General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#3 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Working long hours does not increase productivity at the same rate. That's a valid argument against the way we do things, but not an argument against how hard we work. Just cuz our productivity drops doesn't mean we aren't working hard. It just means our hard work becomes increasingly less efficient. |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I question whether the non-Calvinist protestants and Catholics were historically less enthusiastic about the work ethic. According to Pekka Himanen, yes they were. The religion depicted work as a curse instead of a blessing, and there was no religious/ideological incentive to do more than the daily toil. Besides, wealth was typically frowned upon in catholic countries (to the point that such dirty jobs as usury were left to the Jews and forbidden to Christians), so the accumulation of capital was not a priority either. |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
Originally posted by Spiffor
According to Pekka Himanen, yes they were. The religion depicted work as a curse instead of a blessing, and there was no religious/ideological incentive to do more than the daily toil. Besides, wealth was typically frowned upon in catholic countries (to the point that such dirty jobs as usury were left to the Jews and forbidden to Christians), so the accumulation of capital was not a priority either. I'm not a Calvinist, yet I don't recall ever being told that work is a curse. Maybe this Pekka Himanen doesn't know what he's talking about. AFAIK the ideology of modern capitalism arose simultaneously in Calvinist Netherlands and non-Calvinist England. |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
Catholicism (as well as Orthodox Christianity, btw) is a much more conservative doctrine than the Protestant ones. Yet it is most suited to the more traditional/agricultural societies of Southern Europe, where hard work was not an economic need. Farmers did specific hard work during certain periods of time and then sat idling for a big part of the year. Their dividend depended on mother nature and on the prices they got. This means that more work was not always better, neither for the serf, nor for the landowner.
On the other hand, these people were frequently submitted to severe shortages, even famines, whereas during the better days all the surplus was witheld by the landowners. So the serfs should have to be mentally trained to live ascetically and endure, not to demand much. This is why the tradition of lent is observed. If these societies were bred with the protestant work ethic, every famine would bring huge uprisings (not that there weren't any). The farmers might even demand to be duly compensated for their work, regardless of the output of the land, which would be disastrous for the landowning gentry. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests) | |
|