Reploy to LO7841
Here's some more description of the plausible future I was thinking of (PF1):
- Per capita production is accelerating.
- Per capita work hours are rising slightly.
According to industrial age economics, scarcity creates the need for labor,
and less scarcity results in fewer work hours. What changes in PF1? I'll
assume that wealth is broadly distributed, though not evenly, which eliminates
that factor.
Here's an explanation: labor is conducted as a ritual and as a game. The
ritual aspect of work confers social recognition. Those who are energetic
and sincere in their work are honored. The game aspect of work defines
competitive interactions with outcomes and stakes. Those who win in work
claim extra wealth.
Since the evenly distributed wealth makes physical maintenance easier, there
is more time, energy, and attention available. This surplus is devoted to
ritual and games in one's work organization, hence more work hours.
PF1 is not necessarily a terrible place to live, depending on the details.
People are highly skilled, put themselves out, get involved with each other,
and create some remarkable cultural artifacts and events. The game is less
about making money than about having high stakes. Gambling is more interesting
with high stakes. The Balinese aren't craven materialists because they bet
the ranch on cock fights. They do it because it is a manly thing to do (and
because the game is fixed to guard against people losing the ranch). We
might wonder why the people in PF1 don't develop alternative institutions,
since things might get a little boring. The same could be said about the
people at Easter Island.
Perhaps PF1 exists today, but I'm not sure that it is fully played out or that
everyone realizes it. I still think it is odd, and seems significant, that
EDS offers up its bicyclists as model employees.
Kent Myers myersk@lfs.loral.com
Alexandria, VA
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>