Is there something fundamentally wrong with a world without work?

[Fou-Lu]

The Amazon Go reveal has had myself and friends and family talking. I've been a proponent that an automated future eventually leading to a world where humans don't have to work is a good thing. Yet, everyone I have spoken to rebels at such an idea harshly. They say not working is 'unfair' (for any number of reasons) or against what humanity stands for or would just be really boring. They can only imagine a world without work being either Wall-E or Mad Max. Why are people so attached to the idea of working? Is it really a bad idea to untangle ourselves from the idea that working is the main purpose of life?

 

[Emerson]

There is no possible future where nobody has to work.

As long as somebody has to work, those somebodys will resent anyone who doesn't have to.

(This is not to even delve into the fact that work is good for most people, it is mentally not all that healthy usually for humans to have no obligations at all)

 

[Dio]

Working and bringing home cash can give you the feeling of being a self-made person, and that you are standing on your own and aren't relying on anyone or anything, someone who's managing to get by and be an urban equivalent to a mountain man who built their own house and cuts their own firewood.

It's a romantic ideal to be self-sufficient and relying on no one.

Many people never realize just how much of society, their family, and the government truly supports them and gives them the chance to feel that way, but that's not the point.

 

[wolfhowwl]

Idle hands are the devil's workshop.

 

[Foffy]

The only thing "wrong" with it is our aversion, and our aversion is based upon images, ideals, and concepts. Products of thought are in the way.

Unfortunately, people seldom examine and inquire into this. People believe work is the objective goal for man, and that lacking it in any way is somehow an existential crisis. I'm also sure the people you spoke to who are averse to this very likely have bullshitted themselves with self-worth with that they do, and that's probably the biggest fuck up human beings have going for them today: they believe life is about doing and becoming, instead of being, which one innately is.

The problems are cultural and cognitive. The power of a jobs cult is strong, but it's strength only produces deeper suffering for whom it fails for, and all of the excuses we make to assume one's own precarity.

Consider for just one moment how "work" is dualistic in society. There's canonical work, which is whatever gets you money, but non-canonical work is anything that doesn't get you money. This is perhaps the greatest paradox of the shitpit we live with, but it should also emphasize work will still exist -- you live as a human, and even breathing is work -- and that the problem is what we call canonical work is really in the scope of automation and displacement for Capitalistic reasons.

 

[RinsFury]

There is no possible future where nobody has to work.

You can't say this for sure. There is no reason why everything can't eventually be automated.

 

[Sub Boss]

Humans are shitty, work or not work we will find a way to fuck up and despise each other

 

[ZOONAMI]

You can't say this for sure. There is no reason why everything can't eventually be automated.

Who develops and maintains the tech that automates everything?

Who pays for it? Are benevolent benefactors just going to automate everything for everyone for free?

I don't think so.

 

[Emerson]

You can't say this for sure. There is no reason why everything can't eventually be automated.

Of course there is. Automated systems fail. These could theoretically be managed and repaired by more automated systems, but somewhere at the end of the line will require a human to manage this when things break down.

This is not even to speak of creative professions which cannot ever be truly replaced by a computer.

 

[lazygecko]

Challenging fundamental paradigms that have been in place for thousands of years is always extremly difficult. I think the advent of mass automation versus the slow pace of society and governments adapting their mindset and policies around the new reality will inevitably lead to a painful threshold where everyone will be forced to learn the hard way, not unlike WW1 and how nations viewed waging war.

 

[Joyful]

no, people will still do things
just things they actually want to do instead

 

[Foffy]

Of course there is. Automated systems fail. These could theoretically be managed and repaired by more automated systems, but somewhere at the end of the line will require a human to manage this when things break down.

This is not even to speak of creative professions which cannot ever be truly replaced by a computer.

If what humans do is really a product of information processing, what gives humans that vitalistic special snowflakeism that cannot eventually be replicated by technology?

I worry you are putting human beings on a pedestal, and that farce is absolutely part of the problem of hand waving certain issues of automation itself.

 

[Cartman86]

It's an idea worth considering at the very least however most people A. Refuse to or B. Don't have the luxury to.

 

[Hyun Sai]

When people are bored they tend do stupid things more often than not. This world would be fucking hell.

 

[SolVanderlyn]

I read a sci-fi story about an advanced civilization that doesn't need to work and essentially sleeps in pods that give them lucid dreams for the entirety of their lives.

I want that.

 

[Emerson]

If what humans do is really a product of information processing, what gives humans that vitalistic special snowflakeism that cannot eventually be replicated by technology?

I worry you are putting human beings on a pedestal, and that farce is absolutely part of the problem of hand waving certain issues of automation itself.

