Problem z XIX-wiecznym modelem etyki pracy

A man, In order to obtain something which makes him Or Her happy, Has to per form action which are – In the opinion of others – valuable and Worth to be paid for. Already from the previous sentence we can deduce a Simple truth that there is nothing for free, each thing service Has its price. Or in other words, sometimes you have to be a giver In order to be given something later. A work is a noble act, although many May become indignant about this statement. By working we multiply things we already have, Or we Get New ones. A human activity which makes us richer, is the one which is attributable to the human nature, and an inactivity or a satisfaction with things we already have is in contradiction with this nature. Taking into account a job ethics, as moral we can consider only such an activity of an individual which has won recognition in somebody else’s eyes, the highest manifestation of which is a remuneration. Not elsewhere, but on the ground of job ethics we ecounter a dissatisfaction of some people with actions of others, e.g. with an employer’s behavior who evades the obligation to pay work. The job ethics, since of became a part of a social discussion served politicians, as well a philisophers, or clerics to fight aversion to this organization of everyday live, which is indicated by the clock and operating hours of a factory. This aversion was based on an aspiration to satisfy one’s own needs, and nothing more. A 19 th – century labourer, having been given a remuneration, which enabled him or her a poor existence – poor but existence, did not see a reason why he or she should work more. After all, outside work there were so many interesting things to do, so it was not worth to waste time for moneygrubbing.