Discussion of 'In Praise of Idleness' by Betrand Russell

[Naomi]

Our next meetup is on World Book Night: Saturday, April 23rd. We’ll be reading In Praise of Idleness, by philosopher Bertrand Russell. In this 1932 essay, Russell argues that in a world of plenty and unemployment (1932, indeed), his contemporaries really have no need to work as much as they do. Society would still be able to provide for every citizen if it implemented a 4-hour workday for all. Russell wrote ‘In Praise of Idleness’ in the interbellum, but it feels strangely modern and relevant. Especially now that “software is eating the world” (Marc Andreessen) and robots are plotting to take over our jobs. Should make an interesting read!

Below you’ll find some questions to get you thinking about Russell’s essay, as well as some further reading on the subject.

QUESTIONS TO ACCOMPANY ‘In Praise of Idleness’
Do you agree with Russell that “far too much work is being done in the world”?
In a world where people only worked 4 hours a day, what would you do with your 4 hours of extra free time? Would you know how to use that extra time? (Russell suspects some people won’t.) Would you rather work 8 hours?
If you had a choice: work 4 hour and earn € 100,- less than you earn right now, or work 8 for double the pay, which would you choose?
“If the ordinary wage-earner worked four hours a day, there would be enough for everybody, and no unemployment - assuming a certain very moderate amount of sensible organization.”- How much planning would it take, and how much control would the government have to take? Would it necessarily result in a totalitarian government?
Does Russell's definition of work still apply today? If not, how does his idea hold up?
Is working a moral duty?
If someone is making a living from art, say, should they, in Russell's world order, still work at the factory for four hours a day? Aren't we then taking away people's happiness?
Is it possible to define what a standard of living should be in a society? Who gets to make that decision? And what standard of living is the minimum for you?
In Russell’s world, what would happen to innovation?
Despite all the economic arguments you might throw at him - do you find Russell's vision alluring?

Further reading:
In recent years, the universal basic income (U.B.I.) has made a bit of a revival, but the idea is much older. The first large-scale experiment, called Mincome, was done in Canada, in the 1970s - but the results were locked away, and then forgotten about. Until 2005, when researcher dr. Evelyn Forget unearthed boxes full of forms. The HuffPost reports in this 2014 (pre-U.B.I. hype!) article: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/12/...
Two New York Times correspondents discuss the popularity of the idea of the U.B.I. in Silicon Valley: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/09/bus...
British economist and journalist Paul Mason has also written about U.B.I and the post-work economy: http://www.fastcoexist.com/3056483/we...
Productivity guru and podcaster Tim Ferriss one-upped Russell with his guide to working only 4 hours a week! - The 4-Hour Work Week: http://www.amazon.com/The-4-Hour-Work...
Russell was actually not the first to praise idleness: Michel Montaigne has an essay on it, as does the Japanese monk Tsurezuregusa. Robert Louis Stevenson, writer of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde fame wrote An Apology for Idlers
For a longer exploration of idleness there’s Tom Hodgkinson’s How To Be Idle, a joyful defence of laziness and good-living in a work-obsessed world.
Blogger Kristy O’Reilly-Davi-Digui seems to be living by Russell’s words. In her blogpost What if All I Want is A Mediocre Life? (http://www.alifeinprogress.ca/?p=1065) she writes: “What if I never build an orphanage in Africa but send bags of groceries to people here and there and support a couple of kids through sponsorship. What if I just offer the small gifts I have to the world and let that be enough.”