I'm not interested in this sort of philosophical debate at the moment.

Feel free to get back to me when a sentient artificial intelligence creates a meaningful work of art. I very much doubt it will ever happen.

 

[Zom]

Work is different when you don't do it for the money, and is something you love to do, that kind of situation should be the norm, but obviously in this times you have to work for money or you cant sustain your self or your family.

A world with fully automated jobs, need a totally new economy, or a lack of one in a way.

 

[Foffy]

I'm not interested in this sort of philosophical debate at the moment.

Feel free to get back to me when a sentient artificial intelligence creates a meaningful work of art. I very much doubt it will ever happen.

Ah, passive hand waving. Fantastic.

A+. Just what I expected.

I'm sure you'd be just as passive to call Emily Howell something that isn't meaningful because lolreasons.

 

[CarpeDeezNutz]

If what humans do is really a product of information processing, what gives humans that vitalistic special snowflakeism that cannot eventually be replicated by technology?

I worry you are putting human beings on a pedestal, and that farce is absolutely part of the problem of hand waving certain issues of automation itself.

I wanna see your college boy robot create a song with lyrics.

 

[Hatty]

People would work on bettering themselves I would assume

 

[mAcOdIn]

I think there'll definitely be a future where people don't "have" to work, but I think many would continue to.

If you think about it, that final decision decides what humanity is, at one point we could give everything over to robot AI overlords and live under them but forfeit any real self made destiny or continue to use them merely as tools. I think human hubris, luckily, will always push people to stay on top.

But that said, even if a world without work as a necessity would disappear you wouldn't just be without things to do. Even if there was some guaranteed bottom for people where they could live many, most probably, would try and do something, anything for a better leg up on their situation and for some extra cash or whatever it is they use to buy shit.

Honestly, I see full automation and hopefully a guaranteed basic income as they key drivers for keeping humanity employed. If you think about it the only way to make humans appealing as employees over a robot is a divorce from the idea of the necessity of paying a human a livable wage in the first place. Then many jobs where it may not be financially feasible to outright buy and maintain a bunch of robots to do it but it's also not really feasible to pay people to do it all of a sudden become somewhat attractive to people. All of us would be free to "work" for relative peanuts.

 

[Rapscallion]

Idle hands are the devil's workshop.

Essentially. We've been indoctrinated to believe that working is something we HAVE to do through such things as religion and capitalist ideology.

Many of the most prominent sociological theorists argue that the abolishment of work is the greatest goal of freeing society (Marx, Weber, etc.).

 

[Gotchaye]

I think it's hard to argue that nobody having to work is unfair, provided that really nobody has to work. And if some jobs still need doing then obviously we don't want to force particular people to do them - we should reward the people doing those jobs so that they feel like they're getting a good deal.

But the other thing is a lot more plausible. Lots of people take a great deal of satisfaction from working. They don't necessarily like their jobs, but they like providing for themselves and their families. They like feeling that they are responsible for their own quality of life. They don't want to feel like they're useless and dependent on other people just choosing to give them everything they have. And so they also aren't going to be satisfied with make-work. The work has to be actually valuable. Finding themselves in a world where work is unnecessary would be a huge culture shock. Even for people who don't really understand themselves as getting satisfaction from work, losing their job and becoming reliant on others is I believe a huge risk factor for depression.

The easy response here is that in the work-less world there will still be stuff to do. It'll just be creative maybe? Like, yes, at some point the machines can write a better novel than any human, but people might still want to read human-made novels. Same reason someone might buy artisanal crap today. Or maybe we're only concerned about a closer future where humans are still seen as just better at a variety of creative endeavors.

But it's reasonable to worry that this isn't satisfying work for many people, or at least that they won't do it. Is everyone really going to become an artist? Or will many people just be passive consumers of other people's art? Is that a fulfilling existence?

 

[HideyoshiJP]

It is the very base of our nature. In social mammal societies, what do you think happens to animals that don't provide or otherwise fill their role?

 

[Raonak]

In the future, it's likely jobs will become replaced with hobbies.

 

[Foffy]

It is the very base of our nature. In social mammal societies, what do you think happens to animals that don't provide or otherwise fill their role?

What "role" do people fill in Capitalism, which now is heading towards the negation of human labor within it? Where CEOs say the future is in technologies, not its own employees?

Or are we ignoring this decoupling that's fueled Trump and Brexit with left behind generations?

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I prefer spending the majority of my life sleeping and doing shit I don't actually love in order to survive, thank you very much.

 

[Regiruler]

In the future, it's likely jobs will become replaced with hobbies.

They already are, just look at people who spend most of their time with games and monetizing it simply to do their hobby most of their days.

