Purpose in the Age of Abundance? Easy.

Why we should stop worrying that ending work will end purpose for the “workers.”

This post is inspired by a recent Wall Street Journal article I just woke up to discussing Elon Musk's vision of an age of abundance and its implications for capitalists. All fine, as far as I’m concerned.

But then, BOOM, there it is yet again, someone objecting to post-scarcity by positing the loaded question: “But what will happen to purpose? Work adds purpose, after all.”

Ugh! I find myself compulsively wanting to squelch this all too common question once and for all. It’s partially why I launched this Substack.

I have reservations about Musk’s judgement in terms of his various messaging and social engineering, typified by the disaster known as X. That said, his concept of a technologically-fueled era of abundance resonates with me.

So it’s the retort from UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to Musk’s vision (particular around abundance and the option for regular people to remove compulsory labor for their daily lives) that I find so maddening.

Sunak's assertion that work provides essential purpose and that its removal might create a vacuum in people's lives is deeply off-key and loaded with nonsense and cries out for a near-constant critical examination and rebuttal from anyone who likes the idea of UBI.

The claim that "work provides purpose and removing it creates a vacuum of purpose" is an endlessly puzzling and fundamentally flawed and deceptive point to make in the context of any discussion about freeing humans from labor.

Musk had a defense but it wasn’t satisfying in my opinion. It wasn’t clear enough in pointing out the embedded assumptions hiding in the question itself.

For starters, the “purpose question” glosses over the harsh reality of the working conditions for billions of people: For many, work sucks. It is not a source of fulfillment but a drain of any hopes of fulfillment. It’s an often mandatory thing, undertaken under the threat of poverty, hunger, shame, and social exclusion.

This stark difference between fulfilling, voluntary work and obligatory, unenjoyable labor is ignored constantly in the discussions around how “work” inherently provides “purpose.”

The absurdity of the claim is demonstrated easily. Here’s one way: Many people who have never had to work, or who have the freedom to choose their work, are neither bored nor unfulfilled. They have the luxury of time and choice, allowing them to become self-actualized without the compulsion of work they despise.

This reality contradicts the notion that mandatory work is essential for purpose.

If that’s not enough evidence for you, a quick glance at the science of well-being, amply studied by Dr. Laurie Santos and others, should dispel any “concerns” that ending work could be disastrous for the feeling of purpose.

I audited her class and I suggest you do the same.

Check it out, here:

https://www.drlauriesantos.com/science-well-being

Point being, the persistent emphasis on work as a necessary source of purpose is probably there for a reason nobody wants to talk about: it reflects a darker attitude towards the value of human life.

The underlying concern is not about a loss of purpose but about the existence and role of individuals who might not fit into traditional productive roles in a post-scarcity society. This perspective raises uncomfortable but really important questions about how society values human life.

For example, if a person's worth is solely tied to their economic productivity or their willingness to perform menial tasks, what happens when those tasks no longer exist?

There exists a deep discomfort, especially among ardent fiscally libertarian capitalists, with the idea of people, deemed unremarkable or unambitious, living freely and possibly happily without contributing to traditional notions of labor.

Ergo, the persistent narrative about work and purpose is not just misleading but harmful. It reinforces a narrow view of human value and purpose, tied exclusively to work, and overlooks the obvious broader potential of fulfillment beyond labor.

As we advance rapidly, it's crucial to challenge and rethink these deeply ingrained notions about work, purpose, and the value of human life.

If we don’t challenge these asinine loaded questions early and often, I predict bad things will happen to the majority of precious humankind.

This human family of Earth matters. Not one of us is chattel. Each is a universe into herself, if this is true for you, it’s true for all. You can’t have it both ways without confronting the possibility that you’re in some respects acting like a psychopath or a solipsist living consistently with their values. No offense to that demographic, but if you’re not one of those things, there are coherent normative behaviors implied by the core values you hold.

A careful accounting is needed if you aspire to live in good faith and harmonize with yourself, let alone humanity.

---

The article that got my hackles up is behind a paywall but I’m sure it’ll be chopped up and appear elsewhere.

https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/what-elon-musks-age-of-abundance-means-for-the-future-of-capitalism-7c0807df

Feel free to let me know how you rebut such loaded questions. Always love to hear others sound off on this. Please comment and share.