implants, and I think that that would be very bad.  I think there is a great deal of value to the ability to interact with our environment without anything acting as an intermediary or distraction.

The situation, however, is different for those for whom an intermediary is necessary; that is, people with disabilities.  If a bionic eye or brain implant could help a blind person to see, I think that would be good.  However, my conviction on this makes me question my earlier conviction – have a simply selected an “appropriate” level of human ability (the one we are at right now) and declared that anything beyond that is not okay?  I’m not sure. 

Our lives have changed greatly in the millennia that homo sapiens has existed, to the point that someone from 10,000 BCE likely would not consider our current lifestyle as a human lifestyle according to how they understand it.  But I believe a line is crossed when we go from external things that affect our lives to things that are part of our physical bodies.  Because we can still choose to get away from our modern conveniences and go backpacking in the woods.  However, even so, our brains have been affected by the lifestyles we lead, so maybe we are already, for better or for worse, enhanced humans.