 

[sphagnum]

No, communism is the ideal. When humans no longer need to work, there is no moral obligation that can be attached to it. And when the means of production are not hogged privately, there's no reason for people to judge themselves according to class.

 

[Foffy]

No, communism is the ideal. When humans no longer need to work, there is no moral obligation that can be attached to it. And when the means of production are not hogged privately, there's no reason for people to judge themselves according to class.

And how would we disconnect this? This is the same species that believes money is objective wealth.

Reason seems like flukes within awareness, not a norm. Ideals stay as ideas for that very reason.

 

[jfkgoblue]

I read somewhere that a society that would get to that point would inevitably destroy itself as humans did not evolve to be idle all the time and we would basically destroy ourselves without work to occupy our time.

 

[Hyun Sai]

They already are, just look at people who spend most of their time with games and monetizing it simply to do their hobby most of their days.

Those people also say that it's no longer a hobby for them. It became their job. So they're basically working.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

It's wrong in the sense that it's never going to happen. Automation will lead and is leading to a shift in job skills but there will be jobs.

 

[MidgarBlowedUp]

We were just hunter gatherers until agriculture in guessing. We only need work for the protectionism of the rich.

 

[Freshmaker]

You can't say this for sure. There is no reason why everything can't eventually be automated.

Even Picard has a job tho.

 

[Foffy]

I read somewhere that a society that would get to that point would inevitably destroy itself as humans did not evolve to be idle all the time and we would basically destroy ourselves without work to occupy our time.

We're far more likely to destroy ourselves with the imposition of jobs directly in the crosshairs of technology, though. Look at Trump's job maintainer narrative.

Getting to a more still, idle society still has to defeat the notion of 100% haves or suffrage in society, and that last bit is precisely the bomb that's prone to detonate. One that the White House, the UN, the World Economic Forum, and even the Pentagon believe is presently armed.

We are literally more likely to collapse into chaos with the ideas we hold today than anything else. Assuming otherwise is legitimate madness.

 

[M3d10n]

A part of the ultra rich pretty much already live without work already.

Personally, if I didn't need to work I'd still develop games and software like I already do, because I love doing it.

The idea that you need to do something you hate to feel fulfilled in life is bizarre to me.

 

[Cosmo Clock 21]

Those people also say that it's no longer a hobby for them. It became their job. So they're basically working.

How much of that is because of the demands of the job necessary to ensure they keep getting a paycheck?

 

[Randolph Freelander]

Humans will always have to work.

But if you'll indulge me for a moment, a world without work is a world without humans. There's no need for us if we're not doing anything. Humans not contributing to productive output won't be fed, clothed, or housed -- they'll be purged. Why would the powerful give up resources to keep the filthy poors alive if they're not contributing anything in return? What use are they? (With any luck, the peasantry will not be killed directly, just driven off to some far-off, desolate region with no real resources and therefore nothing for the powerful to desire. At that point, they will have to work very hard just to survive. Hence, humans will always have to work.)

 

[Belker]

I remember a Judge Dredd comic that talked about this issue. One of the reasons given for violence in mega-city blocks is that residents have nothing to do. All jobs were automated and the population - even in the future - couldn't handle it. I think there might have been a panel where someone destroys a street-sweeping robot in order to take over the role.

 

[Enduin]

No, but the issue is that resources are finite. Even were we to reach a world where everything could be automated and no one has to work, many things simply are not abundant enough for everyone to have equal access to everything. In such a world many people will still want to find a way to separate themselves from the rest and hoard those limited things.

It's going to get interesting when we reach a point where production of those essential goods becomes trivial. Where food, fresh water, electricity, etc become effectively limitless and produce without serious human activity or investment, because many other things that people still value a great deal, though not essential, will not be limitless. How will we base our currency and foundations of our economy after that?

 

[Replicant]

Uhm, how you gonna eat unless you work? You need to buy goods and money don't fall out of the sky.

 

[Foffy]

I remember a Judge Dredd comic that talked about this issue. One of the reasons given for violence in mega-city blocks is that residents have nothing to do. All jobs were automated and the population - even in the future - couldn't handle it. I think there might have been a panel where someone destroys a street-sweeping robot in order to take over the role.

To expand on what I said earlier (about the Pentagon) they literally believe climate change + technological unemployment will expand terrorism. The term 'mega-city' is even used in the video.

Uhm, how you gonna eat unless you work? You need to buy goods and money don't fall out of the sky.

Redistribution, or at minimum, an assured minimum floor, which isn't a radical idea.

The United States almost had it in the 1970s, and Barack Obama believes we will likely need it if we're to survive this century.

 

[tokkun]

Parenting is work. Probably the most common work in the world. Can we have robots tuck the kids in at night and go to their soccer games? Sure. But I can understand why many people find that a frightening future.

 

[Foffy]

Parenting is work. Probably the most common work in the world. Can we have robots tuck the kids in at night and go to their soccer games? Sure. But I can understand why many people find that a frightening future.

Parenting is non-canonical work unless you pay someone to do it, though.

A world without work = a world where paid work is more precarious. The work you speak of actually exists, but is ignored entirely in our paradigms unless you have a babysitter.

 

[the-pi-guy]

Who develops and maintains the tech that automates everything?

Who pays for it? Are benevolent benefactors just going to automate everything for everyone for free?

I don't think so.

Except, more than likely humans are just a different kind of machine. Since we are automated, there is no reason why someday there can't be man-made automated machines.

There is a possibility that humans can't be perfectly emulated, but given the advances that have been made, I find that possibility very very unlikely.
At some point, it's very likely that even Computer Scientist and Engineering jobs could be taken over by machines. Even art, music and everything else should at some point in time be able to be automated.

Stop thinking about machines like they are machines. Think about them as if they were capable of every single thing that you are capable of, and then some. Because that's really what we could be dealing with. Machines that can dream, learn, do calculus, do math better than anyone in the world. Compose original pieces of music to your taste.
Every crazy little thing.

You should think about it more like this:

You can't say this for sure. There is no reason why we can't hire people to do these things.

Who develops and maintains the work force?

Who pays for it? Are benevolent benefactors just going to hire everyone?
I don't think so.

It really isn't as out there as you are thinking it is.
----------
We are raised to think that working hard is the most important thing we can do. Raised to think that is our key to success. Just work hard. A huge portion of our culture manages to look down on people for not finding success. It must be because they're lazy. Etc.

I think there are going to be so many problems that have to be worked out while we are automating more industries. I think there are a lot of potential problems depending on how things happen.
If robots start to become in charge of things, what's to stop them from taking over government, what's to stop them from turning things around on us.
If we had robot equals, would they really be wanting to do all the work, while we do nothing?
If we didn't have robot equals and things just got more automated in general; then plenty of jobs would still be open, there just would be a higher bar for things. Depending on the scope of the AI that's driving machinery.

If there's no real AI, then we might get rid of truck driving jobs, but we'd still have composers or story writers or other creative jobs.

If we do create real AI, then what's to stop them from going crazy on us.

These things really depend on the nature of the AI.

 

[Wag]

Idle hands are the devil's workshop.

The right hand doesn't know what the left is doing?

 

[HideyoshiJP]

What "role" do people fill in Capitalism, which now is heading towards the negation of human labor within it? Where CEOs say the future is in technologies, not its own employees?

Or are we ignoring this decoupling that's fueled Trump and Brexit with left behind generations?

I was speaking to the natural revulsion some have to the idea of not working. The problem with capitalism is it's been "won."

 

[TrounceX]

You can't say this for sure. There is no reason why everything can't eventually be automated.

I mean sure, considering deep time, exponential technological growth, knowledge creation, and a hypothetical scenario where nothing interferes with this march of progress, anything is possible.

But to think any of this is coming in the near future, or even the medium term future, is to have a profound naivete of the type of work that actually needs to get done. To erase work completely we would need human-like general intelligence embedded in some type of perfect automaton, nano bots, and really a whole host of other Star Trek-esque technologies. It's not happening anytime soon.

There's a difference between Amazon Go and say, inventing products, doing R&D, organizing companies, creating advertisements, improving processes, and generally building the support structure to get the goods to the store and sold to people. There is just so much human intelligence capital invested in everything that goes on in even a single company. Just how exactly is any of this going to be automated?

People extrapolate way too far based on retail jobs and truck driving becoming automated. These are low hanging fruit examples. It's like factory line jobs, they'll have an impact on the economy, but this is not evidence that the dream of sitting home all day while the world runs itself is nearly upon us.

In the short term we need to work on income redistribution and getting people the education to contribute in the knowledge economy. More people working less hours maybe.

Long term, it's fun to philosophize about the meaning of work and what not, and what we'll do in it's absence. But by the time we have AI strong enough to automate everything, the AI itself will have figured that out for us anyways.

 

[Shadynasty]

Even if we lived in a world without "work" as we know it there would still be work. Even in a fully automated world someone has to fix that shit and on an even more basic level hobbies, cooking, eating, parenting, taking a dump and wiping your ass require some degree of work.

Works not a bad thing, but in the current system many people "work" out of necessity to live in jobs they don't like, or are just not satisfied in, or doesn't really match up to their true talents, but it pays the bills.

Work isn't work when you love what you're doing.